Audgisil Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Does it make sense going forward to start giving the various iterations of combat mission consistent version numbers? Simply put, it would let people know at a glance what code base forms the foundation for any given game. So, the next patch for Combat Mission Fortress Italy, which I'm assuming will be released with the Gustav Line module, would be version 2.01 (or maybe 2.02 if it includes fixes that are not part of Normandy) and not version 1.xx. This lets people know right away that it's got the same fixes and functionality as CM: Normandy 2.01, which right now is actually based on the 1.0 code from Fortress Italy. When there's a bunch of different Combat Mission games out there, this could get confusing real quick. Then, when the Eastern Front game comes out, it should just be called version 3.0 right from the start, and everything else would just get upgraded to the new 3.X code base. Thoughts? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Amen to that. CMFI 1.01 being version 2.01 of the CMx2 Engine where CMBN 2.01 is version 2.0x (it's not 2.01, cos it's got any number of cool extra bells and whistles) is confusing when trying to compare bugs an' such. Personally, I would have preferred if CMBN 2.0 had been exactly the same code base as the version of FI at the time, and wait on releasing upgrades to the BN code til they were incorporated in FI too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Does it make sense going forward to start giving the various iterations of combat mission consistent version numbers? Simply put, it would let people know at a glance what code base forms the foundation for any given game. This is a very sensible suggestion. Good thinking! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Ah version numbers. Everyone has a brilliant idea about them. Not that yours is not good - because it is. But if you ask 3 developers how version numbers should be handled you will get 3 ideas. Then if you ask 3 customers for their input you get 3 more. Now you have 6 different ideas and no matter what one you pick no one will be happy Just be happy BFC does not tell us all their internal code names then you will have version numbers you do not get and a bunch of unrelated names that are even less help. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 Just be happy BFC does not tell us all their internal code names then you will have version numbers you do not get and a bunch of unrelated names that are even less help. I bet some of their internal code names wouldn't be allowed on the forum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.