juan_gigante

I wish BFC would at least give us the top five list of the first game they would do. Then we could only argue about those five instead of the seemingly infinite possibilities. Also, it would give grogs a chance to start reading up on probable subjects, so they wouldn't have any down time of not-knowing.

Well, something to keep in mind is that there are modules and there are the games the modules work with. So there would be a separate game for each WWII, Korea, Napolean, SLoD. BFC has estimated that each game will take about 2 - 3 years. I assume that with future games they might well make tweaks and improvements to the engine. But the modules are like expansion packs to each game, and should hopefully be cranked out 1 a year or better. So you might have a WWII ETO game that starts out Normandy. Then a Bulge module. Then a Ruhr module AND an American Civil War game that starts out Bull Run to Gettysburg. Then a Barbarossa module and a ACW Wilderness campaign mod. And so on. How sustainable this will be, I don't know, but to judge from various bones, BFC hopes to use it to crank out as much quality stuff as they possibly can be concentrating on bits and pieces rather than huge, old CM game-sized bites. In fact, I even heard mention of the possiblity of release of a module wherein, if a bunch of grogs got together and did quality research on a subject for which a game already existed and submitted it to BFC, BFC might release it as a module. I don't know about that, though. THe best way to think of it, as I see, is as a tree. The trunk is the CMX2 engine, from which shoot off big branches (games), from which come little branches (modules). As time goes by, the trunk grows higher. More branches. Eventually, lots of subjects will get branches.

Tell me, were they attacking over totally open ground? Because that is the funnest game ever. (For a few turns before you get bored of mowing down the poor wretches). I also like hundreds of bazookas and flamethrowers in mega-thick woods and hills against Stugs. And my personal favorite pie is blackberry.

But in CMBB and CMAK they did, even if only for the Germans. Furthermore, I would argue that much more information is available (even if, admittedly, not to the general public) about armored vehicles nowadays than those 60 years ago. I'm sure that BFC could uncover a wealth of information involving gunnery tests, etc. regarding modern AFVs. And simply because modern equipment is more complicated, the game can still handle, for two reasons. One: you mentioned AT grenades, and I would like to use this as an example. Now, I won't deny that a modern anti-tank device is more complicated than a gammon bomb. But is the function really so different? After all, to the player, the unit just activates the thing and chucks it at (or plants it on) the unlucky vehicle. We don't see them setting the timer on the explosive or turn it so the charge faces in or whatever. That's up to the computer to handle, and I think it's a reasonable assumption that with regular or above troops, they will do all that minor stuff correctly every time. And for when they don't, there can be a chance that the device explodes early, or doesn't do much damage or whatever. BFC doesn't actually have to model the setting of the timer in the grenade. That is only one example, but I think the idea carries onto other things. Secondly, this is CMX2! It's supposed to be mega-complex! One of the basic tenets (as I see it) of CMX2 is that it will handle accurately and easily a bunch of complex stuff. When I buy CMX2, it won't be for the pretty face and the setting; it'll be for the brain underneath, a brain that will be able to do all that we ask of it and more, a brain that should be able to model complex sighting, targeting, etc., etc. That's the whole point.

When have as powerful of a brain as I do, you think about lots of stuff at once for long periods of time. I only told you guys one of my ideas but there are many more zany things where that came from. But seriously though, I think by playing "irregular QBs", you can do experience new and different things without scenarios. Thoughts? Comments? Pie? [ July 19, 2005, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: juan_gigante ]

That works, but at times I forget I have something in the halftrack or (worse) or the tank, and I send the vehicle into battle with my precious FO clinging onto the handlebars for dear life, soon to be broken by a single burst of machine gun fire.

Sergei, you make a good point. No other conflict that they could portray would have the epic grandeur of WWII as well as, as you say, a deep and rich backstory. But I think that the abilty to create one's own backstory would be pretty handy. Think about how much easier things would be for the people in charge of a CMMC-type thing. Heck, for tourneys you could make up a whole setting for the tourney to be placed in. But still, the lack of background (and the fact that it would be silly for BFC to too much up for us) as I see it is the only problem with near-future. And with regards to the possibility of a lack of realism due to incomplete tests, I would argue that tests are unnecessary. If, let us assume, BFC had all the data on two tanks, including weapon and armor data, I don't think it would be very hard at all to extrapolate, based on that data, what would happen when a shell from one hits the other. I would buy the results dilivered by BFC, assuming they aren't just making up data about the combatants, becuase I trust their gunnery model to realistically represent the effects of x's gunfire on y's armor. The handy thing about SLoD is they could make EVERYTHING up, all the data on everything, so much less research would be involved. But I feel that that is sort of a cop out.

Duh! Have any of you ever played a first person shooter? You can carry like 8 guns at once! Why, I'd have my pistol, and my SMG, and my sniper rifle, and my rocket launcher, and... what? You mean that's not how it works in real life? Did Half-life teach me nothing?!?

I think all the CMX2 threads are starting to evolve from "what features will be included?" to "what will it be about?", with good reason. The features have been covered. We've heard many (though never enough) bones from BFC about the features, and we are all wowed. Now, after being very wowed, we are starting to wonder where and when (among all possible subjects) the eventual "total wowing" (ie release of CMX2) will occur. In fact, I'm surprised a betting pool has not been started. I will be watching the bets made by any BFC employee very closely.

See, I think hypothetical battles are cool, becasue it becomes easier to create scenarios. There's no existing "canon" for you to go against, so you can do whatever you think would be balanced and fun. Was there this particular tank battalion at this point for this time? Never happened, so do what you want! I think that (especially for inexperienced scenario designers like myself) this removes the burden of historical accuracy so it becomes easier to create a scenario. And think of the campaigns that a prolific designer or a group could come up with! Say, if Boots & Tracks decided to make all the battles in a campaign about a division's push toward Pyongyang, they could make all these cool, intricate, interlocking battles, and couldn't contradict any historical facts. I'm starting to babble, but the point remains; I feel that not having a historical canon gives designers a much freer rein and would lead to way more cool scenarios. And fytinghellfish, mad props on the modules for Korea. You even came up with little names and stuff! If they stole your idea exactly, I would be very happy.

I have, in my long hours of sitting around thinking, discovered a way to make QBs cool again. Instead of doing them totally random, or just doing whatever the hell you feel like, give yourself little tactical challenges. Yesterday I did an Allied Attack in a large town against infantry only Germans using a pure armor force. Or, do the opposite. Can your all-infantry force attack a mostly armor defender? I find that intentionally putting yourself in weird spots in QBs can make them a lot more fun, exciting, and different. Do any of you have certain things you like to do with your QBs that makes them more fun?

Yeah, it's pretty much endlessly expandable, would include cool tank warfare, and would all sorts of awesome toys to play with. You could have the M1A1s fighting Chinese tanks in open fields, or Crack and Elite Spec Ops guys with HEAVY air support raiding some place, or whatever. I just go crazy thinking about all the units and nationalities that could be involved. And, because it isn't historical, I wouldn't have to research stuff to make a reasonable scenario(yes!). I hope BFC is listening...

I would think about the shield as I would a helmet. Now, if I take a bullet or hunk of shrapnel right in the dome, a helmet probably won't help much. But if it's just a glancing shot that wings me, the helmet ensures that my head remains intact. I'm sure that some things would go through the shield like butter, but if, say, a mortar round goes off a way away, that shield might protect a few dudes from shrapnel, or would at least provide concealment from small-arms fire from approaching infantry.

At the risk of turning this into the sad, dead grandparents thread, I have a bit of morbid humor to share. My grandmother died a few months ago. She went peacefully in her sleep, and we all knew it was coming, but when we went over to the house to see her, the book on her nightstand was "Stop Aging Now!!". Later on, we all had a good laugh over that. (edited because I can't spell good)

ExplodingMonkey, I bought CMAK just so I could have CMBO updated. For a long time I was happy with CMBB and thought that CMAK was just extra stuff I didn't need, but I changed my tune. It's worth it, but the loss of Sherman Jumbos and Pershings cuts deep.

Really, the thing to keep in mind with all these comparisons is that by 1944, Germany was in deep sh*t. They just weren't able to resupply and reinforce their army as well as we could. So of course 12SS was destroyed! It was a foregone conclusion, given the situation they were in. The point is, they and other German military formations did a damn good job in a tough spot despite being relatively inexperienced.

That idea makes me happy. And the pre-battle map sounds like it would be pretty easy to implement. But then again, I'm just an idiot sitting around with my hand down my pants, so I don't know much about how hard it would be. (double entendre not intended)

I don't remember where, but I saw something about how they had narrowed the first module down to five subject areas, and WWII Pacific wasn't one of them. Steve wouldn't say exactly what the five were, except for no Pacific and no cold war. While I'm sure that Pacific in CMX2 would be pretty cracking (gotta love those beach landings), I don't feel that the theater has the incredible breadth and depth of, say cold war gone hot. At first I felt very strongly that WWII in Northwest Europe was the only way to go, but I thought about it some, and now I am a proponent of modern day tank conflict, be it in Korea or elsewhere. fytinghellfish a what I think was a totally awesome idea which should be stolen wholesale by BFC. If I may... "CM2: Korea 2006 That will include core ROK, local US 2nd ID (Armor/Mech and Light Infantry) and NKPA forces. Modules could then look like: Korea: Stryker Brigade! which will add all the various Stryker models from the US-based 3rd Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division, which would likely reinforce the Peninsula in war. Adds a whole bunch of missions to the game and maybe some of the older NKPA stuff (KOKSAM 170mm howitzer support, T-34/85s, BTR-152), older ROK stuff (M-48A3/A5s) and maybe a Seoul Terrain Tile Set. Korea: Semper Fi! which will add a complete OOB of the USMC (1st and 3rd Marine Divisions) so we'll have AAVs, AAAVs, various LAVs, marine infantry, naval gunfire support, Harrier and Cobra air support, etc. Maybe an ]operation about a modern amphibious landing at Inchon or Hamhung (first battle is coordinating a MEU amphib assault - two companies in AAVs and a heliborne company against a NKPA costal defense force with some tank support, second battle is holding against counterattack, etc.). and finally Korea: Red Tide! which will add the Chinese People's Liberation Army - Type 98 MBTs, Type 63A amphibious tanks, etc. " Unfortunately, Korea might hold a little less appeal for non-US peeps because, unless BFC adds UN troops, there will only be US, Korean and Chinese forces involved. Still, that idea is now far and away my favorite.

Wow, that makes no sense. In essence, even though they lost, I am impressed with how well the German units did in a tough spot. Also, well-trained but combat inexperienced units can still be "regular", as many of these units were. THat's much simpler.

I think that it is worthy of note that, IMHO, more was being asked of those Divisions caught early in the fighting in Normandy. Many of the inexperienced yet well-trained Allied units gave incredible performances, but that fact that units like 12SS, 17SS, 21st Panzer, etc. did as well as they did is very impressive. I would argue that the German units were, in many engagements, attacking in bad terrain, against units like the 3rd Canadian and 101st Airborne that could certainly be considered their equals in training, units that were very well-supplied, with the constant threat of Allied CAS, fewer supplies than ideal because of CAS, fewer supplies, tanks, etc. than I'm sure they would have liked (when 6th Fallschrimjaeger Regiment General Heydte (sp?) asked for more mortars, he was told that "for paratroopers, a knife is enough"), and so on and so on, the GErman units were facing long odds. (hooray for run-on sentences!! w00t!) I think the crux of this argument can be aimed back around to one of Steve's earlier comments regarding training and combat experience being used to determine the CM experience level. "In CM we made no distinction between training and field experience. Instead, it is up to the scenario makers to decide what the net result of training and experience should be for a unit. Well trained, no experience... Regular. Very well trained, no experience... Veteran. Well trained, good experience... Veteran. Poorly trained, no experience... Green. Etc." That makes a whole lot of sense to me, and I think that that explains to some degree this debate by pointing out that these units could be described as roughly equal in "experience".

It's already been made, ExplodingMonkey. The game was called SimAnt, and it rocked my world about ten years ago. You would build up your army of worker and warrior ants and do battle and against the evil red ants, while facing such foes as the beetles, caterpillars, lawnmowers, and, worst of all, rain. You would set trails of pheremones to lead your worker ants to sources of food. You could even take control of a warrior ant and kick some serious red ant ass. Eventually you would colonize the rest of the yard and would move on to the house. You won the game when you forced the owners to sell the house because of your infestation. Running it back on my old Mac, before they even had PowerPC. Hah! Those were the days... when your computer didn't have a cute little name but a confusing and unrecognizable string of numbers. Some things should never change. Hey, was I the only one who actually thought the beige computers looked good?

Well, as the originator of this thread, I feel it is my right to take things waaaaaaaaaay too far and suggest CM:Nat Turner's Rebellion.

I'm starting to think that perhaps MadMatt won't play me. Matt, will you at least tell me a flat-out "no" to soothe my crushed ego and give me closure?

Wait a second. Why couldn't BFC give us the King Tiger in the first module? Is BFC just "not that kind of girl"? I mean, I can see holding back the Sturmtiger and the Maus, but I don't think that the KT has that status. Personally, I think one should unlock the Maus by beating some sort of mini-game; ideally one were you have to press the arrow keys in time as they scroll along the screen, ala DDR. OR, you unlock the Maus by beating a special scenario where you have to destroy it using 2 vanilla Shermans. In open terrain. From 2000 yards. I find that to be fair. OR, a little side-scrolling game where you take command of a Maus, and drive along, destroying Jabos, Ninjas, and aliens with laser guns. I would, of course, insist of Jazz Jackrabbit style graphics, physics, and gameplay, and Jedi Knight style internal monologuing and Full Motion Video cutscenes (Of course your character would talk to himself! Was there every any question about that?) Only if mini-games are included will I be happy with CMX2. (BTW, Normandy would also have Tigers, Panthers, and other cool stuff but not all the cool stuff if they wanted to hold something back)

I agree. While I confess to participating in the "executing POWs" talk, everything that we could say has already been said. Lots of people did it. They were wrong to do so. Done. Now, I personally feel that the first few weeks in Normandy were the most interesting parts of the Allied campaign through Northwest Europe, and I would love to hear people talk about, as my understanding is sorely limited.