Vanir Ausf B

I'd like to know this too. Based on the bones thrown so far, my guess is that a video card with a high triange rate will be the most desirable component for people who want to play large games.

Matrix does some retail. I bought a copy of Gary Grigsby's War At War at a retail store earlier this year.

And if Steve's recent posts are any indication a modern CM will likely be set 10-20 years later than Balkins on Fire, and won't be in the Balkins either. Although, I think it would be fine if it were...

Right. And is CMx2 a tank sim?

Wouldn't a WW2 setting cut into the Strategic Command market?

My opinion at this point is that every casualty should result in a "dead guy" figure on the ground. That avoids any inconsistancy with regards to 1:1 representation. No distinction should be made between WIA and KIA. At the end of the game the computer divvies up casualties into KIA and WIA semi-randomly, same as it does in CMx1. Any system of representing wounded on the field during the game seems certain to significantly affect gameplay as the wounded themselves become objectives, which tends to shift the game's focus. I don't think this would be wise.

It seems to me that system would tend to favor the attacker from a victory point perspective.

Although I'm an unabashed fan of a possible modern CM, I would prefer it be based on a hypothetical conflict rather than either Gulf War. I don't see how it could be both realistic and balanced. I'd make it NATO vs. a neo-imperialist Russia in Easter Europe, or maybe US vs. China somewhere in Asia. UK vs. France in the Chunnel. Whatever. Kicking the crap out of some third world armed mob holds little appeal for me.

I got a different quick test for ya: Who offered up an interpretation of the manual's passages? Keep your eyes on the road, Steve.

It's not my fault if the manuals are wrong I too am quite pleased with the present scale, regardless of what label is placed on it.

BTW, when we are talking "modern" warfare keep in mind that Steve has indicated that they are looking at present day, rather than Cold War or Arab/Israeli.

Except that Steve has already indicated that they are a bit burnt out on ww2. After 3 do they want to do a 4th right away? I have mixed feelings both ways. A modern combat CM has been a dream of mine for years. But I also know that the first release will be more basic and unrefined than the later ones. I could hold off knowing that when it finally does come the modern CM would be better for having waited.

I hope all you ww2 or bust guys are aware that BFC has already said that some of the CMx2 games will be ww2 and some will not. So it's not a matter of if you will need a straightjacket but when.

Not that it much matters, but I was just thumbing through the CMBO and CMBB manuals and ran across some interesting parts. CMBO manual page 6: page 18: And on the "role" the player assumes in the game, CMBB manual page 99:

Relative spotting will likely make the game more difficult to play well. How much so I don't know, but the general trend of the first 3 CM games was that they got more hardcore and realistic with each release, with the big jump happening between CMBO and CMBB. CMx2 looks to be more hardcore and realistic than the last game, so I don't think CMx2 will be very newbie friendly.

If you compare the gameplay problems that leaving the WIA on the field creates with the minor loss of immersion it's intended to fix, abstracting them out is the obvious choice. I guess crosses are ok as long as you can turn them off.

I remember people asking for this when CMBO was released.

Heh In all seriousness, I don't think it will be WW2. If I had to guess I'd say modern combat. For a guy doing WW2 games, Steve is surprisingly up to date on current US Army TO&E. :cool:

That's similar to the "convoy" or "follow" command people have been asking for to prevent multiple-tank pileups on roads. Now that vehicles block LOF, being able to have a squad advance behind a slow moving tank would be nice.

I'm surprised that SOPs aren't going to be used and that movement speed and reactions will still be amalgamated into a single command. Just because a unit is in a hurry to get somewhere doesn't necessarily mean they don't want to stop if someone starts shooting at them. I suppose if SOPs were considered and rejected there must have been a good reason, but it sounds like the new command system will be much like the old one. (?)

That's good to hear. I think sharpshooters work fine the way they are. The "problem" that people are talking about is really more of a god's eye view issue than one of relative spotting. I don't consider this to be a problem at all, and in fact think of it as one of CM's best attributes. The only way to "fix" this "problem" without turing CM into a command level game is through multi-multi player.

oops

Will CMx2 have SOPs, so that movement speed and behavior vis-a-vis enemy units are not always wedded to each other? For example, you could give a unit a fast move order, but there would be a list of standing SOPs that could be applied to the unit to govern its behavior if it sees an enemy or is fired upon. Kinda like this: I think the second set shown above might solve Bigduke's dilemma. [ September 09, 2005, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

Well, maybe a little more than zero. CMx1 did have battalion formations available for purchase. They were very useful and it would be nice if this were in CMx2 also.

The outcome of larger games is less influenced by chance. That's simple math and isn't debatable. Whether there is too much chance in small games is subjective. Some feel it's more exciting that the outcome can hinge on a single pivitol event. Others don't like being bound to the fickle finger of fate. My own reasons for liking bigger games is because it allows for greater flexibility in planning and force composition. My only concern was that the game would allow for battalion+ in a way similar to CMx1. It seems that will be the case and our ability to play large games will only be hindered by the steep hardware requirements to do so. But this is something I can live with because that will become less of a factor over the years as people upgrade.