Paper Tiger

Not Birdstrike, Paper Tiger. Where on earth do you get the idea that I confirmed your opinion that no vetting takes place in my 'horrible idea' post? I was talking, (and I thought quite clearly too) about your proposed 'Scenario Master' making changes to our missions and ownership of the scenario passing to him, a point which you must have understood when you responded to it with your 'artistic/business perspective' post shortly afterwards. Now, I don't know how it was done before I joined the team for the Brit module but BFC absolutely DOES vet peer reviewed scenarios submitted for inclusion in the module with a view to maintaining consistency in their product. Perhaps NOT to your unbelievably high standards for inclusion of course. Is that clear enough for you?

The only difference would be that the 'Scenario Master' would be in charge of reviewing and approving any scenarios that have been produced by the beta testers. The Scenario Master would have a free hand in making any modifications and adjustments to all those scenarios and once the beta tester submitted the scenario to the Scenario Master the scenario would then 'become' the Scenario Master's (although the original maker would still get full credit in the briefing for the design of course). What a truly horrible, horrible suggestion. . Take out your 'Scenario Master' <shudder> and the rest of your post is pretty close to what actually happens. Your scenario is reviewed by your peers but nobody TOUCHES your stuff. Anyway, just wait and see what the new module brings.

ASL Veteran A wee bit of a shame that you chose to post this before you've seen the new scenarios that will come with the module (that's not your fault though). I think, by and large, that most of your requests have already been met. cheers PT

The scenario, plucked at random from the 28 available in the preview version Just thought I'd draw your attention to this point mentioned in the review. There's a LOT to look forward to in this module.

When you think about it, there really wouldn't be very much required to get a WW1 western front game up and running after the changes made to the game engine to make Normandy have been made. Personally, I would love to have a WW1 'Guns of August' Western Front game. It wasn't all artillery for 2-3 days, detonate your mines and then...charge... lose the mission...

It would be nice to add doorless option to map 3d editor for balconies. It's a nice idea but have you considered how the game's pathfinding AI would react to it and the potential for problems ? It seems to be a simple enough request but do you think this 'special effect' is worthy of the precious coding time that would be necessary to implement it?

Well, you can never say 'never' with regards to BFC. I remember that even Steve was surprised when the Blue Bar came back in v 1.11...

Not for 'CM:Shock Force' in any of it's future modules. However, Kill Stats are on the list for WW2 and, I'd imagine, subsequent titles.

I'd be VERY disappointed if RED air power wasn't included in the future modern era titles. However, judging from some of Steve's earlier posts about this I'm confident that it will be in. Just as long as scenario designers don't give both sides air support in the same mission. Now THAT would be unrealistic.

I am sure this has been brought up, but is there any plans for an IDF module? <Ahem>, yes, it's definitely come up for discussion once or twice before (heavy understatement). There are no plans for an IDF module. Try doing a Forum search for 'Gaza Strip IDF module' and you'll find all the arguments laid out there from both sides. Makes for some fun reading... Hey, I found it for you.... http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=85428&highlight=gaza+strip+IDF

If you buy new units in the scenario editor, you'll have to place them yourself in the editor as well. Otherwise, it will place them in an obscure corner of the board. Good luck with working with the editor. That's where I spend most of my CMSF time...

You have some very good ideas there Scipio. I'd like to see some improvements to the way the game handles reinforcements and I like all your ideas. I don't think we'll ever see them for SHOCK FORCE but perhaps the WW2 game or the next Modern era title?

Peter I have to confess that I'm not really qualified to comment on Humvee's behaviour under fire as I've hardly played a mission as the US side for over a year and a half (and on those very rare occassions when I do, I play missions with the heavier hitters). Unfortunately, this behaviour can't be reported as a BUG though as it's 'working as designed'. I think the current argument is that the average CMSF battlefield is a FAR more lethal environment than most US troops are facing in real life in order to give the BLUE player a challenge. The vehicle crew's motivation will also affect things. So it might (remembering the opening sentence of my post) be more the scenario designer's 'fault' than the game engine. This requires a more careful argument to get it changed so I'll run a couple of tests and raise the issue on the Beta forum. Most of those guys are American anyway so I'm sure they'll take this up with more fervour than I could possibly muster... (I'm Scottish) Edit to add... Actually, if you could point me to a scenario or two where I'll see this behaviour, I'd be grateful.

Err, not so much a bug as a designer stuff up... I forgot to give the BLUE player the Friendly Bonus in the Depot missions that ensured he would just have to press Cease Fire to continue... The entire script was tested with dummy scenarios so that I could explore each branch and of course, the dummy had the bonus... I haven't actually made any changes to the 'Dinas' campaign so it will be released as soon as the Brit module arrives.

So far, the new AI plans make the AI attack much more deadly so this might take a wee bit longer than I first thought. To avoid overwhelming Blue, I'm having to reduce the AI forces somewhat or delay their arrival and that means rebalancing everything. I'm also seriously considering doing a 'Hasrabit' version with T-90s instead of the TURMS. But it would have to be a special version only as I think there are still a lot of folks who don't have the Marines module.

Nope. I literally just tested this and it's working fine... Syrian BMP Mech Infantry throwing Smoke grenades after being issued with a Pop Smoke command...

Has anybody actually started to work on a scenario on an existing map yet? With a couple of hundred QB maps already available for doing this I have a feeling that you're going to find that it's programming the AI that's the real challenge when designing scenarios. I guess we'll soon find out...

Nothing more satisfying than watching a building catch fire then turn into a raging inferno! Really?

Or how about this one? This is the map from my very first scenario 'In Harms Way' This is an adaption of one of my favourite ASL scenarios 'The Niscemi-Biscemi Highway' or something like that... it's not important... I've since used it again... This is the map for 'Jameelah' in the 'Dinas' campaign. As you can see, it's been hugely altered but it wasn't nearly as much work to do as to start a new one from scratch... Finally, once you get a bit of confidence placing buildings and flavour objects, you can really go to town.... That's a shot of the map I made for the finale to 'Dinas'. The outskirts of the town have been devastated by a huge preliminary artillery barrage and many of the buildings are broken or rubbled, with copious amounts of junk flavour objecrs arranged in patterns stretching away from the fallen buildings. It took me hours and hours just to place the flavour objects for this one but in the end I felt the effort was worth it.

Back on the topic of this thread, here's a further suggestion to you fledgling map makers... recycle your own work. Here's a screenshot of my very first QB map... It really is nothing special, no flavour objects or buildings, just a rather bog standard open desert map that I liked to use for tank battles in the very early days of CMSF. But after creating a map, I don't just leave it, I use it again... That's the map for 'The Guards Counterattack' in the 'Hasrabit' campaign, stretched quite a bit along the east-west axis but it's essentially the same map... And used it again here.... That's the map for 'Heavy Metal' from the 'Hasrabit' campaign. So I used the same map three times in different guises. It doesn't take very much time to alter a map that you've already used to make it bigger, better etc...

And if I had to beg for aircraft models, if they're not depictable in the air, then at the minimum, please supply us with their smashed up remains for rescue missions. Well, you can ask for them but, be honest with yourself Kyle, a smashed aircraft flavour object is not really essential to a wargame played at this scale is it? Since Shock Force was first released 20 months ago there have been frequent and passionate calls from forum members, myself included, for more flavour objects to be added to the game with no result. And there were some really good ideas suggested too. You'll simply have to find some other way to simulate your downed aircraft/helicopter in the game. Now Pete Panzer's MG facing bug is more likely to get fixed. I was able to replicate this bug myslf very easily so I've filed a bug report for you Peter. It's in BFC's hands now. That doesn't mean that it will get fixed though. We'll just have to wait and see if it makes the v1.2 list of fixes.

For a 'must address' list of points, it's a very short list and quite an unusual one too... With regards to the Humvees buttoning up, perhaps you might want to consider keeping them a tad further back from the action than having them too close to small arms fire. I know that this is not always possible especially in MOUT operations but it doesn't seem to be too unrealistic behaviour to me. After all, the vast majority of Western soldiers are a bit less willing to risk their lives as recklessly as say a Technichal who may be truly convinced that he's heading for an eternity of pleasure with 40 perpetual virgins. Hell, if I could convince myself that that were REALLY possible, I'd be much braver too. I'm not disagreeing with your point though. It's quite possible that you'll see this one tweaked at some point in the future. With regards to the Graphics settings, I suspect you're referring to the lack of variety in the technichals, i.e. the same bog standard vehicles? Modding will help a bit but it wouldn't hurt to have another couple of car models in the game. It would be nice to have more than just the yellow taxi and the 4x4 pickup. Perhaps for the NATO module perhaps? NVD goggles would be cool. It would be REALLY nice if you could get that in the game. This would require reworking all the original soldier models though so it is quite a lot to ask for. But if you don't ask you don't get... It's a pretty safe bet that you won't get aircraft models in ANY future patch or CM title. While I agree that it would be cool for WW2, I don't believe that modern era fighters and helos get right down in there where you'd see them in the mission but stand off. But since they added the air and helo sounds to the game, I don't feel a lack. Tracers have come up before. Not sure what the outcome of that discussion was.

Nicely put sfhand. That's probably the #1 reason why playing against the AI can be boring for some people. It's doubly important for the playing of campaigns and since campaigns were mentioned in the title, let me add that two of my campaigns were designed specifically for people to play them that way, accept the result of their mission and move on to the next one. Both 'Hasrabit' and 'Dinas' have several different paths to the finale, in 'Hasrabit' , the path will be a more difficult one, in 'Dinas' merely a different one, and quite possibly a bit easier too but I explained how all that was to work in the campaign announcement.

This is NOT a thread about Real Time being a better way to play the game than WEGO or vice versa. Neither is it about observing your turns or watching the action unfold because of course, WEGO is the only way for players to do that. It is simply intended to address an issue I see posted about very commonly regarding this playstyle. But first, a bit of a story... When I first purchased Shock Force, I played my very first mission (the Training campaign) in WEGO, the same way I played CMBO and CMBB for years before. It was fine but I noticed that there were some icons on the interface that were only useable when the game was played in Real Time and that made me curious. I liked playing in WEGO and thought that RT would be too fiddly to be enjoyable. But I wanted to see what those icons did so I replayed the Training campaign in Real Time to see what it was like. It WAS tough and I didn't feel like I was in control of the situation the way I was when I played the campaign in WEGO. But I enjoyed the challenge. Back in the early days, playing Real Time Elite meant that you couldn't PAUSE the game to issue orders after you started the mission so I broke my teeth on Real Time Elite with no pauses. After a couple of patches (v1.03 I think) When BFC allowed us 'Elite' (HA!) players to pause the game I started to use it occassionally but I was by now quite comfortable playing without it. One enormous caveat to everything that follows is that RT is only really playable as I advise when the Blue player has about a Company with some support units thrown in or less at his disposal. Handling Battalions in RT IS a micromanagement nightmare:eek:. You'll get NO argument from me on that point and I'd play any mission like that in WEGO. Now, I read posts here occassionally that suggest that people micromange their game more in RT than they do in WEGO and I can't help thinking that they have grown SO accusomed to the pauses in the action to reflect on the game and issue their orders that they can't do the same in RT. I have read people's comments saying that instead of having the game pause once a minute, they can pause and unpause the game every second if they wish and of course it's not much fun and more management. But WHY do you need to pause the game so frequently? I rarely ever pause a game now when I play and I can play a 1 hour mission in less than 90 minutes easily (yes I DO pause occassionally). I enjoy the tension of issuing orders knowing that when I'm focussing on one part of the battle that I'm missing something somewhere else. I LIKE that tension and if I win playing like that, it makes me feel like it was earned baby! Playing RT with very occassional pausing can be a very exciting way to play the game against an AI opponent. At some point in the near future, you'll get the opportunity to play a small mission I've designed which is intended to be played exactly in this way. (Actually, almost everything I've done since 'Hasrabit' has been on a scale manageable by me with my 'low pause' RT game.) Unless you're very new to Shock Force, by now you should have become accustomed to the 'new' interface. The customisable hotkeys and Space Bar menu have improved the interface as well so it's quite possible to issue commands to a number of units quickly in RT without pausing.

I don't want to put any of the campaign builders down Don't worry mate, I never read it that way. It's just that with three campaigns under my belt and a fourth in the design stage, your choice of title was always going to catch my attention.