Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

76mm

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,366

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Posts posted by 76mm

    General discussion about CM:SF

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    But, to put it into WWII terms, fighting Panthers against Stuarts (or even Shermans) isn't fun then either. But people still do it.

    It's not about the hardware - it's about the scenario designers. Fighting a Panther company against a single M4 tank won't be any more fun that fighting a company of M-1A2s fighting a single T-55. It's up to the mission designers to make the game interesting.

    I never said it was about the hardware--it is about one side hopelessly outclassing the other because of hardware, training, doctrine, etc., etc.

    Your analogies to CMx1 are misplaced-it is not similar to fighting a "Panther company against a single M4 tank"--if anything, it would be more like the opposite--pitting a single Panther vs a company of M4s. While this might be interesting a couple of times, I think replayability would suffer.

    While presumably the Syrian army, or at least parts of it, is more competent than the Iraqi army, the fact is that their conventional forces would have a very slim chance of winning any sizable engagement against US forces. In urban ambushes and unconventional warfare the US will certainly take its lumps. I just don't think it sounds very fun. And you will certainly be able to create some interesting scenarios, such as the one you describe, but how long will this kind of thing remain interesting? At least for me, I don't think it will retain my interest for very long...you are of course free to feel differently. In any event, I will certainly give the game a try, I'm just a bit disappointed in the subject area.

    0

    General discussion about CM:SF

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    I think there was a quote from an Iraqi tank battalion commander in GW1 who said something like "We went into Kuwait with 30 tanks. After six weeks of air attacks we had 25 tanks. After five minutes against the M-1 Abrams I had no tanks."
    This is exactly my concern. Doesn't sound that fun. Yeah, you can set up the victory conditions to make any scenario challenging, but it sure helps if there is a real fight to start with.

    I'm sure I'll buy this, but not sure how much I'll like it...

    0

    Multi-player campaigns?

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Dear Steve:

    I understand if data import/export doesn't make it into the first release, but please keep it on the short list of items for follow-on releases--it seems to have been one of (if not the most) popular requests on the CMx2 "wish list".

    And could you specify what other easier means you have in mind for allowing user-created campaigns?

    TMR

    0

    Comments on CMAK Companion

    in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps

    Posted

    lofeasy,

    Umm, which game do you mean, CMAK? (this thread is actually for the CMAK Companion, which is a book rather than a game).

    CMAK has been available for a couple of years online from Battlefront, not sure if it is in retail. Battlefront is also working on CMx2, based on a whole new engine, which will probably be out next year some time. So not sure which game you're asking about...

    0

    Map size question

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    From the scenario editor screen, just choose New Operation and go to the map editor. I make operations maps in CMBB all the time that are 4km x 6km.

    The only problem being that you can't use operations maps for battles unless you use Map Converter, a program one of the players wrote (search on forum)--but even then I am almost positive that you can't convert an operations map larger than 3kmx3km into a battle map.

    Hope that wasn't too confusing...

    0

    Campaign Tracker Database

    in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin

    Posted

    Hi,

    Over the last couple of years I've developed a database (called CAMPAIGN TRACKER) to allow players to create and track units in a CMBB campaign. It does things like allow you to create units, track casualties inflicted and sustained, commander status, etc. Here is full list of features:

    CAMPAIGN TRACKER allows users to:

    --Create units from the CMBB units included in the database and track the casualties that they sustain and inflict during the course of a campaign by type (ie, infantry, weapons, vehicles), as well as number of battles fought, victories, etc.;

    --Track unit commanders throughout a campaign, including WIA, KIA, increases to their CMBB attributes, transfers, promotions, and demotions;

    --Allocate Resource Points-used for purchasing new units or replacements-by possession of campaign objectives determined by the user;

    --Track log data, including log date, weather, ground conditions, and campaign player turns; --Modify many of the settings used in CAMPAIGN TRACKER; and

    --Conduct extended multi-year campaigns using automatic or manual upgrades from one "Equipment Set" (ie, the TO&E as of, say, June 1943) to another.

    You can download a manual with screenshots, etc. and the database zip files at the Campaign Tracker download page . Please read the instructions before downloading the database!

    I basically developed this database for my own use but thought that someone else out there might find it helpful. Note that Campaign Tracker does not include a map or any other means of creating your campaigns--you'll have to use one of the campaign systems out there for that. I'm using it with a campaign layer I'm working on in VASSAL and am having a lot of fun with it--the ability to track individual units and commanders really gives the game more "personality" and gives the battles much more relevance.

    76mm

    [ October 12, 2005, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: 76mm ]

    0

    CMx2: probably not for me

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Kellysheroes:

    You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but I've got to object to one of your points--to complain that CMx2 modules will be more expensive than, say, CMBB, etc. is just ludicrous. In retrospect, CMBB and the other CMx1 games were ridiculously cheap for the value delivered, and for the amount of research and development that Battlefront put into them. I am still playing CMBB several years later and still have not experimented with all of the units, etc. It is like a car company selling a car for $500 that you can drive for 2 million miles.

    The bottom line is that the market for this type of game is relatively tiny, and if you sell one game that people in this market will play for five years for $35, you're not going to be around to develop many more games like that. You can call it greedy if you want, but I am pretty damn glad that Battlefront is bothering to develop these games at all and hope that they can earn at least a little $$ for their (unappreciated) efforts.

    76mm

    0

    CMx2: probably not for me

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Michael:

    I'm in the process of trying to figure out how to post the database so people can download it--it is basically a finished product (although it isn't terribly useful without some kind of campaign layer to use it with). Hopefully I'll have this figured out in a few days.

    The Vassal campaign layer is more work in progress, so I wasn't going to make it generally available yet. But since it sounds like you're familiar with Vassal, I will try to upload it as well so that you can download it and check it out. I should warn you that this Vassal component is a fictional campaign, although you could probably use pieces of the map (featuring steppe, forest, villages, cities, rivers, etc.) for at semi-historical campaigns. Basically each hex on the campaign map equals one 3k x 3k battle map in CMBB, with some of the cities occupying 4k x 6k operations maps. I've created CMBB maps of about two dozen of these hexes, mainly villages and cities, which I can also provide if it would be helpful. As mentioned above, some of these maps are large, so you might need a decent rig to run them.

    I think both the database (based on a run-time version of Access) and the campaign layer are too big to e-mail, but I could e-mail the manual I've created for the database to see if you want to mess with it.

    76mm

    0

    CMx2: probably not for me

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    I'm sure that CMx2 will be a radical improvement in almost all respects from CMx1, despite slight concerns about the smaller scale of engagements and narrower scope of the modules.

    The only feature that is really important to me, however, is the ability--somehow, someway--to export OOB data after battles and import it prior to battles to allow for player-developed campaign systems.

    It took me a couple of years to do, but a couple of months ago I finally finished constructing an operational level campaign for CMBB in VASSAL and a database to track the units, leaders, etc. The only drawback being the tedium of manually entering all units into CMBB prior to each battle and manually entering the battle results into the database. Nonetheless, it is fun as hell (at least to me)--the bottom line is that I now play CMBB several times a week, while CMAK, with its quick battles and stand-alone scenarios, sits unused.

    I have no idea how difficult it would be to include a data import/export feature or modifiable text fields, or how many people would actually use this feature. I suspect, however, that even if only a handful of players used the feature to create campaign systems for general use, it would result in much more interest in, and sales of, the game.

    I hope that Battlefront will at least consider releasing some kind of "Developer's Module" (free or for $$) along with the first couple of modules.

    76mm

    0
×
×
  • Create New...