lordhedgwich Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 Michael, you're absolutely right in your recollection. My wild speculation is based on nothing more than the fact that prior to this Battlefront was turning out a new base game or module about every six months. It's now been a year since Black Sea and the slow down seems surprising to me. So that and the fact that the current engine is aging leads to my guess. I have nothing to lose by guessing so it comes easy. Should I be right however I doubt even the Beta testers would know at this point.I think they will ride CMx2 as long as possible which is fine by me I love the way it looks =D and after playing a few scenarios for CMBB and CMAK i appreciate CMx2 so much! I am worried CMx3 wont be as good 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I think they will ride CMx2 as long as possible which is fine by me I love the way it looks =D and after playing a few scenarios for CMBB and CMAK i appreciate CMx2 so much! I am worried CMx3 wont be as goodYou worry to much man CM1x was great and CM2x is better why wouldn't CM3x be even better? I know there are no guarantees but these guys are doing a damn find job making better and better games IMHO.Mind you I agree they can keep going with CM2x engine for the foreseeable future as far as I am concerned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordhedgwich Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 You worry to much man CM1x was great and CM2x is better why wouldn't CM3x be even better? I know there are no guarantees but these guys are doing a damn find job making better and better games IMHO.Mind you I agree they can keep going with CM2x engine for the foreseeable future as far as I am concerned.Well I read there was a alot of hate for CMx2 when shock force first released.. I guess that is what I am worried about and I played CMx1 after CMx2 so by comparison it is super primitive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Battlefront had a contract with Paradox to release Shock Force by a certain date, so it was in actuality released prematurely, hence the early bad reviews. Steve has said they will never enter into such a contract again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 By the way another thing came to my mind about a reason for my perceived "slow down" in releases. Let me see if I have my facts straight on this. The CMX2 engine is based on something called "Open GL". Open GL was chosen way back in 2004 because it had the advantage of being Mac friendly, among other things. As time went by however Video Card manufacturers became less and less concerned with support of Open GL drivers. There has been talk of converting the Engine from Open GL to something else (what I'm not sure DirectX perhaps, it's over my head). Such a conversion I'm sure would be a major project and take up lots of time. If I have butchered the facts my apology. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Well I read there was a alot of hate for CMx2 when shock force first released.. I guess that is what I am worried about and I played CMx1 after CMx2 so by comparison it is super primitive. Ah got it. Yeah there was hate for sure. Honestly I was not around by my impression it was the vocal minority + pain from so many bugs. It is hard to get into a new way of playing / new detail in the sim when bad stuff keeps happening. So, I think they have improved their execution over the years and the really bad and tons of bugs part is not likely to happen again. I hope 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 By the way another thing came to my mind about a reason for my perceived "slow down" in releases. Let me see if I have my facts straight on this. The CMX2 engine is based on something called "Open GL". Open GL was chosen way back in 2004 because it had the advantage of being Mac friendly, among other things.Correct - back then Open GL was not an also ran but looked at favourably (to simplify things). As time went by however Video Card manufacturers became less and less concerned with support of Open GL drivers. There has been talk of converting the Engine from Open GL to something else (what I'm not sure DirectX perhaps, it's over my head).Yeah, Open GL has lost a ton of steam since then and many games are Direct X only - of course this varies a lot and I'm not a big gammer so just my impression. Steve has mentioned (not an announcement just mentioned) Unity before which is an engine that uses (currently) Direct X on Windows and Open GL on the Mac. The idea is they port the engine to whatever is best for the OS they support and you write your game to their API and you don't have to worry about handling the different low level graphics API and you can run on many different versions and OSes. That's how I think of it at least - no actual experience with Unity though. Such a conversion I'm sure would be a major project and take up lots of time. If I have butchered the facts my apology. oh yeah for sure big. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 FWIW (not much, but, you know :D ) I don’t think CM is particularly well suited to North Africa, because North Africa isn’t a particularly good place for tactical battles. The vehicles and other models are all easy to do, and as someone above noted if BFC wait a while a lot of them will have already been built for other modules and families anyway. The terrain tiles that would be needed are probably mostly already done (barring some re-skinning of buildings, and swapping the visuals on the vegetation. All that stuff is quite tractable and BFC have shown they can do it all quite readily. But using all that to produce a range of attractive and interesting scenarios … mmm. That I’m not so sure about. I know there were interesting battles in NA, and some of them even fit into CM’s particular sweet spot, but I just don’t think there are very many. Not enough to provide a decent range and variety of scenarios which present the player with unique and interesting tactical decisions and challenges. I think that the salient points of battle in North Africa are better realised in an operational game than a tactical one (but I have other problems with operational games in general – the largest of which is the utter lack of Strat FOW; “Op CRUSADER you say? Ok then, well, a) I’ll not be terribly surprised when the British attack, b) I doubt the British player will scatter his forces willy nilly, c) there’s no way I’ll be pushing these two panzer divs off to the wire, and d) I foresee an attritional, almost WWI-style continuous frontline forming from the coast out to the desert somewhere just to the east of Tobruk … which is the very antithesis of Op CRUSADER” “Feb 1943 in southern Russia you say? Right, so the Germans will be attacking up this rail line shortly to try and relieve their forces in Stalingrad. I’ll plonk some forces in the way there, and send everyone else streaming eastwards, but not too far otherwise they’ll become overextended and ripe for a counterattack by those Axis forces which I know are streaming in from all over Europe.” Etc.). North-West Africa (i.e., Torch-to-Tunisia) probably has a much better smorgasbord of tactical situations and encounters which would lend themselves to reproduction in CM than North Africa/Western Desert does. There’s also a vast range of forces and equipment used there, too, which is nice from a designers perspective. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Simmer down, Luke. In this case "corporate honor" means solidifying their reputation as a company that can consistently deliver the goods on whatever they turn their hand to, and that translates pretty directly into dollars and cents. What's ridiculous about that, hmmm?MichaelI'm plenty simmered down, and yet I still think your idea that BFC needs to somehow rehabilitate themselves is patently ridiculous. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazing 88's Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 FWIW (not much, but, you know ) I don’t think CM is particularly well suited to North Africa, because North Africa isn’t a particularly good place for tactical battles. The vehicles and other models are all easy to do, and as someone above noted if BFC wait a while a lot of them will have already been built for other modules and families anyway. The terrain tiles that would be needed are probably mostly already done (barring some re-skinning of buildings, and swapping the visuals on the vegetation. All that stuff is quite tractable and BFC have shown they can do it all quite readily. But using all that to produce a range of attractive and interesting scenarios … mmm. That I’m not so sure about. I know there were interesting battles in NA, and some of them even fit into CM’s particular sweet spot, but I just don’t think there are very many. Not enough to provide a decent range and variety of scenarios which present the player with unique and interesting tactical decisions and challenges. I think that the salient points of battle in North Africa are better realised in an operational game than a tactical one (but I have other problems with operational games in general – the largest of which is the utter lack of Strat FOW; “Op CRUSADER you say? Ok then, well, a) I’ll not be terribly surprised when the British attack, I doubt the British player will scatter his forces willy nilly, c) there’s no way I’ll be pushing these two panzer divs off to the wire, and d) I foresee an attritional, almost WWI-style continuous frontline forming from the coast out to the desert somewhere just to the east of Tobruk … which is the very antithesis of Op CRUSADER” “Feb 1943 in southern Russia you say? Right, so the Germans will be attacking up this rail line shortly to try and relieve their forces in Stalingrad. I’ll plonk some forces in the way there, and send everyone else streaming eastwards, but not too far otherwise they’ll become overextended and ripe for a counterattack by those Axis forces which I know are streaming in from all over Europe.” Etc.). North-West Africa (i.e., Torch-to-Tunisia) probably has a much better smorgasbord of tactical situations and encounters which would lend themselves to reproduction in CM than North Africa/Western Desert does. There’s also a vast range of forces and equipment used there, too, which is nice from a designers perspective.I totally disagree. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) You don't think North West Africa has a lot of good candidates for CM?You don't think a wide range of situations and forces is important from a the point of view of a scenario designer who needs to make a variety of scenarios?You don't think there were any interesting battles in North Africa?You don't think the terrain tiles are mostly already done?You don't think the vehicle and man models would, in a module or three, also be mostly already done?You don't think BFC have a track record of making good stuff? That's a lot to disagree with in one unsupported assertion, buddy. Your post reminds me of this. Edited February 4, 2016 by JonS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordhedgwich Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 You don't think North West Africa has a lot of good candidates for CM?You don't think a wide range of situations and forces is important from a the point of view of a scenario designer who needs to make a variety of scenarios?You don't think there were any interesting battles in North Africa?You don't think the terrain tiles are mostly already done?You don't think the vehicle and man models would, in a module or three, also be mostly already done?You don't think BFC have a track record of making good stuff? That's a lot to disagree with in one unsupported assertion, buddy. Your post reminds me of this.I think he was disagrees with North Africa doesnt suite CM. No need to get your knickers in a twist man 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazing 88's Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 (edited) I think he was disagrees with North Africa doesnt suite CM. No need to get your knickers in a twist manLol... Exactly! I think it is total RUBBISH that he thinks CM doesn't suit North Africa, other than for the time period suggested in his post. I guess "totally" should not have been used, just - I disagree. End of argument in my books. Edited February 4, 2016 by Blazing 88's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 That's a lot to disagree with in one unsupported assertion, buddy. Your post reminds me of this.It is nothing like that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 Jon, I have no experience building scenarios, while you are one of the most experienced scenario creators, so your opinion carries more weight than mine in this regard, but when you say North Africa doesn't have a wide enough range of interesting battles, couldn't the same be said about the Normandy bocage? Your probably right in that there wasn't much urban fighting but I would think that isn't the CMX2 "sweet spot" anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) couldn't the same be said about the Normandy bocage?It could, but CMBN wasn't just about Normandy and the bocage. And just even within Normandy there are areas that are more open, more close, mountains, hills, flats, open areas (think of the areas east and south of Caen c.f. the terrain around St Lo), the beaches, full on forest, orchards, rivers, streams, causeways, roads, bridges, etc. North Africa has a notable lack of bottleneck terrain, whereas Normandy (and France, and Italy) is bursting with it.OTOH, it's easy to set up a fight in the desert, and it's easy to make the map. And if you just want to mash tank forces together in head on battles over and over again then I definitely can see why North Africa appeals. Edited February 5, 2016 by JonS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazing 88's Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) That is what smoke, weather /haze, hills, wadi's, escarpments, DUST, etc. is for... CM is perfect for North Africa 40-43 imo. I have been waiting years for CMx2 or whatever version to finally go there. Irks me to no end when someone says otherwise. Sorry. Edited February 5, 2016 by Blazing 88's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) Then I hate to say it, but I kind of agree with Jon. And no thread can't be improved with a Monty Python reference. I really get into the infantry component in CM. somehow I think the NA desert is just not going to add much. The first thing I did upon getting CMAK was to add the Northern Europe mods. All I wanted were the commands available in CMAK and I promptly stopped playing CMBO. This is comes from someone who has bought everything and loves CMSF. Edited February 5, 2016 by sburke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blazing 88's Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 D'oh... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 (edited) It could, but CMBN wasn't just about Normandy and the bocage. And just even within Normandy there are areas that are more open, more close, mountains, hills, flats, open areas (think of the areas east and south of Caen c.f. the terrain around St Lo), the beaches, full on forest, orchards, rivers, streams, causeways, roads, bridges, etc. North Africa has a notable lack of bottleneck terrain, whereas Normandy (and France, and Italy) is bursting with it.OTOH, it's easy to set up a fight in the desert, and it's easy to make the map. And if you just want to mash tank forces together in head on battles over and over again then I definitely can see why North Africa appeals.I think the North African terrain—and even that of the Libyan Plateau, which comes the closest to what you are describing—is much more varied than what you are describing. Even where the ground is fairly flat and featureless, such features as were present tended to be what got fought over. And in many places there were rises and depressions that could conceal surprises. I would very much like to play on maps done by somebody who does not simply proceed from presumptions about what it looked like, but who has actually studied the ground and has a feel for it.And if the Western Desert still does not hold any appeal for you, there is also Morocco, Algeria, and especially Tunisia that have every kind of varied terrain that your heart could desire.Michael Edited February 6, 2016 by Michael Emrys 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) somehow I think the NA desert is just not going to add much. Then clearly I have to suppose that you never saw the portfolio of photos that one guy took of the Sahara as he crossed it in an ultralight a decade or so back. Most of the pics I saw were extraordinarily beautiful. Anyone who would not want to play on such ground must have no soul.Michael Edited February 6, 2016 by Michael Emrys 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 umm yeah so the Sahara is beautiful. If I were playing far cry, fallout or tomb raider that might matter. However to my pixeltruppen it is friggin awful terrain.On the other hand yeah I probably have to admit to having no soul. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 I've made a few maps if that's the criteria for having an opinion. Shock Force has already shown CMx2 capable of desert warfare. Armor fans would love the chance to see a Matilda earn her title of "Queen of the battlefield" one year and then lose it the next when Rommel unleashes his 88's. The thing about the Western Desert is the clarity of technological advance from 1940 to 1942. And for the Infantry it was a time when the anti tank rifle was feared right along with the 2 pounder AT gun. And don't forget the uniforms.Italian stylish Helmets and British knobby Knees. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 (edited) The Sahara is indeed stunningly beautiful, and stunningly irrelevant since there was practically no fighting there.I think the North African terrain—and even that of the Libyan Plateau, which comes the closest to what you are describing—is much more varied than what you are describing. Even where the ground is fairly flat and featureless, such features as were present tended to be what got fought over. And in many places there were rises and depressions that could conceal surprises. I would very much like to play on maps done by somebody who does not simply proceed from presumptions about what it looked like, but who has actually studied the ground and has a feel for it.Dude. That's pretty insulting. I did not say the terrain was flat and featureless, I said it lacked bottleneck terrain. There is a difference. In a CMBN map you might easily more than one bottleneck per 100m x 100m. In North African you'd probably be lucky to have just one per 1000m x 1000m.I've got a reasonable grasp on the nature of the terrain between El Alamein and Medenine, and the way seemingly minor local terrain dictated the course of battles, as you already know. I've also made CM maps for bits and pieces of that area in CMAK, and Syrian-style desert maps in CMSF. I already know that CM scenarios can be done in that environment. But I don't believe it is what CM is good at (as distinct from something CM can do).And if the Western Desert still does not hold any appeal for you, there is also Morocco, Algeria, and especially Tunisia that have every kind of varied terrain that your heart could desire.Dude. Jumping into the middle of a conversation like that is pretty disrespectful. Read my first post - I specifically called out NWA as a good candidate area. Edit: I was hoping this might become an informed discussion by people who know what they’re talking about regarding the merits of different times and places for the CM engine – hopefully it's obvious that just because a time and place could be done in CM doesn’t mean it should be done? Instead we've got yet another ‘your mother smells of elderberries’ level of discourse. That could have been predicted, I guess, but as they say; trying to engage on internet forums is the triumph of hope over reality Edited February 6, 2016 by JonS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kohlenklau Posted February 6, 2016 Share Posted February 6, 2016 Maybe we can solve world hunger with a low grade discount rack solution and do a mini mod but if BFC throws us a few extras in the next pack, we could do more.For now I can give you Bersaglieri in Africa. Quote My youtube channel! 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.