Wiggum15

Mhh, i actually would say GTOS is in many aspects superior to CMx2 although it has a bit of a different scale. Infantry combat is not woeful, you just cant micro-manage your Inf like in CM. Make sure they move at the right time to the right position and everything is fine. Graphics are not just "decent", they blow away CMx2 in every aspect, CM is not even the same league. What should that mean ? They have a great game with interesting scenarios, regulary add new features and fix bugs + its way cheaper then CM. Wow, thats actually the best description ever for CMx2 and BFC... Just replace "Paradox" with "BFC" and "strategic" with "tactical"...

Please dont derail this thread, if you have a affection to Japanese anime erotica games, fine. But we are talking about CM here ! Thanks ! Whats the risk from putting games on Steam on starting a kickstarter campaign ? That some über-hardcore grogs will no longer buy your products because you have become mainstream ? I thought the same, then i discovered GTOS (the new Steam version) and was blown away ! By the way, there are dry hardcore wargames like "Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations" on Steam and i bet CM would outsell them every day !

What' s your age and occupational background that you think you are qualified to tell others what kind of suggestions they can make and not make on a internet forum ? Do you know the word "Gedankenspiel" ? But if its a serious question: Iam 17 and my occupational background is that i live in my parents basement...

There are many possible ways to finance the creation of a new engine. One would be to search for a Publisher like Paradox or Matrix Games. Or use Kickstarter and look how much money you can collect. I would go for this approach: 1. Work on a concept for a CMx3 engine 2. Release all the CMx2 games and modules on Steam (on a date like VE day or something), do a discount like 20% for the first few weeks...the popularity of CM will go through the roof ! 4. Make sure all those new CM players know about the Kickstarter campaign for CMx3 If you reach the goal and can actually build a CMx3 engine, great ! Maybe they can collect enough money to hire additional developers, artists. 6. Do a Early Access to collect additional money while still in development But i suspect BFC wants to play it as safe as possible and fears such a approach. They make enough money with CMx2 and know pretty well how much money they make with every "new" game and module. Possible they can all carry on this way till they can retire and become full-time grandpas.

No it is not. Its the so called "third version" or "third update" of the CMx2 engine ( CMx2 v3.00)...you should really know that...

The complete lack of communication with the community maybe...

...the only misconception is that you think it would be pointless to discussion the matter. Dont post here if you dont like the discussion !

Hi ! CMSF is 8 years old now, technically i would say that we play the same game for 8 years now... Its time to move to the next level of wargaming ! What do you think, when should BFC start to develop a CMx3 engine ? What would be the features you want to see in it ? Do you want it on Steam ? Do you think a Kickstarter or Early-Access Model would work for BFC ? My most wanted features: - Reworked Infantry Simulation (Movement, Formations, Cover, Spotting) right now i think its pretty unrealistic - Better TacAI, especially for the enemy AI, more situational awareness and a kind of self preservation (better Panic behavior !) - More Commands like a "Use Road" or Road Movement command for Vehicles - Make suppression more effective - Finally enable the TacAI to use bridges - Reworked Building Model + special MOUT commands - Inf - Vehicle (Tank,IFV,APC) cooperation commands - Better simulation of Night Combat with Flares and a NVG View - Better Modeling of terrain, terrain deformation and real trenches and foxholes not that ugly things we have now (but still with FOW) - The Option to mark buildings as prepared for defense in the editor - Fighting Positions for Vehicles - Better Quick Battles, better automatic force selection - More options for the AI in the Editor, more trigger options and waypoints - SOP's for the action Phase like "Evade enemy fire" or "Area fire at suspected enemy positions" or "only engage enemy AFV's" - Better graphics with not such a comic look like in CMx2 - No more "floating in green goo" map - Completely redone UI - Better optimization for Dual and Quad Core CPU's - Reduce loading times - Map overlay system - Actually show us the aircraft - Wet surfaces during rain - Build in Vehicle and Weapon Encyclopedia What do you think ?

If you think thats just something really minor... Then please tell me what are the major shortcomings of the current CMx2 engine for you ? In another thread everyone posted about the major improvements CMx2 made since SF, i said these were mostly minor improvements and everyone lost their minds...

But you too think it a issue that needs to be fixed ?

Isnt there a bug with the fog/smoke (fogtables) ?

I agree with you. The whole modeling of Infantry needs to be redone. We need formations (column, line, free) and spacing options (tight, normal, wide). I also agree with the HE problem, it adds to some inconstancy within the engine. Maybe BFC (with their limited time & money) should better retun to the abstracted modeling of Infantry similar to CMx1 Just think about the amount of work needed to get it right with a 1-1 representation...MOUT, Inf-Veh coordination. Then you have the cover and spotting problem, CM generally offers a unrealistic small amount of cover for Infantry but ha them spotted WAY to easily. I hope they put some work into the infantry for the Bulge game but highly doubt it...

The question is, at what speed are they moving and how far can they move forward while in the "cage" called CMx2 engine...

Wow, you reached a new low with this post sburke... No, you DONT criticize how CM handles Bridges ! If that was the case you would stard threads about it and ask BFC why they did not fix it in 8 years. You have a strange desire to always be polite toward BFC, thats why you never would ask them harsh questions or demand a answer from them. Then you try to get this thread closed... That typical, get the critic banned or derail his threads so they got closed...again, very mature. And about World Cup, as far as i know Germany won it, i mean the real thing not the Women's thing nobody cares about. And i guess you care as much about football as i care about American Football or Women's "soccer"... Thats so childish but you still got me to answer this...i know thats your plan because you want m,e banned or at least this thread closed...

I could answer to IanL but it seems pointless to discuss with someone who puts everyone who has a different opinion on his ignore list...i mean Stagler is there too ? Lets face it: Someone has a complain about CM -> you guys tell him you dont see the problem, its no bug, his PC is trash, his conclusion is invalid, go play something else, dont buy it then, or if you for some reason think his point is valid that BFC does not have time/money to fix/add it anyway. So what ?

I know you cant read my post because you put me on your "ignore list" (how mature is that ?)... Childish is only your talk about "winning"...this is not about winning (whos winning, you because you got another critic to shut up or got him banned ?!), its about a combined effort (from the community AND from BFC) to improve CM !

@ MikeyD Now can you tell me how snow will be modeled ? Will there be different snow tiles simulating deep snow ? Will it actually look like deep snow or will it just be flat ? Will there be reworked trench-foxhole models and other forms of protected fighting positions (overhead protection) ? Will there be "reinforced/prepared" buildings ? Will there be "snow" weather, i mean actuall snow i can see falling ? Will the buildings be recycled from the Normandy game or are they all/mostly new models ? Will the infantry movement (formations !) get a update ? Will the TacAi be improved ? Will night combat (Flares/LOS) be improved ? Will there be a "Use Road command" ? Will there be new AI trigger features ? How much of the content is recycled (1944 again again...) ? Is there a new feature that enhances the gameplay like "action phase SOP's" ? Imagine you could choose a SOP like -> "evade enemy fire" plot a few reverse waypoints back into cover or a fast waypoint behind a building. You start the turn, your Sherman hunts forward, receives AT fire and rushes forward over the open field behind a barn... Just something that gives the gameplay more depth ? No (huh, i thought it will be the "new" CM game) ? So its just a new TO&E (modders cant touch this) + new scenarios + some new textures + a few new models (again, modders cant touch this) Doesent this sound more like a 20$ DLC for you too ? Tell us, what the great deal about the Bulge game...whats "new" ? You cant forever hide behind the "wow look at our well researched TO&E" while your engine is a rusty old thing full of flaws...except you are JTS... ...there are only a few things the ordinary german cares less about then women playing soccer.

There is nothing wrong with JTS except that they developed a "engine" somewhere in the early 90's and keep them nearly unchanged till now using it for all kinds of time periods and foce size (group-division). They dont care about artwork or sound. Every game is a TO&E and scenario pack slapped onto those ancient engine. I dont want BFC to do the same with their "cash cow" the CMx2 engine. If in another 8 years they release CMBN (Combat Mission: Battle for the Netherlands) and it still feels and plays like CMSF then something went wrong. It looks ugly and especially on small maps you often have n other choice then to advance on the map edges which is unrealistic and feels like cheating.

I never said CM needs to be perfect. Its only about the lack of progress since CMSF, 8 years and no big step forward, no game changing new feature, no new level of realism for one of the best wargame series ever...that makes me sad and angry because i suspect BFC became lazy somehow. If i look at the improvements GTOS got through the latest patch alone or the Mius Front videos... Its not about being perfect...its about progress ! I dont want BFC to become the next JTS !

As a wargame fan and a long time CM player yes, i will most likely buy the Bulge game (but again, if i had to "care" about 55$ i would not buy it and install the Bulge Mod for CMFI instead). To be fair, both games have a different focus, CMx2 is all about micro-managing while GTOS has a operational layer and is more about Macro-management. Its been developed by a small team to and go look at the "Mius Front" videos on youtube and tell me thats not very impressing ! I wish CMx2 would be able to include features from GTOS, they already "stole" the hit decals feature (but with less functionality) from them anyway...

Sorry sburke but you are so hypocritical... Why cant you accept that a 3D computer wargame called GTOS is in some aspects superior to another 3D computer wargame called CMx2 ? Its not about eye candy but the graphics, map and terrain features of GTOS blow CMx2 "out of the water"...if you really denial that then this says much about you. Do you know that there are many CMx2 players who only play against the AI ? I would bet they are the majority by far. You try so hard to cover up the fact that there is another similar wargame thats better in some aspects that you come up with the cheap "bah no multiplayer" argument. CMx1 was actually superior to both thanks to abstraction.Yes the Inf in CMx2 "plays" better then in GTOS, you can micro-manage them more. But i dont see such a huge difference when it comes to TacAI behavior.

Did i say everything in GTOS is better then in CMx2 ? No ! I said -> GTOS blows CMx2 "out of the water" in some aspects Thats something you cant denial if you played the fully patched Steam version of GTOS !

@ waclaw ...and Snow ! Dont forget Snow...i mean how great is a white ground-tile ? GTOS blows CMx2 "out of the water" in some aspects: Graphics [CMx2 is not even close] Operational layer Airstrike modeling It has flares for night combat A bit more detailed modeling of armored vehicles Simulation of wired communication networks Some commands CMx2 lacks [inf and Vehicle formations, "use roads" command, Inf-Armor cooperation]. ...and if you take a look at the upcoming "Mius Front" game they are working on, well look for yourself on youtube... You will be surprised !

The line between a "module" and a "base game" is quiet blurry. For example MG was a module but the bulge game will be a "base game"...mhhh.

I dont have anything against the graphics besides that they look to comic like and the awful "floating in nirvana" map thing. + BFC should finally fix all the graphic glitches.