rooibos
-
Posts
51 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by rooibos
-
-
31 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
I'll chime in by saying that I think that all of us (well 99% at least) all want BFC to continue to do well and produce more games for us to enjoy. We all know that they are a business and will only continue to survive as long as they continue to make money, and that if they had a ton of money dumped on them, it would (likely) make making more games faster a reality. (Ignoring all the various logistics and such, the basic equation is the more money a company has= the more productive it can become)
Rooibos and others who have commented on this on the forum all essentially say the same thing; if BFC increased publicity, it would increase sales, which would then allow them to expand as a company and make more games faster. The reality is different and more complicated than that, but that is the general outcome they are pushing for. Again, I think everyone here wants the best for BFC, people just have different ideas about how to go about doing that.
Absolutely.
I can't help but feel jaded when the people in charge of the game treat it like some back shelf secret they're ashamed of. Or like some teenage band who are just too cool for "selling out" and as a result, you never get to see them play shows and when they do, they're in the singer's weird uncle's garage and no one else shows up. And merchandise? Good luck, they're not interested in a merch guy because "that's the way they've always done it". You're welcome to screenprint your own Scuttlebutts Tshirts though. Hey maybe they'll even sign it for you if you go to the one show a year they perform... that is, if you even hear about when it's happening.
I've got a half dozen friends that won't touch this game with a 10-foot pole because of its archaic downloader and lack of opponent browser. They would absolutely play it, and play it often, if perhaps I were to drunkenly purchase it for their Steam (or GOG or what have you) inventory- as I, and many others have done a countless number of times for other games. And that's not even including internet friends/friends from other games who you might look to get into it (sorry Funtimesguy666 from that weird forum I post on, I'm not buying you CM as it is now. If it were two clicks of my mouse then yeah, you'd have a copy already) or simply benefit from seeing people on their Friends List playing it.
Even a small increase in active player base not only means more people to play with, but more content. More maps, more scenarios etc. It's exponential really- more content being generated in turns generates more content. More DARs/AARs/Lets plays which means more visibility as a result. Plus, players who may be on the fence and might feel sort of blase about the game, see positive work being done and more players involved. Someone who bought the game on a whim and has no way to connect to others, or sees that at any given time there's maybe a half dozen opponents looking for games isn't going to go that extra step and might "oh lame this game is dead". Someone who logs in and sees 100 opponents available thinks "oh wow this might be worth sticking to".
-
6 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:
It has gobs of presence with me. As long as BFC is happy to keep turning out finely crafted games, I'll be happy to keep buying them. And that's really all I care about. The rest is just noise.
Michael
That's defeatist and counterproductive. If you're fine with struggling to find opponents, a tiny selection of maps and mods and a company uninterested in modernizing, that's fine. But it's a disservice to the exceptional product itself, and inconsiderate of the product it can be.
-
On 2/27/2017 at 4:25 PM, Erwin said:
The strange thing is that the only person who seems to care about this is you. Not expecting you to be visiting here long.
I'm sure that really matters, given the sample size. How about you ask any of the...oh wait. It's almost like there isn't anyone else anywhere actually discussing this game.
On 2/27/2017 at 6:04 PM, Michael Emrys said:But it could easily also mean a dilution of effort as more people mean more disagreements over what directions the game should pursue. There is an optimum size population for any endeavor. Too few and matters stagnate. Too many and it all dissolves into chaos. So far, CM appears to be hitting it about right.
Michael
I'm not sure CM will rocket to the level of popularity wherein there's a schism within the community about what features need to be added. That's a terrible excuse. Instead, one can look objectively at metrics like popularity- and see this game has next to zero presence. And if that does happens, that's a wild and incredible thing for BF as a company.
On 2/27/2017 at 6:38 PM, Baneman said:Well, I don't know - how "niche" and/or "complex" is Crusader Kings regarded as being ?
Because there's a huge difference between a grand strategy title and a game that's modelling every bullet etc.
No active subreddit ? That's a damn poor show !
You have identified a major shortcoming of Combat Mission. Go ye forth and create one then - we will all be grateful.CK2 isn't really seen as being niche anymore which is the point. The genre, for the longest time was, and tbh outside of CK2 sort of still is.
Underlying mechanical engine complexity doesn't really matter. There are plenty of games *more* complex than CM both complex in terms of engine mechanics, and in term of gameplay systems that are considerably more popular and quite a bit more visible than CM. Look to a game like ARMA, that up until ARMA2 was released was basically an extremely niche "nerd" game that has since grown into one of the largest, most popular and simple best games of the entire genre- if not PC gaming in general. It hasn't lost complexity. It hasn't lost community involvement. In fact there was an entire standalone non-ARMA game launched based entirely off of the contributions of the community.
Wanna know how much I've spent on Operation Flashpoint/ARMA as a whole? And that doesn't even consider the mechanics other games adopted from ARMA, making them in turn better as a whole.
I don't accept your narrative that CM is "only for" or "will only be played by" stuffy old grognards.
On 2/27/2017 at 6:48 PM, niall78 said:I had to look up what a 'subreddit' was.
Now that I have I can see how having CM on a subreddit would massively increase my enjoyment of the game.
This is a game developed by 1 guy, and it only recently jumped onto steam. (I've bought this game several times as well)
https://www.reddit.com/r/RimWorld/
40,000 reddit subscribers.
200+ users browsing
There are nearly as many users browsing that sub as there are the *entire forum population of The Few Good Men*.
The second hit on youtube for Rimworld has almost 300,000 views and is 2 months old.
Ithikial's best video? 1/10th the views and is 4 years old. Searching for "combat mission red thunder" doesn't return a *single video* with more than 25,000 views. Black sea has a handful over 50. Interestingly a 9 year old Shock Force video broke 300,00 and two CM Touch videos broke 200,000.
On 2/27/2017 at 7:16 PM, Rinaldi said:For the record, it in fact does have a subreddit - just not very active, nor do I ever expect it to be.
The way reddit works, it won't gain any real traction without admin support, and a healthy community independent of the site; like any forum. His temper tantrum is basically white noise, in short.
There's better platforms for discussion of the game, like here, or at SIMHQ.
The inactive forum is *indicative* of a problem, not the reason.
On 2/27/2017 at 5:28 PM, Rinaldi said:If CKII is complex than what a time it is the be alive. ? Entertaining? Certainly, but not complex, even if you're memeing as a no name Greek Duke.
CKII has but one sole advantage over CM: I can systemically and ruthlessly exterminate the nobility of England and replace them with my Norman yes-men. BFC is sorely lacking in this feature. I am holding out hope for a patch.
CKII has a considerable learning curve and a large amount of mechanical complexity. Just because it *can* be used for shenanigans and memes doesn't make that untrue.
CKII is a stodgy game about medieval power politics, where combat takes a distant backseat to electing council and assigning peerage. That should be a recipe for "niche" if I've ever heard one.
Glancing HE shells off of the sides of a tank resulting in the cowering infantry nearby being blown apart or shredding buildings with AGS-17 should be at the top of the list of "hell yeah that's cool".
-
7 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:
Personally I couldn't give a monkey's t*** how many sales CK2 or anything other game has sold. Since when has popularity equaled quality? Mein Kampf sold shedloads, it was still garbage.
It's a clear and obvious demonstration that "niche" or "complex" titles aren't actually "niche" at all.
It's not about quality of the product itself, that stands on its own. It's about visibility. Something that objectively improves quality. More opponents. More maps. More mods. More AAR and DARs. We're sitting here praising a single article in a B-list gamer magazine.
The game doesn't even have an active subreddit.
-
Oh wow a single review on a niche gaming website. Really making leaps and bounds with that "visibility" thing. Meanwhile, Crusader Kings 2 one of the most complex titles for PC released in the last few years has surpassed 5 million units sold (and they surpassed that mark 2 years ago) with 4,000 players on Steam just last month. I'm not interested in pursuing anymore CM titles until BF smartens up and moves into the 21st century.
-
6 hours ago, Erwin said:
It's probably a generational thing but us older dudes value our privacy and can't stand having intrusive programs like STEAM on our clean machines as we don't know what info is being taken from us in order to sell to marketers so that they can send us more spam.
Same reason I don't partake in "anti-social media" where you invite ID thieves and burglars to steal your stuff when you tell everyone about yourself (who the hell cares?) and when you are on vacation etc. I suppose I may be xtreme, but security was always an issue in my world. As I said to Putin last time, "You aint hacking my computer, pal".
Hell, I still have an old flip cell phone as I detest texting and actually like talking to people using full words in the elfish language! It's so degenerate, I know.
that's what steam offline mode is for.
the issue isn't pandering to you, you've already bought it. the issue is the 8 million people who bought a game about driving a tractor or that CM's spiritual ancestor actually sat on steam's TOP 10 best seller list.
-
probably having a community the size of my mother's bridge club doesn't help
-
I find movement much easier in older eras. Weapons are not as lethal, there isn't the everpresent danger of near instant artillery or fast movers and spotting is not as effective.
Whereas in BS I might really plot out with exact detail a sneaking/cautious path of some infantry through some woods, in RT and FB I don't have a problem just walking them up to the front. It's much easier in this sense, to reinforce holes or shift maneuvers. Small mistakes don't always becomes huge ones as they did in BS (no russian grenade launchers to worry about).
You can be a bit sneakier, use movement more effectively. At the same time, so can they. Beware of areas where spotting coverage is poor, you'll rapidly find enemies behind your lines.
I had the *opposite* issue, coming from RT to BS. My maneuvers were too brazen, too rapid. I was used to rolling up to a front with fresh men or pulling troops out of a pocket and just marching them somewhere else. That you can't do in BS, you'll be wiped out.
While we lack vehicles like Bradleys and BMPs to lay HE into buildings or thickets where you suspect there may be infantry, don't be afraid to employ jeeps or something light skinned vehicles in a support role. Generally, they will die fast if fire is returned from just about anyone, but a .50 from 500yds out can be very effective in suppressing an area. You need every asset you can to make up for the decrease in overall lethality and you don't have piles of 20mm autocannon you can just lob around.
-
This game has no presence.
It's never mentioned on reddit (except for by one notable user, now banned... I know who you are :D). And reddit is the biggest website on the internet. It doesn't have its own subreddit, and everything has a subreddit. There are only a few dozen CM videos on youtube with over 1,000 views.
It's not mentioned on gaming websites- Rock Paper Shotgun is pretty much the only one, and even then it's in the "niche wargaming for old dudes" column. Hell, the only reason I bought CMBS or even knew about it was because I remembered the Combat Mission name from its connection to Close Combat, way back when CM was turn based. I used to post on the old SSI boards a lot.
Despite what the higher-ups say, I'll still harp that not migrating to Steam is a HUGE mistake. Christ, a game about driving tractors and planting corn sold 8 million copies on the PC.
-
I wouldn't mind a simple ROE or posture mode. Could perhaps be issued absolutely at the commander level or perhaps per platoon basis, idk. Sometimes seems like it would be a good way to streamline the constant adjusting of target arcs.
I.e.
Hold fire.
Hold fire unless engaged.
Hold fire until good targets found.
Open fire.
Heavy suppression (shoot anything with everything)
-
17 hours ago, Machor said:
if they wanted to expand their market
Everyone here knows the answer to this though
-
maybe a campaign mode finally? a proper map editor? Steam support and a large community (LOL)?
-
On 11/2/2016 at 1:00 PM, hattori said:
I saw this on the wiki article about Battlefront:
"On July 1, 2010, battlefront hired Phillip Culliton as a "First Second Programmer" after operating for 13 years with a single coder. "
ONE coder and now TWO? I'm going to cut Battlefront a ton of slack, and I'm now more impressed with the work they have done.
Or you could look at games like rimworld who don't just have one coder, their *entire* team is one person and have put out actually weekly updates to the game for 2 years now.
-
On 6/28/2016 at 7:39 PM, John Kettler said:
kinophile,
Fair point. I use these high quality (Veteran absolute minimum) snipers to inflict casualties on light armor and soft-skins in order to derail an attack without exposing the fire means employed.
Exposition
If present, I will preferentially target the Tunguska in order to clear the field for CAS and drones (if I have any) or to remove the deadly threat it poses to practically any weapon or force I have and especially for MOUT. If no Tunguska, then I'll be looking for Kriz, FO/FAC AFVs and other similar high leverage targets. Will I take kills vs more vanilla BMP, BTR and MTLB series IFVs and APCs? Sure, especially if deep, since even a simple kill with no explosion forces the occupants to debus and walk. I've yet to get a K-Kill anyway. When not engaging key targets, what I seek to do is take the steam out of the attack by progressively removing the mechanized component and slow down the attacker's momentum. I've yet to snipe personnel targets. If budget permits, I'll deploy several Barrett teams in order to generate crossfires and allow me to work the angles, have one shoot while another relocates and similar. Where possible, I will put them under command of a good officer.
Regards,
John Kettler
I can't seem to user snipers effectively.
I find they get targeted and shot rapidly. The other annoying thing is when their spotter decides to fire his carbine and give away the position before the long gun has come to bear.
-
3 hours ago, hattori said:
Quick question (sorry if this is ridiculous) ... are you checking line of sight ahead of time by putting a movement waypoint on where you want to go, and then check LOS from that waypoint with target commands, or are you zooming down to ground level to see if there is LOS?
Yeah, I make sure to check where I'm moving first- the main issue was specifically with an MG team who had LOS while "weapon not deployed" but not once the weapon was deployed- they hadn't moved from their action square afaik.
The second issue is more of a general issue with finding LOS in grassy or wooded areas in general. I tend to avoid them outright as I find it extremely finnicky trying to guess at what areas have LOS despite what the camera shows
Thanks for the info guys, it seems like the problem is a combination of the aforementioned issues.
1) Posture change from standing/not deployed to prone/deployed. Which is really kinda annoying.
2) Ground level LOS required for all buildings regardless of height, this is a terrible bug tbh, I'd always sorta felt like this was the case, but it's good to know that it's more or less confirmed. C'mon BF, get on this.
So, any tips or tricks people use to make infantry usage easier in "difficult" terrain? Especially in regards to smaller teams or teams that need to be "deployed" or prone?
-
Playing through the second mission of the Shield of Kiev.
Put my infantry in the woods on the left flank looking towards the large buildings. Have an MG team moving in to provide cover, find a good spot with good LOS on the buildings. Have him set up his gun, and now the LOS is gone. I had another rifle team right beside them (same elevation, no trees in the way) who could see perfectly.
I really can't figure out how to set infantry up in the grass. They never seem to see anything. Same goes for trees. A single tree seems to block an entire team's LOS despite the fact that that with the camera I can see perfectly that two storey building I wish to light up.
-
On 10/19/2016 at 0:14 AM, czarejs said:
Hello Gentleman,
So I'm the guy who made that scenario. First, I'm glad you enjoy it. Second, I haven't actually played Black Sea almost since then and was thinking about that scenario and getting back and maybe updating it. If you don't mind my asking, what did you find "gamey"?
Thanks
Good question, I'll try to expand (keep in mind it's not a bad thing)
It definitely feels like a designed level, rather than just a skirmish between two forces. As in someone went in curated it completely. The flow of the battle felt very much like it was intended- felt like it was laid out in a Call of Duty style, a sort ofcinematic fashion- again, not a bad thing. It was a very exciting experience.
-
Starts off as a nice close quarters scouting operation. At this point I usually level all the buildings I can with my grenade launchers a .50s and pick off whatever crawls out with my infantry.
And then it becomes a larger scale mechanized battle with lots of ambushes and sneaking around buildings and close range javelin kills, really satisfying-
And then its namesake. Quickly you're set upon by suicidal motor rifles. BMPs everywhere. Autocannon and 40mm GL exploding everywhere. Calling in Paladin artillery strikes danger close to half strength scout teams hiding in ruined buildings and shell holes.
Probably one of the more "gamey" missions, but it sure is a blast. Things ramp up perfectly and by the end I found myself sweating, barely taking time to breathe. Hats off to whoever designed this battle.
-
I'd say its interacting with vehicles mainly.
Often if it's a situation of: run the hell out of cover, grab more ammo, and run back to the front to shoot it just never works that smoothly. Takes multiple turns.
Same with embarking/dismebarking. I do a lot of kamikaze style runs with FOs and stuff where I rush up to cover, have him leap out and run into some woods (or vice-versa) and it's not a smooth process. I find things like jeeps or any vehicle that can carry infantry (especially in WW2 titles) immensely useful and I'm constantly using vehicles to ferry people around but unfortunately the transition between dismounted/mounted/dismounted is never smooth and the vehicles/infantry can be tricky to get the right timing down.
-
I don't use it for anything but mopping up and I go in with the mindset that i'm going to lose UAVs very fast so their usefulness is limited.
There's really no way of accurately predicting the state of an enemie's AA other than just hoping you've swept the map- and by that point, the battle should be pretty much over anyway.
-
1) as mentioned, the atgm/cannon fire select. this has caused a lot of grief from me.
would also like to micromanage weapons/ammo fire as it is. would like to tell vehicles to change ammo if need be (If I know there's a certain threat type approaching) and tell infantry to only use certain weapon types.
2) better multi-order commanding. way points and firing arcs are easy enough. but try to set up something complex like having a vehicle back up to an area, having a unit walk up to it, have them re-arm and the do something else is usually an exercise in frustration. often If i'm trying to get a unit to dismount, and then the vehicle rush off elsewhere I usually bung it up and half the squad or the whole squad is still on it.
3) los. los. los.
I hate trying to maneuver FO teams or snipers in tall grass or bushes. If they made the camera actually flat to the ground instead of hovering 10 feet off the ground, that might help.
Yes, you can see that building. You're looking right at it.
4) campaign map. 'nuff said about that.
-
Happens when I save.
Everytime I save the game get progressively buggier, glitchier and less stable.
And then, I'll go to save it and my computer crashes.
Force restart. Laptop won't start up. Gets to windows, then all icons go white and computer hangs. Keep restarting and it does this.
Before, i managed to get to my start menu and do a shut down before it freezes and it worked fine.
Thought it was a fluke. Start playing again
Go to save, freezes. Restart computer now i can get Windows to start.
Can (sometimes) get into startup repair which doesn't help- can launch on safemode.
Win 8. AMD gfx drivers fully updated.
So now I'm stuck in this loop. (posting from phone)
-
Watched a Bradley shred a T90 last night, that was great. But then the T90's sister came out in a rampage and killed 5 of my bradleys in one fell swoop because they wouldn't fire their TOWS.
-
right, makes sense. Point missions make them less vulnerable?
I find I only use air assets as cleanup once I've encirlced a town or position and don't feel like pushing further
Armchair General praises Final Blitzkrieg
in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
Posted
You've created a strawman here. No one espoused "dumbing down" of the game.
It's not a realistic scenario, because not only does it not need to happen, but in fact, outside of AAA Titles, it's not always the case. ARMA3, complicated as it can be- especially with people (as myself) who use full milsim mods, is leaps and bounds above its earliest predecessor. ARMA3 is also an order of magnitude more popular than its progenitor.
You're using "oh but popularity will make the game bad" as an argument as to why the game can't be more popular, which is a false argument, full stop.
I have no interest, beyond minor bug-nitpicking, in changing the game.
None of the "big dogs" even know this product exists and if the game vaporizes and the studio disappears, we're left with nothing. No legacy. No studios out there aspiring to build what CM once had. (There aren't any doing that now either)
https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/
This is a 17,000 member strong, moderately active community dedicated to a 17 year old game that hasn't had proper support in years. The company folded three years after its release.