Sunbather
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sunbather
-
-
5 hours ago, Centurian52 said:
This has already been discussed to death over the last two years. There is no doubt that plenty of people would buy it, myself included. But Battlefront, and their partners at Slitherine, have decided that it would almost certainly be a bad PR move. However we feel about it, the matter has been decided and there is no point in us discussing it further.
I just want to reiterate that Matrix/Slitherine will publish Broken Arrows this year and they have been advertising it heavily since 2022. Although the game is 'fictional' it literally has all the TOE from the current war (drones, heavy airstrike jets, heavy bombers, Bradleys, T-90s and Armatas) and the maps look frightingly similar to what we've seen on the news in the past years. Broken Arrows is set in the Baltics (which makes it completely fine, I guess) and yet after a 30 minutes match with 8 players, the map looks exactly like Mariupol.
Sorry, but I have a great distaste for double standards. And denying the release of the Black Sea module, yet putting so much PR effort into a game like Broken Arrow is just too much. And we didn't even speak about the seriousness of Combat Mission which could even be called educational, whereas Broken Arrows is a competive game for fun. And to multiply that: Combat Mission is a niche product, whereas Broken Arrows will be a beststeller relative to wargaming standards. (similar to CM: Red Thunder and Steel Division 2 if you will.)
-
On 2/13/2024 at 4:41 PM, Centurian52 said:
Maybe someday in the distant future, when we all have our own personal moon-sized supercomputers, someone will make a single game that fully integrates air, ground, naval, and space warfare on the tactical, operational, and strategic levels in the full rich detail in which Combat Mission currently covers tactical ground warfare.
I don't think hardware is the main limitation here. The question is more like, how you would implement all this in a single game and still make it playable? Air warfare (aircrafts, weaponry and systems) covers 100s of kilometers and demands a vast but less detailed map; naval warfare (crafts, weaponry and systems) is even grander in its scale, covering 1000s of kilometers, and demands a completely different map with lots of water, obviously. Meanwhile, ground warfare can only be tactical when the map is reduced to a few dozen kilometers to allow for enough map detail. So you can't just combine these three levels, and it's not a hardware issue. How would you go, naturally and without utterly breaking the gameflow, from one map scale to a hugely different map scale?
Then there is staged aspect of modern warfare: the Air Land Battle doctrine, for example, does not mean everything happens at the same time. First come the missiles from ships, then the airstrikes, then ground troops with limited CAS (to crassly simplify the whole thing). Another temporal aspect would be the huge differences in travel distance, speed, engagement range etc. as is exemplified superbly in the movie Dunkirk.
It is also telling that you completely forgot to mention logistics which would add a whole different layer to the whole affair but would, in my opinion, be necessary to realistically depict full-scale modern warfare (especially when you want the game to be operational or even strategical). All the problems (regarding the map and the temporal aspect) would now multiply.
With all that being said, the closest thing we have that combines all three combat layers, and to a very minor degree also logistics, are the games by Eugen Systems. Especially Wargame: Red Dragon comes to mind or the current WARNO that now has a campaign that is add a lite operational layer to the game. However, when you play these games you can immediately see how wonky it gets when you try to put naval, air and ground warfare all in one game.
-
15 hours ago, Flibby said:
Speaking as a lawyer in the field, There's nothing in a EULA which could prevent anyone from subscribing/donating to a patreon account for someone who makes mods so long as the mods are publicly available and not dependent upon payments being received. It would simply not be enforceable.
It's technically illegal in some places to stream gaming content but for obvious reasons it's tolerated.
I see! Thanks for taking your time to answer my question. So it's basically a voluntary donation and not a payment since money and downloading of the mod are not connected.
-
I was quite shocked when I saw the thread being closed because of a comment from a random user. Why not delete that specific comment, the only one by the way that mentioned a monetary aspect in a thread of 3 pages? At the same time, now that Battlefront explained things, I do see how the wording "Battlepack" and "pre-order" might cause problems with users stumbling upon the forums or what not. And as one can see, even long-term users of these forums had big troubles in reading through Mr.X' first few sentences in the original post in which he clearly stated why it is called "pre-order" and that everyone receives the Battle Pack for FREE as long as he registers with him. [EDIT: Made a mistake: it's in the third post, the first one is only a picture, but the argument still stands that the chances you might think you actually have to pay for the Battle Pack are nil. Well, until the comment in question.]
From what I understand, modding CM games (creating maps, scenarios, campaigns or even 'new' vehicles) is already a painstaking process. Throw sticks between the feet of those who create mods is a real headscratcher, especially in the year 2023 when most if not all wargame developers endorse modding and do all they can to give the modders the tools they need. Heck, even Eugen Systems finally introduced a map editor.
But apart from having an opinion, I am very curious about one thing and I hope someone can enlighten me: a LOT of games with a huge modding community - Rimworld, Paradox games like Hearts of Iron IV etc. etc. - have modders with a Patron page or saying right in the official Steam workshop that if you like their content you can buy them a coffee (with a link to a Paypal account). What differentiates the EULA of Combat Mission from the EULA of Hearts of Iron? Is it maybe that the USA has the right to the vehicles? But I can't really see that when it comes to the WW2 titles. HUGE DISCLAIMER: I don't ask that so in the end Mr X gets donations for his work (which he doesn't want anyway which he has stated now over and over again). I ask because I always wondered how it is allowed (or only tolerated?) for modders to get donations for their content which clearly is new content (otherwise it wouldn't be a mod) but based on existing, official content or at least the framework of the respective game.
-
15 hours ago, BFCElvis said:
That would be an idea. But the better idea is to find out why they are showing as corrupted files, fix it and but the fixed version link in. Which is what has been done.
After long consideration, I agree that this is the better solution, haha. Thanks!
-
3 hours ago, BFCElvis said:
Open up a Help Desk ticket and I'll get you the scenarios.
Since I will eventually buy the game as well (as soon as I have an interest in the Russo-Afghanistan War again), wouldn't it be easier to just upload the affected scenarios in the download section?
-
On 1/15/2024 at 1:39 PM, Centurian52 said:
Graviteam has amazing physical detail. But I didn't see much effort put into things like accurate TO&E. And options for setting up complicated scenarios seemed very limited. I was in awe of the physics, but they seem to have forgotten everything else.
What makes you think that? I don't want to trigger yet another discussion about how good game X is compared to game Y but Graviteam has insane TO&E and OOB, at least for those operations I could verifiy it for. Some other battles and operations are so obscure that there aren't any published sources in English for it. Look at e.g. the "Bird Grove" DLC where a user has compiled a +100 pages book with English translations of the original Russian and German war diaries, including 'exact' notes on what equipment was used, lost, destroyed etc.
In fact, I would say that Graviteam Tactics doesn't really look like a correct TO&E and OOB because there hardly ever was a thing like that in real life, especially from 1942 onwards: so many cobbled together Kampfgruppen and ill equipped 'divisions'. Combat Mission does the same, of course.
-
On 1/13/2024 at 10:31 PM, Commanderski said:
No game is perfect and no game company has ever had a game where none of their customers ever had a complaint or didn't want any more improvements. Some people like CM, some like Graviteam, some any of the others of the myriad of WWII games. to each his own.
Until a perfect game comes up we should be happy that the companies we support continue to make improvements and additions to our games.
I think this is what I was ranting about. I love Combat Mission, still my most played wargame when you take all the different iterations into account. But it's not perfect and there won't ever be a perfect game for the simple reason that sometimes you're just in the mood for something else, maybe 2D instead of 3D, maybe obscure African conflicts instead of WW2 Normandy, maybe Cold War 1989 instead of 1979 or maybe even Cold War 1971. Maybe you get frustrated with the micromanaging or spotting in Combat Mission and for that reason you go to Graviteam. Then you find flaws in that game or something that just doesn't speak to your mood because maybe you're in the mood for some micromanaging.
At the end of the day, I am just glad that the wargame genre is so thriving (as is the RPG genre) and I am in no shortage of "complex" games that had a lot of "labour" put into them (yes, I am still irked about that quote, haha). That being said, Combat Mission Yom Kippir when?!
-
3 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:
War in the East and Command: Modern Operations do indeed offer impressive levels of detail. But War in the East models ground warfare at the operational/strategic layer, not the tactical layer.
Once again, this was not the argument. The argument was that never ever will be something created that is so ridiculously complex and had so much work put into it like Combat Mission.
2 minutes ago, Centurian52 said:Never is a very long time, and I have no doubt that someday someone will produce something that measures up to Combat Mission. But I'm not expecting that day to come anytime soon.
There are already several games in the works that might be "measuring up" (AB2; Broken Arrow) but again: who is the measurer and what is the measurement tool? A lot of people seem confused here between their personal opinion and having objectively measured the goodness of a product.
-
10 minutes ago, Artkin said:
Graviteam does not have the same micromanagement fidelity as CM.
Some might call that a virtue.
-
1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:
Got them all, but not comparable to CM.
That wasn't your argument so please don't twist my words. You said never again a wargame that "complicated and labour intensive" will be created. By stating quite a few "complex" and "labour-intensive" games, I proved your argument wrong (objectively, if you just measure the "labour" and "complexity" that went into those games with the "labour" and "complexity" that went into Combat Mission by the same curious yardstick you apparently possess).
-
2 hours ago, Vacillator said:
I think I do too, I've tried most of those other games but what do I spend nearly all of my game time playing? CM.
2 hours ago, Erwin said:Those games are not direct competitors and offer a very different experience. The closest game to CM I recall was "Panzer Elite" which was far ahead of its time back in the last 1990's. But, the CM2 series is way more sophisticated now. So I agree with Aragorn:
Yeah, that kind of "argumentation" (if one is generous enough to call it that) is easily enough flipped around. Swap out CM for GT or whatever, and you have the same effect in a like-minded forum. Heck, a 17-year old could say, I've tried all games but what game I have the most hours in? Fortnite! Alas, it must be the best game ever created.
-
54 minutes ago, Aragorn2002 said:
NO ONE will ever produce this kind of complicated and labour intensive wargames anymore. So let's praise ourselves lucky we've already got his much.
What an incredibly ill-informed statement. Ever heard of Graviteam Tactics? Armored Brigade? War in the East? CSL Campaign Series? Command: Modern Operations? Heck, even a gamey game like Warno is "complicated and labour intensive" production.
-
4 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
I did bring this up in the CMBS forum at some point, but I haven't made a large formal announcement yet. I'll edit my initial post in this thread to give the bad news... it's scrapped. It's just not something we feel comfortable doing and Slitherine is 100% of the same mind.
Thanks for answering me so clearly on this one! However, this is devastating news. CMBS is my favourite CM game but it always lacked a bit variety. I can understand your decision but this makes me incredibly sad.
As for Slitherine/Matrix, they are soon releasing Broken Arrow. A game that features the realistic destruction of entire building blocks via rocket strikes, painstaking detail when it comes to authenticity of units and overall a very smiliar landscape to Eastern European countries. I don't really see them squirming there. Maybe because that game could be their first mainstream hit?
And personally, I've never understood why contemporary conflicts are taboo while it is completely fine to have SS Todeskopf troops in your fun wargame or bomb the Vietcong without any notion of all the civilian casualties. I probably know all the arguments why this war is okay to depict but not that one. And I can even comprehend most of them. But Wargames are not some casual fun games. They are - more often than not - simulators and show us the workings of modern equipment and tactics. And, at least for me, they even have an anti-war element to them, much more than most of so called anti-war movies. And in that regard, they transcend the regular piety rules that apply for entertainment media.
Anyways. It is great to hear that there is enthusiasm for other modern settings from your side. I do know that it's not gonna be a game featuring the IDF though.
-
Scheldt campaign if it isn't included in the Downfall module. I guess, making the maps would be really hard though.
-
Absolutely great news, although I would have liked a bone for the Black Sea module. There were rumours about re-discussing the embargo. After all, the IRL mess could take all from 6 more months to 6 more years. But we got what we've got.
One serious notion though: the Downfall DLC page mentions very little about what the campaigns are actually about. But since the Canadians made it in, can one assume that the Scheldt campaign is included? Or is the DLC strictly 1945 only? Either way: congratulations to all contributors that this DLC sees the light of day!
-
29 minutes ago, Redwolf said:
There are 3 versions:
- BFC
- Matrix
- Steam
Buying Matrix gives you Matrix and Steam, but not BFC. The Matrix version has better DRM (no activation limit). However, if you don't have the BFC version you can never run on Mac. Matrix and Steam might also be later with patches.
Good explanation but it is NOT 3 versions. It is 1 version that can be bought from three different distributors (one being the developer himself).
-
46 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:
The facts don't seem to support your position. How else do you explain hundreds of thousands of Russians willingly volunteering to die in a war of choice against in a country that posed no threat to it? How do you square this with Russians willing to do this even after several hundred of their fellow citizens have died or been maimed?
Where are the facts regarding that it lies in "the nature of [insert country X here]" to slaughter other people? Why are you all about talking culture now when the lamented thread talked about nature? Kinda proves my point that the argumentation here (on whichever side) is a bit on the lazy side and words get twisted around a lot.
46 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:We've discussed the nature of Russian culture here in detail. You skipped those discussions. Your choice.
The nature of the culture? I know it's an American expression to say "it is the nature of..." but the nature of the culture, really? It's getting Pythonesque here. And yes, it was my choice. I stand by my choice. I think it was a good choice to not read 3300 pages of "discussion", feeling already a bit damaged after only reading 4.
46 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:No new announcements at this time. Previous announcement was there would be no expansion of Black Sea while this war is going on. It is still going, so that's your answer.
It was meant as a joke, hence the winky smiley. But thank you for answering anyway, although I do remember the last news actually was that we will be getting news regarding the release embargo (whether or not it needs rethinking). But I'll patiently wait for the new New Year's post
-
Haven't touched the thread since it was like 40 pages or so. All I see now is 10 people ganging up on 1 guy. If you think he's a troll why feed him? And to be honest, most of the responses to him are even poorer than his style of argumentation. Feels a bit like kindergarden around here.
1 hour ago, Astrophel said:Perhaps not consciously because a lot of it is in their nature and driven by their historical perspective.
Saying something like this is wrong on so many levels. Even logically, this doesn't make sense. Is it their nature now or their historical perspective? Or is nature history and history is nature? So many questions...
****
But to actually contribute something: Black Sea module when?
-
2 hours ago, kohlenklau said:
Maybe you know if any Steam guys created and shared there in Steam some CM scenarios? I was briefly on Steam and played some Lock n Load ASL style games "Heroes of ...." and made and shared some scenarios. I then departed Steam and moved on. Internet issues on my end and I discovered VASL and vassal and Discord.
Unfortunately, I do not know that.
However, I think the base assumption leading up to that very question, namely that the Steam version and the Battlefront version (and then there's also a Matrix version if you will) are somehow different, is already misleading. There are thousands of games out there that exist simultaneously on many different distribution services (Steam, GOG, Epic, Ubisoft just to name the big ones) and quite a few of those games have mods. Until now I have never heard of any incompatibilty when it comes to mods just because you're on a different distribution system (which is exactly that: a distribution system). When it comes to Combat Mission, I can say that the game files are 100% the same (although the location of the folders is a bit different) so there is no logical reason (and isn't computer stuff all about logic?) for a mod created on the Steam "version" not to work on the Battlefront "version". It would be a completely different story when we were talking about different platforms (PC, Playstation, Nintendo etc.). What might make things confusing is that Steam, Epic, Ubisoft etc. are also called "platforms" sometimes (also by me) but strictly speaking that isn't correct.
PS: While I have you here, Kohlenklau: I know you make a lot of great content but only very recently have I dived back into Fortress Italy and saw that you've created 4 Crete scenarios AND a German winter campaign for 1943. This is absolutely great and exactly (!) what I was looking for when I reinstalled Italy. Thank you for that and all the other good you're doing for this community! (I am maybe gonna volunteer to make some scenarios for Israel 1948 but first I have to see if I somehow get my worklife consolidated in the next few weeks or months. I'll let you know then!)
PS2:
On 2/3/2023 at 6:40 AM, kohlenklau said:GL Raging Buffalo is already Anzio I am 99% sure. IIRC that campaign had the first big scenarios I could ever finally play with the awesome PC my son built me for my 50th birthday. 8 years ago. Still the same PC. Maybe I get a new one when I turn 60...?
I'll keep my fingers crossed for you!
-
As a dedicated Steamist, I hereby pledge to honor the modding community and Bootie`s warehouse in one of my Steam reviews for the CM games! (However, the reviews will take some more time)
EDIT: On the thread topic: Yes, we do have an Anzio campaign in Gustave Line, however, it is a "What if" scenario and it's "only" about the breakout. It would be really nice to have the actual beach landings and the big German counterattack as campaigns!
-
I would like to pre-order as well!
I'd also tentatively say that I could playtest the 5th campaign; do note, however, that I have not tested a campaign before. But I am sure I can bring imbalances, spawn bugs, faulty briefings or whatever to your attention!
-
-
Any news on this project? I wonder if I should just start playing the single scenarios or if linking them in a campaign is still planned.
Why Battlefront.com could put out the Combat mission Black sea dlcs without any backlash
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted · Edited by Sunbather
I interpreted it more like a mutual understanding.
On a more lighter note (or heavier): I'd rather they publish more content on an existing conflict instead of releasing a game about a 'fictional' conflict. If for example they release Combat Mission: Tiger Dragon, three years later China will invade Taiwan! We've already seen it happening twice.