Hawk66

Hi, I've now read that there will be a new CMSF game, called "Black Sea"...is there any more info available? I'm a little out of the loop concerning SF, so I might have overseen that info. Thanks.

I'd also vote for CMSF 2 Concerning the quick battle generator: Yes, I also see the connections between the AI plans and creating semi-random(with predefined tiles) maps. But in the long run, my personal opinion is that the AI plans should be deprecated by superior means - that is a dynamic strategic AI. Such a research might be a good candidate for a thesis. I play WinSPMBT usually and although the AI is not flawless there, it's pretty decent and dynamic - considering that the original (unmodded) codebase is from 1996.

It looks like Battle for Normandy is a big success and -although I will not buy it, since I am only interested in modern stuff - I'm happy about the success since this keeps the series going on . So, my questions would be: - Quick Battle Maps: Is it planned that in future major engine version of CM the engine is capable of generating random maps (or composing predefined tiles?) - Is there a very rough estimate (year) when we can expect a next post-wwii scenario. Would be 2013 realistic? Sorry if those questions were already discussed but I tried to use the search function, yes .

any update what will be addressed in the new patch/NATO module?

I completely disagree here...Not all folks here have the time to regulary play against other players and I think I am not alone here, who wants to play a QB against a capable and interesting AI. I'm currently reading a research paper of the university of maastricht: www.personeel.unimaas.nl/M-Ponsen/ (2005: . Automatically Acquiring Adaptive Real-Time Strategy Game Opponents Using Evolutionary Learning) They did a research on that matter and noted that players would be unhappy with current AIs; mentioned the reasons why developers are reluctant to use learning/adaptive algorithms and developed a prototype to prove that such algorithms can actually work.

I've bought the British module now. It was worth the buy! The QB maps are still a little weired if you wanna play small battles but you guy were right: A lot of new scenarios!

Yup, I agree that triggers would be definitely a big enhancement. So, let's keep this thread alife so that Steve & Charles can adjust the development priority of it Any hints if trigger make it to Normandy or a subsequent patch? Would be great!

That's actually the issue with most game AI's, I would say. Probably most AIs use final state engines, rules and randomize it a little. The behaviour is than pretty stable but the drawback is that the AI is not adaptive. As already discussed in this thread, learning algorithms like Neural Networks and Evolutionary algorithms http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_algorithm could address this. For games with 'simple' rules and environments like Backgammon this works very well, but the environment of CM2 would be a real challenge. Wouldn't that be a challenge for a student to write his bachelor/master thesis on that matter ? I know that for the game Defcon a thesis was written, which outcome signficantly improved the AI of that game.

I cannot counter this, Ken Actually, I also do not think that the AI in CM:SF is bad...it is good concerning the complexity. It's just that good things can always get even better .

A 'rules-based' approach, combined with some randomized behavior is probably the best solution if the AI-budget is limited. In WinSPMBT the original steel panthers AI was also visibly be enhaced by adding a new bunch of tactial rules and vastly adding (reasonalbe) randomized behaviour to confront the player with unexpected behaviour. Sure, sometimes the randomization creates suboptimal resulsts if compared to a pure rules-approach...but I think in the end it's better since it is not so static. Still, I would love to see some form of API for the Combat Mission 2 Engine but I know Steve and Charles are busy men :-). Perhaps later, if they do not know what kind of module they shall develop next ;-), they could rethink abouth integrating Python etc. There are some nice C++/Python bridges available ...

Looks great :-) @Steve: Any chance that you talk a little about the features of the QB system? This is my most favorite feature I am looking forward too :-). Merry Christmas to all of you and let's hope that the next year is more peaceful, especillay for those men and women who do their dangerous service in the known places.

Ok,thx for the feedback. I think, I will make a christmas gift for myself and buy the British module

Hi folks, I've bought CM:SF almost from the beginning but never reallly got into since of some quality problems ;-) that time and real-life stuff afterwards. So, my focus would be single-player and quick battles. I mostly like random battles with a few units. Do you think it's worth for me to get the British module? Are the QB maps fun now...is the AI sufficient? I know that AI is not like a human player...it just should provide some challenges and not do always the same things...like the AI in Winspmbt if you guys know this (also) great game! Thanks for any comments...

wouldn't that be an strong argument for releasing an AI-API so that everybody has the possibilty to code/improve the AI? I know, this would be some investment on your side. But just have a look at Civilization 4: There, a community project actually was the basis for an updated AI in an expansion pack. Even small games like Defcon have released an API afterwards and are used in universities for AI research.

Flight Commander 2 is now very old but still the only true major tactical air combat game. Am I alone or is there anybody out there who still loves this game, too? An updated Flight Commander 2 would be just a hit! @Battlefront: Any chance that you produce a successor and if not did you consider to release the code?

perhaps in future the modules do not only add units but different time settings too? Or would that be always a new 'game family'?

I haven't meant to save it as a video but only in an internal format which should not need much space. If somebody knows the replayer in Falcon 4.0: This is what I'm talking about. It has a 3D replay tool and an action log and I think it is quite popular.

Hi, how about to introduce an extended after action report which would consist of the possibility to replay the whole battle and would provide an after action log? Perhaps it is not that tough to develop since the basic infrastructure is already there (at least for WEGO). The action log could consist of entries like 'unit x damaged/destroyed unit y with weapon z' and provide links which would mark/zoom to the unit in the 3D view. Of course the action log could have different filters to display even 'events' like 'unit x was detected by unit y'. This would be a tool for a player to analyze and review his tactics. This is surely not a high prio functionality but might be a big bonus in reviews too:) Any comments?

Yes, finally I like CMSF! Patch 1.11+Marines is for me version 1.00...now I can start beginning to play seriously:D.

Indeed the Europeans do and you should be grateful about that because it means they have time to play and spend money for new modules .

so, the new QuickBattleEngine is able to produce random maps again...? would be great news:)

why are the people so WWII-centric ... Hope, the next title (after Normandy) deals with a cold war scenario... BTW: Is the new QB engine already specified?

just bought Marines module+patched to 1.11 Now I'm back to CMSF and so far I like it :-)

@BF guys: What about to create a Wiki (I mean just provide the platform, without any content from your side)? Even if it contains only organized links (forum/external) in the beginning, it would be worthy IMHO. And it would save your time since you only have to answer general questions once .

I prefer the download version too...no Zoll(custom) issues! The only bad thing is, that I often forget to save the download stuff on a disc...so BTW: is it possible to download the Marines module later again if you've lost your copy etc.?