Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The CMx2 engine is thirteen years old,  and it shows. So I say let's drop the demands for new theaters and new features and instead urge and allow them to focus on an entirely new game engine, CMx3.

I'm still buzzing over CMRV. I would never have named Indian, South African and Free French forces as additions I would love to see, but I've been enjoying them immensely since the game came out.

Almost every scenario & campaign ever made for CM (even officially) are semi-historical at best... do not overestimate the historical accuracy of the computer game that you play. I suspect fa

Posted Images

Started a new Updated Poll topic:

Please cast your votes there.  Here is a summary of what you'll find:

1. Blitzkrieg: 1939-40 
WWII Early war
Poland
France
(also Finland)

2. Barbarossa: 1941-43
WWII Eastern Front
Can Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin data be used as sort of an upgrade?
Invasion of Yugoslavia
Operation Typhoon
Case Blue
Blau to Stalingrad
Warsaw to Moscow
(also Finland)

3. Afrika Korps: 1940-43 
WWII North Africa
Operation Torch, American North Africa Invasion Libya, Egypt, and Tunis 1942-43
 
4. Expansion of Combat Mission Games to VE-Day on Both Fronts: 1944-1945
End-of-war module that includes Brits, crossing the Rhine and the Ruhr pocket
A siege of Budapest for Hungarians
Battle for Berlin
(East vs West, 1945, 46)
 
5. Arab-Israeli Wars: 1948–49, 56, 67, 73, 82, and 2006
Israeli War of Independence, 1948-49
Suez Crisis, 1956
Six Day War, 1967
Yom Kippur War, 1973
Lebanon Wars, 1982 & 2006

6. Vietnam War: 1955-75
US Involvement
(French Involvement, 1945-54)

7. "Fulda Gap": 1970-90
Europe WWIII
 
8. "Battlefield Asia": Modern Day
USA/NATO vs China
USA/NATO vs North Korea
China vs India
India vs Pakistan
(Afghanistan Update)

9. One Engine - CMx3
game performance improvments, graphics improvements, ray tracing, intermediate distance bitmaps
additional editor features, dynamic operational campaigns
additional gameplay features, coop, LoS tool, visible aircraft

10. Enhanced Modding Support
add units
equipment
functionality
ingame OOB editor

11. New Modules more battlepacks for existing titles
New Countries for Barbarossa (Bulgaria Hungary Romania Yugoslavia Partisans). 
Additional modules for Red Thunder
Additional modules for CMSF2: Modern Day Syria, Turkey, Iraq 
CMBS Marines (from both sides)
Commonwealth forces and expansion into VE Day for Final Blitzkrieg

12. Surprise me - I'm certain to love it
Korea 1950
WW2 Pacific
WW1
Horses

Edited by Probus
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Probus said:

Started a new Updated Poll topic:

Please cast your votes there.  Here is a summary of what you'll find:

1. Blitzkrieg: 1939-40 
WWII Early war
Poland
France
(also Finland)

2. Barbarossa: 1941-43
WWII Eastern Front
Can Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin data be used as sort of an upgrade?
Invasion of Yugoslavia
Operation Typhoon
Case Blue
Blau to Stalingrad
Warsaw to Moscow
(also Finland)

3. Afrika Korps: 1940-43 
WWII North Africa
Operation Torch, American North Africa Invasion Libya, Egypt, and Tunis 1942-43
 
4. Expansion of Combat Mission Games to VE-Day on Both Fronts: 1944-1945
End-of-war module that includes Brits, crossing the Rhine and the Ruhr pocket
A siege of Budapest for Hungarians
Battle for Berlin
(East vs West, 1945, 46)
 
5. Arab-Israeli Wars: 1948–49, 56, 67, 73, 82, and 2006
Israeli War of Independence, 1948-49
Suez Crisis, 1956
Six Day War, 1967
Yom Kippur War, 1973
Lebanon Wars, 1982 & 2006

6. Vietnam War: 1955-75
US Involvement
(French Involvement, 1945-54)

7. "Fulda Gap": 1970-90
Europe WWIII
 
8. "Battlefield Asia": Modern Day
USA/NATO vs China
USA/NATO vs North Korea
China vs India
India vs Pakistan
(Afghanistan Update)

9. One Engine - CMx3
game performance improvments, graphics improvements, ray tracing, intermediate distance bitmaps
additional editor features, dynamic operational campaigns
additional gameplay features, coop, LoS tool, visible aircraft

10. Enhanced Modding Support
add units
equipment
functionality
ingame OOB editor

11. New Modules more battlepacks for existing titles
New Countries for Barbarossa (Bulgaria Hungary Romania Yugoslavia Partisans). 
Additional modules for Red Thunder
Additional modules for CMSF2: Modern Day Syria, Turkey, Iraq 
CMBS Marines (from both sides)
Commonwealth forces and expansion into VE Day for Final Blitzkrieg

12. Surprise me - I'm certain to love it
Korea 1950
WW2 Pacific
WW1
Horses

I can't see why they couldn't knock all that out over a long weekend...  :D

(I'd push the PTO higher up the list, but that's just me.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect they will go path of least resistance.  Early war means nearly entire new OOBs.  So I expect we'll see east front 1943, CMBS module, and maybe module for CMFB.  Those would be the least disruptive.  Then they'll work backwards again to 1942, then 1941.   1939-40 means all new allied OOB, so that probably is a long way off.   So in order to not go completely dark for long period of time, I think they'll expand off what they already have in order to get products out that folks will buy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Holdit said:

I can't see why they couldn't knock all that out over a long weekend...  :D

(I'd push the PTO higher up the list, but that's just me.)

I placed them in semi-chronological order with the coding changes at the end of the list.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, danfrodo said:

I expect they will go path of least resistance.  Early war means nearly entire new OOBs.  So I expect we'll see east front 1943, CMBS module, and maybe module for CMFB.  Those would be the least disruptive.  Then they'll work backwards again to 1942, then 1941.   1939-40 means all new allied OOB, so that probably is a long way off.   So in order to not go completely dark for long period of time, I think they'll expand off what they already have in order to get products out that folks will buy.

Maybe.  My goal started as just wanting to give some visibility to Battlefront as to what their players want most if they had a choice in the matter.  It kinda morphed a bit as I saw how many different things folks wanted (I shouldn't have been surprised).  That kinda led to the fact that modding was the only way battlefront could possibly hope to include all the differing content folks wanted.  I get the impression from the fans that Battlefront is too conservative to allow modding for fears that 1. it would degrade the quality of their product and 2. cut into future profits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Probus said:

Maybe.  My goal started as just wanting to give some visibility to Battlefront as to what their players want most if they had a choice in the matter.  It kinda morphed a bit as I saw how many different things folks wanted (I shouldn't have been surprised).  That kinda led to the fact that modding was the only way battlefront could possibly hope to include all the differing content folks wanted.  I get the impression from the fans that Battlefront is too conservative to allow modding for fears that 1. it would degrade the quality of their product and 2. cut into future profits.

Nice poll, although I don't think the visitors actually voting is perse a good representation of the full customer base (I did vote 😉 ).

Regarding modding the nuts and bolts of the game:  I just don't see it work for this game. Of course the business model is a very valid aspect as well; they need to make enough money to stay in business. Visuals only modding is imo a good call. 
Third party developing is, afaik, already possible. For example CMA wasn't done by BF themselves.

Someone mentioned the Linux model. Large open source communities behind Linux and other projects are great imo! Some of the best quality and 'sustainable' software comes forth from such initiatives. But I don't see those swarms of developers/companies working on the CM codebase pro bono. Not the same ballpark I'd say.

Edit: Such an idea might be great for a 'generic' (war)game engine. A base which can be used for free by anyone wanting to develop a (war)game. Lot's of work though, you'd be (ten) thousands of hours in before even knowing whether all that work will be actually put to use ever at all.

Edited by Lethaface
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, Aquila-SmartWargames said:
2 hours ago, Lethaface said:

Nice poll, although I don't think the visitors actually voting is perse a good representation of the full customer base (I did vote 😉 ).

 

I had the same thought

Best I could do guys.  I'm sure there aren't too many visiting trolls to battlefront...  Does a wargaming Grognard count as a Troll? :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lethaface said:

Edit: Such an idea might be great for a 'generic' (war)game engine. A base which can be used for free by anyone wanting to develop a (war)game. Lot's of work though, you'd be (ten) thousands of hours in before even knowing whether all that work will be actually put to use ever at all.

If modding was limited to adding equipment ONLY, I think the boost to the community/popularity of the game would outweigh any risks.  I just have to keep pointing back to KSP as my example of an overwhelmingly positive experience. (Granted KSP is not about killing virtual people and blowing things up...  scratch that...  KSP is not about killing virtual people.)

EDIT: There are many mods to KSP that add weapons and aircraft, tanks and ship parts and that also turn it from a single player game into a multiplayer game.  Chaos did not ensue.

Edited by Probus
Weapons and Multiplayer Mod for KSP
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Probus said:

If modding was limited to adding equipment ONLY, I think the boost to the community/popularity of the game would outweigh any risks.  I just have to keep pointing back to KSP as my example of an overwhelmingly positive experience. (Granted KSP is not about killing virtual people and blowing things up...  scratch that...  KSP is not about killing virtual people.)

I love the KSP tagline: "Failure is always an option..."

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, slippy said:

As regards modding, if you look at a game like IL-2 1946, you could say modding is the only reason anyone still plays it. The modded game is light years away from the original, and i believe so good in its latest form that it detracts from people buying Il-2 Great Battles the modern equivalent.

The base game was released roundabout 2001 i believe, so your talking of a 20 year old game, that due to modding is still being played and does not look out of place alongside more modern titles.

 

50099784736_18b51afd09_k.thumb.jpg.4672b6e04f0e6d9ecc8535e74006eb2e.jpg

But part of the question has to be...how much extra money did the devs make off of that longevity? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Thewood1 said:

But part of the question has to be...how much extra money did the devs make off of that longevity? 

At this point none because their gone. After the minor disaster that was Cliffs of Dover the series died for quite some time. But I recently bought two copies of IL-2 1946 off of GoG a few weeks ago. Jagged Alliance 2 also.


Some devs do release historical data and the tail tends to be pretty long and pretty strong. Especially on Steam since you can gain a sort of steamroll effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another recent example is that there were people telling me that they got into CMSF2 because of the Heaven & Earth mod.

If I hypothetically had zero interest in CMSF2´s Middle Eastern modern warfare setting but some interest in the Vietnam/Asian setting, I would buy CMSF2 just for it without thinking twice. I mentioned it several times while playing the Year of the Rat campaign on the stream and it was meant serious.

I guess I have a lesser threshold than the average to spent money on wargames but if I assume that for some reason I had no interest in the default content of the other CM titles - which is not the case but hypothetically - but had for whatever reasons interest in user content such as the various mod/campaign projects, I would buy CM games just for them alone. Last week I bought two JTS games primarily in order to get my hands on total conversion mods.

Edited by Aquila-SmartWargames
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Probus said:

You take care!  There is a poll function built into the KSP forum which uses the same engine. Elvis said it was not in Battlefront's version though. 

Agree  I reconized the mistakes this is why I delete my last message that you already saw probably !

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Thewood1 said:

But are the JTS mods just graphical?  And btw, The Heaven and Earth mod is only graphical, right?

The games allow modification of what I call "hard data" so the JTS mods are not only cosmetical. 

While it is technicallly correct that HE does not change hard data, calling it only cosmetical would be the biggest understatement I´ve heard alongside it. To everybody that has the slightest interest I recommend to test it out for yourself. Playing the yot Rat campaign in HE was on of the greatest and most unique experiences I´ve had in recent years in CM. It is remarkable what the team achieved despite CM´s modding restrictions.

Which brings me to my point: I do not ask the devs to go full 180 degree on CM´s modding friendliness as I understand the reasoning. However I am confident that offering the community at least some more modding options would be a win-win situation for all involved.

Edited by Aquila-SmartWargames
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:

Being a graphic only mod seems to go agsint the whole point of CM's attractiveness as a wargame.  That is historical accuracy in units, actions, and OOBs.

Almost every scenario & campaign ever made for CM (even officially) are semi-historical at best... do not overestimate the historical accuracy of the computer game that you play.

I suspect far more people play CM because of the decent 3D graphics & sound (for a wargame), fairly realistic physics &, at least plausible, infantry behaviour than they do because of accurate OOB's... if BFC decided to go back to TACOPS style graphics for CMx3, but increase the OOB accuracy, I can certainly imagine that it would hurt sales.

Heaven & Earth is a fantasy & although, technically, the modded aspects are graphics & sound mods only it also comes with unique maps, concepts, content & unit compositions... it very often requires a different playstyle & mindset compared with CMSF2.

Either way, it was the best that could be done given the modding limitations. Some of us have been waiting almost twenty years for CM-Vietnam (or CM-WW1) and not everyone has survived that wait.

A lot of what was done could only have been done with the help of people like @sbobovyc & @Aquila-SmartWargames making & figuring out how to use the modding tools... which I think is part of the point.

Link to post
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.


×
×
  • Create New...