Wiggum15
-
Posts
537 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Wiggum15
-
-
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...
-
Can i amend this quote to:
BFC got stuck in there own niche and are moving it forward
As long as they make enough money there is no reason for them to change what they are doing
I will keep coming back to buy the next great game they release, so don't care much if some would class it as update/DLC whatever
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 ?
-
Brilliant, we win - hilarious. You managed to create an argument as pointless and childish as his and win doing it nicely done. Now if he would only admit he has been bested and more along.
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...
I feel like an English women's soccer player..... kidding, they did beat Germany.
...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.
You keep bringing this up as if it were a major problem, but I actually prefer it this way. Knowing at a glance where the map bounderies are is a boon to gameplay.
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.GTOS infantry is worse than cmx1 and that ruins the game completely for me. Infantry is the most important aspect in a tactical ww2 game imo. It cant be compared with cmx2 at all if you ask me.
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.
-
That would be funny except you are serious.
How long has it been out and you can't even play against an opponent? Seriously? But if you really like that great, go play that.
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 ?
This. Is there a game out there that blows CM out of the water? I too would like too know. I have not found anything that comes close so far.
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.
-
Thats correct but BFC has shown no interest in actually improving the engine or fixing fundamental flaws.
They were the ones who started the whole "DLC after DLC" thing.
They could have gone the other way which most likely would mean less sales/income for a year or two.
But maybe the CMx2 engine can not be "fixed" anyway and BFC knows that, thats why they choose to release texture/scenario packs.
I see no initiative from them like a kickstarter campaign for a new engine "CMx3". Then they could make money while still in development through early access.
-
And here I disagree. The game has improved greatly.
You are listing stuff that has not made it in (yet), but you do not list the stuff that did make it in.
I could make a long list of improvements that made it in over the years, but I will not.
Please tell me, what game changing or major features got added since SF ?
Target Armor Arc ? (A basic CMx1 feature) ?
Tank riders (a CMx1 feature and only available in RT) ?
Flame weapons (a CMx1 feature and only available in RT) ?
Hit decals (more of a graphic enhancement) ?
AA fire ?
-
The game has significantly evolved since 2007. The difference with SF is huge IMHO. And it is still evolving.
And here i disagree.
The game has by no means "significantly" evolved since 2007.
All we got are bug fixes, some additional but minor features and balance tweaks.
After all this discussion here i did a test:
I showed a friend (ordinary hobby gamer, 33 years old) SF and then CMBS (he first thought CMBS was a mod for SF or the other way around). I asked him what he thinks how many "updates" are between both titles.
His answer was "maybe 2 or three".
Then i told him that between both games are no less then 8 years...he was like WTF really...?!
- 8 years and we still have no infantry formations (hail to the conga line)
- 8 years and the map still floats in nirvana
- 8 years and vehicles still dont know what a road is
- 8 years and the TacAI is still as bad
- 8 years and we still do not have SOP's for the action phase
- 8 years and we still have the same graphic glitches
- 8 years and still no flares or NV mode for night combat
- 8 years and the enemy halftruck still sits there while my mortars shoot at it till its finally hit
- 8 years and the UI is still the same (which is not a good thing)
- 8 years and still no TCP/IP Multiplayer
...
-
no actually I do not say that about everyone who criticizes the game. I rarely say that. I reserve that for people who are NEVER going to be happy.
The rudeness starts with your attitude. It gets returned in kind. Imagine that.
There is NO wargame that makes me 100% happy, they all have flaws.
But...i have a special love for CM and cant accept the fact that it has been in a standstill since 8 years now.
CMx1 was great, i remember playing the tutorial mission the first time and i was blown away. CMAK and OFP made me a wargame fan and got me interested in the military (iam active infantry soldier since many years) !
I bought CMx2 and was disappointed but saw the potential...and now 8 years later and its still the same flaws and shortcomings...
So many "new" games and all just seem like a texture mod with some new units.
-
Wiggum why dont you write a ticket at helpdesk or a PM directly to Steve?
...and what should i achieve with that ?
I wrote PM's to Steve and ChrisND an never got a response.
Helpdesk is more for support and not to discuss the game...thats something that belongs into the forums.
-
Then please for all that is holy, go play THAT game and leave us in peace.
Look, and THAT is the flawed attitude you guys have.
Someone complains about CMx2 or criticize it or BFC.
Your reaction -> "Play another game" or "Develop your own game"
No wonder BFC did not move forward in the last 7 years, you guys deserve CMx2 as it is...stop being rude to everyone who does criticize CMx2 or BFC !
-
What are they working on mate? Have you got any links?
I can not post them here but have sent you a PM.
-
@ c3k
Oh come on.
You argument is the same as sburke's.
- BFC needs more time
Really ?!
8 Years should be enough to work on the basic CMx2 flaws and shortcomings and add game changing new features.
- BFC has no money
If i look at what some Indie Devs are pulling of at the moment i cant let that count
- BFC is a small team
There is another small wargame developing team from Kharkov, Ukraine...just look at what they are able to do !
- The game is the best tactical battle simulator anyway
Actually i would say no it is not. And i think sooner then later BFC will realize that they got much to comfortable in their little warm niche.
Action Square /spot
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
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...