2022 Mid Year Update

[massi9797Dz]

5 hours ago, Aussiegrit said:

Surely time to go back on topic right?

if at  least there was information on the progress of the  implimentation of the pbem system will have a clue about a release date , until today no news from battlefront guys neither from slitherine games complete silence that what it is a whole year still no cmbn or red thender or .... nothing 

[PIATpunk]

Right.  And don't call me Shirley.

[BFCElvis]

On 11/28/2022 at 12:54 PM, Sunbather said:

Where is the Steam release of the WW2 games? Where the battle pack for CW?

The WW2 games are available today. Right now, through our website. Once they are also released on Steam people can get Steam codes at no additional charge. So, no one has to wait for the games to come out on Steam to play them. You can get'em now.

  

On 11/27/2022 at 1:25 AM, massinissa97 said:

What the hell still no news on Combat mission battle for normandy on steam ? Guys give a sign of life at least ? Even the guys from slitherine age like dead silent

It hasn't really changed, so there hasn't been much to report. We expect Normandy to be released in the 1st Quarter of 2023.

We haven't been silent, you just may not be looking at the threads that we've posted in, probably because they aren't talking about Steam WW2 release dates.  Not even 2 weeks ago we released the Red Thunder Battle Pack. Less than 2 weeks before that we released the tournament patch for Cold War. 

[markus544]

On 11/28/2022 at 12:38 PM, Lucky_Strike said:

Where is or Where's  since we're also discussing grammar

Grammer on a game forum. My old supervisor gave a worse headache then folks commenting on whatever. Having said that some news would be welcome, but I digress.

[Centurian52]

On 10/27/2022 at 9:17 AM, DerKommissar said:

Just my two nickles:

We have a lot of talented folks on here. Why stop at campaigns/scenarios/maps?

What if they give these trustees the ability to edit TO&E, and add new models? They could make modules that BFC may not be interested in (early war, PTO, 'nam, arab/isreali etc.). This may bring new customers, who are more interested in other conflicts.

There are, already, some impressive mods, why not turn them into full fledged modules? DCS has really expanded their line-up after publishing third party modules.

Big disclaimer here: I am sure BFC knows their business better, as they've done it for decades. This is just me thinking (proverbially) aloud.

Because if they did that then people would quickly make a module for just about every single war/operation/battle that the Combat Mission engine can handle. There would be no games left for BFC to release, and so they wouldn't be able to make any more money.

But if BFC ever closes its doors (lack of business, critical mass of the team retires, etc...) then this would be an outstanding idea! It would be a fantastic way to keep Combat Mission alive even without any further official content.

[BFCElvis]

On 10/27/2022 at 12:17 PM, DerKommissar said:

Just my two nickles:

We have a lot of talented folks on here. Why stop at campaigns/scenarios/maps?

What if they give these trustees the ability to edit TO&E, and add new models? They could make modules that BFC may not be interested in (early war, PTO, 'nam, arab/isreali etc.). This may bring new customers, who are more interested in other conflicts.

There are many reasons we wouldn't do this but the big ones, in my opinion, are the pride that is taken in making historically accurate TO&E. Having our name on that without having a hand in it is scary. Also, and we all know this would happen, the creation of Frankentanks. Fictional AFVs.

[Artkin]

[Alchenar]

4 hours ago, BFCElvis said:

There are many reasons we wouldn't do this but the big ones, in my opinion, are the pride that is taken in making historically accurate TO&E. Having our name on that without having a hand in it is scary. Also, and we all know this would happen, the creation of Frankentanks. Fictional AFVs.

 

I'm totally on board with the answer 'no modding because we need to be able to monetise content' because I think game devs should absolutely be entitled to do that, but 'no modding because someone might have fun' is such a strange philosophy to have.  

 

[BFCElvis]

18 hours ago, Alchenar said:

 

I'm totally on board with the answer 'no modding because we need to be able to monetise content' because I think game devs should absolutely be entitled to do that, but 'no modding because someone might have fun' is such a strange philosophy to have.  

 

I understand what you're saying but it isn't really fair.

A great deal of time and energy has gone into making the game/simulation as realistic as possible. Allowing players to make, for example, Panthers that can fire 100 rounds per minute cheapens the integrity of the game. It can become comical and it would, in our opinion, lose some of the soul of the game. The part that makes it the best tactical level wargame available. I am sure that there are games out there that can be modded to allow a Panther to fire 100 rounds per minute. If that is someone's idea of fun then those are the games that they should use to do it. 

 

Unless, of course, you are a country with a military. And are able to offer a contract for us to allow exactly that to develop new weapon systems. In that case we can accommodate you.

 

[Ultradave]

One has only to have lived through the Harpoon series version/mod/spawn debacle and hate and discontent to see the reasoning behind this.

Dave

[SgtHatred]

2 minutes ago, BFCElvis said:

Panthers that can fire 100 rounds per minute cheapens the integrity of the game. It can become comical and it would, in our opinion, lose some of the soul of the game.

 

Yet in CMBS T-90s are left without front armour since the last patch 8+ months ago. If the game was easier to mod, maybe the community could pick up on some of Battlefront's slack, and that would do more for the game's "integrity" than avoiding silly mods. Maybe we could get the Porsche Kingtiger back in CMBN, 32 months after it disappeared, or correct some of the very silly point values in quickbattle.

 

Combat Mission has more to worry about than its "soul".

[BFCElvis]

3 hours ago, SgtHatred said:

Yet in CMBS T-90s are left without front armour since the last patch 8+ months ago. If the game was easier to mod, maybe the community could pick up on some of Battlefront's slack, and that would do more for the game's "integrity" than avoiding silly mods. Maybe we could get the Porsche Kingtiger back in CMBN, 32 months after it disappeared, or correct some of the very silly point values in quickbattle.

 

Combat Mission has more to worry about than its "soul".

You're confusing bugs with design decisions.

[SgtHatred]

12 minutes ago, BFCElvis said:

You're confusing bugs with design decisions.

In this case the design decision is "prevent users from modifying software", which would include user created fixes for these problems. Anyone who has ever played a Paradox grand strategy game is aware of the concept of user created "patch" mods, because Paradox can often drag its feet for months and months on simple typos in scripts that break features.

[Artkin]

I VERY highly doubt anyone in this community wants to play Panther fires 100 rounds a minute.

What people want is content, and theyre sick of paying $60 for a half recycled game.

[Glubokii Boy]

Allowing outsiders to help BFC with their...less than stellar...release rate of new products does not neccesarely have to mean that those outside products would be riddicolous fantasy games...

Surely BFC could demand to have a 'quality check' option before releasing any outside projects in the Comnat Mission name. Ones these outside teams considders their products ready...BFC will have a look at them and if they meet the desired standards add a simple code to the files...

Without this code these 'modules' will not be playable within the CM game engine....

Something like that ought to be possible...There are many, many possible scenarios for future modules out there and without any outside help to lend BFC a helping hand we will most certainly never see them as BFCs productivity...atleast for non-military during the last 5-8 years or something have been downright pityful...

 

[Alchenar]

11 hours ago, Artkin said:

I VERY highly doubt anyone in this community wants to play Panther fires 100 rounds a minute.

What people want is content, and theyre sick of paying $60 for a half recycled game.

But If I do want a Panther that shoots 100 rounds a minute...why should anyone care? It's my gaming experience.

 

e^^ there are a bunch of models. You can open up the game and let anyone mess with the TOE and unit details and throw in anything they want.  100 rpm Panthers.  Infantry with power armour.  Double Barrelled Mammoth Tanks.  

Or you can run a curation service to screen for quality and lock modding access behind that gateway.  Given Battlefront already has delivery issues I don't know why they'd want to take on that additional work.
 

Edited December 10, 2022 by Alchenar

[BFCElvis]

7 hours ago, Alchenar said:

Or you can run a curation service to screen for quality and lock modding access behind that gateway.  Given Battlefront already has delivery issues I don't know why they'd want to take on that additional work.
 

Could you imagine? Having someone doing that? Ugh.

 

I suppose it would have been much easier for me to say "being able to mod anything other than appearance will never ever ever never happen with Combat Mission" , rather than attempt to explain why. Lesson relearned. Since it is not a debatable issue I will end by saying......Being able to mod anything other than appearance will never ever ever never ever never ever ever happen with Combat Mission and leave it at that.

[Glubokii Boy]

1 hour ago, BFCElvis said:

Could you imagine? Having someone doing that? Ugh.

Yes...i could 

A perfect example would be DCS world from Eagle dynamics. They are doing exactelly that and because of that have been able to expand their game world many times over. Simply by allowing 'outside' designers to help develop new maps and new flyable aircrafts. 

And as it happens...DCS world is not a fantasy space invaders game.

 

[Artkin]

God forbid someone covers a topic that will never get done around here - like Fall Blau.

To assume your clients are too incapable to reproduce correct, quality content is laughable. It's obviously about greed.

[Glubokii Boy]

I would buy a Combat Mission Fall Blau...day one !

[Glubokii Boy]

But as you mentioned...We will NEVER see it 

[Warts 'n' all]

1 hour ago, BFCElvis said:

... will never ever ever never ever never ever ever happen with Combat Mission and leave it at that.

Not quite catchy as " Pump It Up".

[BFCElvis]

 

7 hours ago, Artkin said:

To assume your clients are too incapable to reproduce correct, quality content is laughable. It's obviously about greed.

No one (at least not me) ever said that people couldn't "reproduce correct, quality content". What I said was that there would be people that created Frankenunits/tanks/guns/etc. We want no parts of that and will not be party to it. (Nice strawman attempt though.)

 

[Artkin]

On 12/8/2022 at 1:02 PM, BFCElvis said:

There are many reasons we wouldn't do this but the big ones, in my opinion, are the pride that is taken in making historically accurate TO&E. Having our name on that without having a hand in it is scary............... ...Also, and we all know this would happen, the creation of Frankentanks. Fictional AFVs.

32 minutes ago, BFCElvis said:

 

(Nice strawman attempt though.)

 

[BFCElvis]

31 minutes ago, Artkin said:

 

Correct. And where in there did I say no one would create accurate mods? Nowhere. Because i didn't. That is where the strawman lives. But nice effort to put words in my mouth that I never said.