Jump to content

Will there be a 5.0 game engine?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

10 hours ago, RepsolCBR said:

Maybe Battlefront could provide us with a situation update as of mid 2017...

I think it's just that.

Taking the time to provide an update to their little community on a regular basis would probably put some crazy thoughts to rest. Not saying BF should tell us their financial position (we have no right to know) but some idea about how the different projects are progressing and what to look forward to would be welcome. And yes include caveats/health warnings about project timelines. Would this help? All you need to do is look at a thread on these forums where Steve makes an appearence and the level of interest / question asking sky rockets. If there is a vaccum of information then the internet will fill it... usually with rumours and falsehoods so not in the best way. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Ithikial_AU Some sort of monthly to quartely devblog or official Q/A session would be great, especially since Combat Mission is a franchise that relies heavily on its tightly-knit community. As it stands right now, we are paupers standing under the window of a rich merchant, hoping that today he will toss out a few coins like he sometimes does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ithikial_AU said:

If there is a vaccum of information then the internet will fill it... usually with rumours and falsehoods so not in the best way. :P

Also, posting in these forums is free. BFC should impose a 20 USD levy on every post. Just stuffing some actual meaning into that "here's my two cents" phrase. Retroactively, of course.

Ka-ching!

Next thing we know we have CMX2 running on Vulkan, better than CmdOps assistant AI that always get right our intent, TrackIR support so we don't have to push those mouses around anymore, a set of tools to import GIS data from the USGS site so we can get high fidelity 4x4 kms maps that would make @Erwin cry with joy with a snap of our fingers... And why not, briefing voice overs via text to speech tech that just sounds like Sean Bean...

Edited by BletchleyGeek
20 USD is more like the amount adjusted for inflation since the phrase was first used...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/24/2017 at 3:25 AM, AstroCat said:

Yeah, I feel the same way... I try and come back to CMx2 but it is just so visual/aurally/performance/UIX wise clunky... It's just is so jarring. I've stated this before, nothing new and I know, I know nothing will ever be done to improve the visuals/sounds/uix or performance...it is what it is. Kind of an end of line of major development. I'd love to be wrong but it doesn't seem that way.

Sure we might get a few more "modules" but a "modernization" of the engine from everything I've read and been told just is not gonna happen. The best "we" can hope for is a game with the "guts" of CM but the outside/performance of a modern game. The only way I see that happening is with a new engine... probably from some other developer, maybe some day. Niche games are more popular than ever these days...and with Steam (which I know BF has no interest in), who knows, maybe we'll get lucky. CM has been fun (sound and texture limited modding too) while it lasted all those years for me, especially when the experience didn't feel so far behind.

Or we'll end up with what happened to Harpoon. New development effort after development stalls and what you end up with is a very old engine being bought and tweaked endlessly by third parties. Let's hope it doesn't go that way.

Personally, I hope Dice buy it and merge it with Battlefield - the best of all worlds. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BletchleyGeek said:

Also, posting in these forums is free. BFC should impose a 20 USD levy on every post. Just stuffing some actual meaning into that "here's my two cents" phrase. Retroactively, of course.

Ka-ching!

Next thing we know we have CMX2 running on Vulkan, better than CmdOps assistant AI that always get right our intent, TrackIR support so we don't have to push those mouses around anymore, a set of tools to import GIS data from the USGS site so we can get high fidelity 4x4 kms maps that would make @Erwin cry with joy with a snap of our fingers... And why not, briefing voice overs via text to speech tech that just sounds like Sean Bean...

What about multi-monitor support?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

@Ithikial_AU Some sort of monthly to quartely devblog or official Q/A session would be great, especially since Combat Mission is a franchise that relies heavily on its tightly-knit community. As it stands right now, we are paupers standing under the window of a rich merchant, hoping that today he will toss out a few coins like he sometimes does.

ID software used to do that in the old days and built a very strong community where the developers were continuously communicating their plans with the base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, nightops said:

What about multi-monitor support?

That'd be great too :) with that kind of funding Steve can go into "full Chris Roberts mode", and we could gloat on how good look some fancy shaders specific for the epaulettes on German uniforms, and have animations showing the odd grunt scratch their butts while waiting for our commands. Other games have sound effects for troopers  yawning loudly... just sayin'

Edited by BletchleyGeek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have every confidence BFC know what they are doing, they've been receiving my pennies in fairly regular instalments for some time now (with a bit of a gap between CMx1 & CMx2).....Long may they continue to do so.  ;)

4 hours ago, BletchleyGeek said:

And why not, briefing voice overs via text to speech tech that just sounds like Sean Bean...

The horror!  :o

PS - Is CM:SF II ready yet?  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Hmm, the lads at Bletchley are running a tad short of German naval codes to crack. Quick, send them some more prim but pretty Cambridge mathematics undergraduates in tight fitting wool uniforms!

An extra Battalion of HG Panzergrenadiers is all I want for my current play through The Forest of  Wild Beasts. And some flying elephants, the models deployed can't get where I want them to go.

Now seriously, if I would ask something from a hypothetical v 5.0 are group commands, where I set frontage, orientation, type of route (quickest, covered, etc.) and aggro level, and the AI generates for me routes, conveniently broken into nice segments so I can adjust them, for every unit on the group. If that causes stuttering when playing RT... well there we just created a necessity for the engine to go multi core.

And I take full responsibility for any casualties that follow, as I have done so far for the couple million pixeltruppen which have given up their simulated lives to distract me during my spare time over the past 15 years :) 

Edited by BletchleyGeek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another feature that might be reasonably simple to implement and which might have considerable utility (especially in combination with the Reinforcement Triggers previously discussed) would be the ability to add a minimum required duration to a Touch Objective.  Perhaps it might be called a 'Hold For Objective'? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BletchleyGeek said:

Now seriously, if I would ask something from a hypothetical v 5.0 are group commands, where I set frontage, orientation, type of route (quickest, covered, etc.) and aggro level, and the AI generates for me routes, conveniently broken into nice segments so I can adjust them, for every unit on the group. If that causes stuttering when playing RT... well there we just created a necessity for the engine to go multi core. 

My own 5.0 wishlist intersects with that; I'd like scenario designers able to set and run AI plans for both sides (a CM "war movie"), with the human player(s) able to interrupt and redirect the programmed plan for a subset (or maybe all) of the units. It doesn't seem wildly impossible to do using the current engine architecture.

....But some prim English mathematicians would suffice. That naughty librarian thing, dontcherknow, but with headphones... 

The_Operations_Room_at_RAF_Fighter_Comma

And long pointy sticks. Yes, we must have sticks.

... Oh,  I'm terribly sorry, what were you saying again? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Another feature that might be reasonably simple to implement and which might have considerable utility (especially in combination with the Reinforcement Triggers previously discussed) would be the ability to add a minimum required duration to a Touch Objective.  Perhaps it might be called a 'Hold For Objective'? 

Yepp ! :)

Stuff like 'timed objectives' is also a nice way to add to the flexebility of the editor imo.

In a scenario that starts with a small recon force on the map and using this option things could work in the opposit way compare to the idea of using a trigger (terrain/ unit) to put player reinforcements on the map ones, and only ones, the trigger conditions are met. No matter how long it takes the player to achive said objective.

Using a 'timed objective' option the player could be given a maximum of 30 minutes for example to achive the objective given to the initial recon force. When 30 minutes have past the main fighting force will arrive regardless if the objective have been achived or not. If the player failes to achive the recon objective he will miss-out on points.

Timed objectives would be a very nice thing to have ! The more options the designer has the better...:)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For my own part I would love to give my players in Mosul the ability to booby-trap ISIS tunnels if they find them:

Hidden Location Objective 'ISIS Tunnel' - Touch (Hold For: 5 Turns) - Reinforcement Trigger - AP Mines!  ;)

PS - LLF, I had nine great aunts in total, six or seven of them were in various services during WWII, they were some lovely but very strong willed ladies.....I miss each and every one of them dearly.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites


We could also use timed objectives to make "blow the bridge" missions. Occupy and hold the bridge for 10 turns with your engineers, then EXIT all friendly forces.

But would be nicer to have it as an extension of the blast command.

(I know some say you can't blow a bridge in the time of a typical scenario, but I think that mostly depends on how many explosives you carry - at least that's what Hemingway wrote)

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Assuming we can blow the bridge up reliably.....Did we ever get to the bottom of what exactly is required to do that?

No, it's a running argument, just like the halftrack gunners :)

I think some people get confused because they think of peacetime demolition jobs where you have to drop the bridge in a symmetric way, at no risk to public property, and using the least amount of force.

In a war, you just need to put a lot of explosives at one or two critical junctions.

It could be argued that the engineers in the game currently don't carry enough explosive material for that kind of demolition, but that could be solved by making it possible to boost the amount of TNT they carry by giving them a higher equipment value. Maybe at a high rarity cost. For special missions.

(Of course, some bridges are way bigger than others. In that case, maybe there could be more demolition points that had to be blown before the structure would collapse. Smaller bridges could then have one or two points, bigger bridges could have 6 or 8. But I realise it's a lot of coding for a quite narrow addition to the game. So doing it by Occupy for Time objectives could be a sort of halfway house)

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The expansion of how reinforcements and objectives are used have been on my wishlist fro quite some time.

Atleast to a non-programer changes like these seems like a fairly simple thing compared to many other things that we want to see improved ;)

It will require no changes to the AI as far as i can understand and will have very limited impact on game performance.

Getting the UI to work in the editor feels like the biggest problem with these ideas.

I'm sure that if we gets option like these it will inspire the scenario designers to come up with many creative ideas on how to use them to make intresting scenarios.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think some people get confused because they think of peacetime demolition jobs where you have to drop the bridge in a symmetric way, at no risk to public property, and using the least amount of force.

In a war, you just need to put a lot of explosives at one or two critical junctions.

Of course it could be argued that the engineers in the game currently don't carry enough explosive material for that kind of demolition, but that could be solved by making it possible to boost the amount of TNT they carry by giving them a higher equipment value. Maybe at a high rarity cost. For special missions.

That's the area that needs to be clarified, should this actually be an option in this game format?

If so, could engineers be given a 'Demolish' command, which destroys a single structure providing that sufficient satchel charges are available, the number required depending on the sturdiness of the structure?  The time taken for the action might depend on the number of charges to be placed and the experience/suppression state of the engineers, perhaps modified for the complexity of the structure?

Just some musings (TBH though I suspect they've probably been mused before and rejected for practical reasons).  ;)

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Assuming we can blow the bridge up reliably.....Did we ever get to the bottom of what exactly is required to do that?

I used to have a comprehensive engineers field manual that included instructions on how to drop a bridge span among many other useful bits of information. Oh how I have wished I still had it! But it might still be hanging around in used book stores and something to look for.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...