Wiggum15

I don't understand why some people are reacting in such an hostile way if somebody outlines the obvious shortcomings of CM titles. The same happened in a recent thread which argued about CMs inferiority compared to GTOS.
 
I mean he says what he dislikes about the CMBS campaigns and why he dislikes it and why he thinks solo-content in CMBS is inferior to previous CM titles and all you have to say is, that he should go away and look for antother game to play.
 
I mean he never said he dislikes a short night recon mission per se, he just said, that if a campaign is only 5 missions long, he expects all missions to be of a certain complexity and length. And I think he has valid a point. There is too litlle content for player who are not playing MP.
 
If a mission feels and plays like it was pure unimaginative padding hacked together in one evening but actually took hours and hours of work by inhouse mapbuilding experts, work efficiency as well as quality is an issue.

 

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 ?

Yes.
 
I use this mod but why has everything get modded into a 55$ game ?
If it would be 10$ i would not care.

As someone pointed out even the scenarios get donated to BFC.
I know small team, no money, niche games. But i expect some quality from a 55$ game, especially when its no "proof of concept" or other rare stuff. CMx2 had 8 years to evolve into a quality product.
Just look what Kieme(ITA) did with the distance ground textures, with his mod it looks 100 times better. BFC needs to step it up a bit.
Or take the sounds, someone pointed out they use sounds from the CMx1 era.

Hi !

What kind of engine improvements do you expect from the Bulge game ?
Do you wish that the performance and loading times get fixed ?

On my list are these technical and engine improvements:

- Overall Better Performance
- Reduce the loading times dramatically
- Get rid of all the old graphic glitches
- The ability to save turns as "replays"
- Fix the wind effect

- Use road command
- The ability for infantry to use differend spacings and formations
- Better/reworked (not so ugly) trenches and foxholes (a must-have for bulge)
- TacAI improvements for example better panic behavior
- Finally fix the use of bridges
- Real Deep snow terrain with a effect on tanks and vehicles
- Reworked UI that makes use of modern FullHD 16/9 screens
- Better Night combat effects and features like flares

What do you think, what real new features and fixes to you expect from the Bulge game ?
Oh, and why cant i start a poll anymore ?

Oh, thats a good point.
The effects of supression are not severe enough.
Fire and movement rarely works.

The code for surrendering needs to be changed too.
Surrendering should occur if:
- A whole formation with already low moral gets surrounded by enemy forces
- Single soldiers (last survivors) are x time closer to enemy troops then to friendly ones.

Another thing that needs to be added back is routing.
It should be possible to route a defender and if he reaches the map edges hes counted as MIA !

No more fights to the death (95% of all CM games feel like that)

... And that's my whole point.
You talk about how CM is "continuing to develop" but I and many others don't see that.
CM is in a standstill since 2007.
They fixed bugs and added minor features but the big issues and shortcomings are still there...just look at the infantry movement !
Or the awful "floating in nirvana" map.
8 years and still, CMBS feels like the 2007 SF just with a 55$ texture mod.

You always say "be nice and we can have a discussion"...
But how "nice" can you be if you want to criticize something ?
After every suggestion for change the first thing you hear is either:
- no its fine you are irrational
or
- will never happen they are a small team

Them you say "hey but the BFC marketing suggests this is a ->new<- game so whats ->new<- about it except textures and scenarios"
Then it goes one downwards from there people are calling you aggresive aor wish you would die in russia (actually happened)...

Im done with it, you cant criticize anything about the state of the engine or BFC's business model without getting your thread locked.
And by the way i dont see all those threads criticizing CMx2 or BFC, they are non existent. Only "polite" bug reports and happiness.

I dont know how much longer you can ride the CMx2 train without significant change, i just hope you dont wait till its to late.
I was always a BFC and CM fan...

You always say "be nice and we can have a discussion"...
But how "nice" can you be if you want to criticize something ?
After every suggestion for change the first thing you hear is either:
- no its fine you are irrational
or
- will never happen they are a small team

Them you say "hey but the BFC marketing suggests this is a ->new<- game so whats ->new<- about it except textures and scenarios"
Then it goes one downwards from there people are calling you aggresive aor wish you would die in russia (actually happened)...

Im done with it, you cant criticize anything about the state of the engine or BFC's business model without getting your thread locked.
And by the way i dont see all those threads criticizing CMx2 or BFC, they are non existent. Only "polite" bug reports and happiness.

I dont know how much longer you can ride the CMx2 train without significant change, i just hope you dont wait till its to late.
I was always a BFC and CM fan...

You always say "be nice and we can have a discussion"...
But how "nice" can you be if you want to criticize something ?
After every suggestion for change the first thing you hear is either:
- no its fine you are irrational
or
- will never happen they are a small team

Them you say "hey but the BFC marketing suggests this is a ->new<- game so whats ->new<- about it except textures and scenarios"
Then it goes one downwards from there people are calling you aggresive aor wish you would die in russia (actually happened)...

Im done with it, you cant criticize anything about the state of the engine or BFC's business model without getting your thread locked.
And by the way i dont see all those threads criticizing CMx2 or BFC, they are non existent. Only "polite" bug reports and happiness.

I dont know how much longer you can ride the CMx2 train without significant change, i just hope you dont wait till its to late.
I was always a BFC and CM fan...

Sometimes discussions just go off on a tangent and its like how many times can the same battle get fought over and over and over? Okay, you don't like playing games where the fighters aren't all speaking English (or whatever the complaint). Its been stated. Time to move on.
 
If the topic is current events in Ukraine - well, that's Steve's baby. That's an entirely different thing than unruly forum behavior. I know of no one this side of the State Department that has been following that story so closely for so long. There's an internal topic thread on that going back a year and a half wth more than 5,000 postings, last updated just a couple hours ago. Mis(dis)information on that particular topic drives Steve to distraction. Touch the third rail at your peril.

This is what? The fourth time a thread about change has cropped up in 6 months? Maybe they are popping up for a reason.

I have no problem with locking threads but i too dont like the "i have the last word" thing...

I dont know, maybe the BFC forums are a place where everyone is happy.
Take for example the DayZ forums (a game i play). There are hard discussions about which way the game should evolve and if the devs are fast enough fixing bugs and getting the game to Bata status.
Here this is not possible.

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 ?

I have no problem with locking threads but i too dont like the "i have the last word" thing...

I dont know, maybe the BFC forums are a place where everyone is happy.
Take for example the DayZ forums (a game i play). There are hard discussions about which way the game should evolve and if the devs are fast enough fixing bugs and getting the game to Bata status.
Here this is not possible.

I have no problem with locking threads but i too dont like the "i have the last word" thing...

I dont know, maybe the BFC forums are a place where everyone is happy.
Take for example the DayZ forums (a game i play). There are hard discussions about which way the game should evolve and if the devs are fast enough fixing bugs and getting the game to Bata status.
Here this is not possible.

I have no problem with locking threads but i too dont like the "i have the last word" thing...

I dont know, maybe the BFC forums are a place where everyone is happy.
Take for example the DayZ forums (a game i play). There are hard discussions about which way the game should evolve and if the devs are fast enough fixing bugs and getting the game to Bata status.
Here this is not possible.

i just want to say that i don't share your opinion that its ok to share your views/standings/opinions/decisions  on certain things and then lock the thread so that your word is last. i don't belive in publicity ,it doesnt make you 1% bigger
 
also i don't really experience your thread locking as something like ' i am owner of this place and i do what i want, i know i am right and i dont have time/nerves to argue with people who have no idea what they are talking about'
 
sure,you don't think my opinion is relevant,nor i ask for it to be relevant to you,but i wont comply,thats the bottom line
its not like we are wild ,rude,arugmentless creatures
 
wont happen, i protest, and i 'd rather be banned than comply with your policies
 
 
Sebastian Lacroix is Not approving
 
 

Hi !

What kind of engine improvements do you expect from the Bulge game ?
Do you wish that the performance and loading times get fixed ?

On my list are these technical and engine improvements:

- Overall Better Performance
- Reduce the loading times dramatically
- Get rid of all the old graphic glitches
- The ability to save turns as "replays"
- Fix the wind effect

- Use road command
- The ability for infantry to use differend spacings and formations
- Better/reworked (not so ugly) trenches and foxholes (a must-have for bulge)
- TacAI improvements for example better panic behavior
- Finally fix the use of bridges
- Real Deep snow terrain with a effect on tanks and vehicles
- Reworked UI that makes use of modern FullHD 16/9 screens
- Better Night combat effects and features like flares

What do you think, what real new features and fixes to you expect from the Bulge game ?
Oh, and why cant i start a poll anymore ?

Yes.
 
I use this mod but why has everything get modded into a 55$ game ?
If it would be 10$ i would not care.

As someone pointed out even the scenarios get donated to BFC.
I know small team, no money, niche games. But i expect some quality from a 55$ game, especially when its no "proof of concept" or other rare stuff. CMx2 had 8 years to evolve into a quality product.
Just look what Kieme(ITA) did with the distance ground textures, with his mod it looks 100 times better. BFC needs to step it up a bit.
Or take the sounds, someone pointed out they use sounds from the CMx1 era.

Oh, thats a good point.
The effects of supression are not severe enough.
Fire and movement rarely works.

The code for surrendering needs to be changed too.
Surrendering should occur if:
- A whole formation with already low moral gets surrounded by enemy forces
- Single soldiers (last survivors) are x time closer to enemy troops then to friendly ones.

Another thing that needs to be added back is routing.
It should be possible to route a defender and if he reaches the map edges hes counted as MIA !

No more fights to the death (95% of all CM games feel like that)

Hi !

What kind of engine improvements do you expect from the Bulge game ?
Do you wish that the performance and loading times get fixed ?

On my list are these technical and engine improvements:

- Overall Better Performance
- Reduce the loading times dramatically
- Get rid of all the old graphic glitches
- The ability to save turns as "replays"
- Fix the wind effect

- Use road command
- The ability for infantry to use differend spacings and formations
- Better/reworked (not so ugly) trenches and foxholes (a must-have for bulge)
- TacAI improvements for example better panic behavior
- Finally fix the use of bridges
- Real Deep snow terrain with a effect on tanks and vehicles
- Reworked UI that makes use of modern FullHD 16/9 screens
- Better Night combat effects and features like flares

What do you think, what real new features and fixes to you expect from the Bulge game ?
Oh, and why cant i start a poll anymore ?

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"...

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.

Ah, so you say they are silently monitoring the forum ?
As a small developer team with a small community they need to be much more active.
I say it again. Where are they active in discussions about the engine, where do they responde to critique ?
Where do they answer to technical problems ?

Fact, they rarely do. How can you sugarcoat that ?