Annual look at the year to come - 2023

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, SergeantSqook said:

CMPE

Market for everybody. 

 

[Artkin]

13 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

A nice up to date how to manual, instead of letting customers argue about it with name calling etc. Recommending target tools which clearly don't work. Unit A gets LOS when you think great Unit A could target from that square. Put identical Unit B there the No LOS pops up. It took me a few years to figure out how this is possible but nothing the manual says about it. 

LOS works fine as does the target tool. What would be good would be additional stances added to the 5 existing, to add more resolution along that axis of calculations. 

[chuckdyke]

5 minutes ago, Artkin said:

LOS works fine as does the target tool. What would be good would be additional stances added to the 5 existing, to add more resolution along that axis of calculations. 

Road to Nijmegen first Mission. The houses are in clear view, but you can't plot an LOS once you receive incoming fire and want to return fire. So now and then a unit returns fire but the MG team can't. LOS and LOF are probability factors once I play like that I didn't look back.

 

Edited January 30, 2023 by chuckdyke

[Artkin]

9 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Road to Nijmegen first Mission. The houses are in clear view, but you can't plot an LOS once you receive incoming fire and want to return fire. So now and then a unit returns fire but the MG team can't. LOS and LOF are probability factors once I play like that I didn't look back.

 

There is an issue with troops refusing to crouch when under contact and in forested areas. I'm not sure about your exact situation but that is really the only issue ive ran into. It can be worked around by issuing your troops a pause command in which they will usually crouch. 

Edited January 30, 2023 by Artkin

[chuckdyke]

17 minutes ago, Artkin said:

There is an issue with troops refusing to crouch when under contact and in forested areas. I'm not sure about your exact situation but that is really the only issue ive ran into. It can be worked around by issuing your troops a pause command in which they will usually crouch. 

I can't return fire when fired upon, which goes against the law of physics. I made an post on discord how to move to contact which works. You need to plot your moves using Camera 1 aka POV.

 

[Simcoe]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

There will be no replay feature for CM2. I've explained why and I don't really care if you accept it or not.  It just isn't a viable commercial feature.  Period, end of story. 

You guys have also asked that we ship a pony with every game for a long time, and that's not going to happen either

Steve

Some of us might not have caught the original explanation. Would you mind explaining again?

Also, are there any features that will transfer from profession to commercial?

[Mr.X]

@Battlefront.com:

Can You give us some more information about the CMFB Modul to come?

Time frame till May 1945? 
How many campaigns? What‘s the campaign‘s theme? Remagen Bridge? 
Ruhr-Pocket closing at Paderborn? Operation Varsity? Battle for Nuernberg? 
Will there be included Canadians and French Forces into the Modul? 
 

Thanks

Regards

Mr.X 

[Sunbather]

All I want is more British Forces!

We need the BOAR in Cold War and we need the Brits in Black Sea.

Heck I am not even British but the only modern Brits we got are in Shock Force 2 and they are by far the most fun nation to play with. What would the US Marines do in the Ukraine and in a CWGH in Germany anyways?

[SergeantSqook]

19 minutes ago, Sunbather said:

All I want is more British Forces!

We need the BOAR in Cold War and we need the Brits in Black Sea.

Heck I am not even British but the only modern Brits we got are in Shock Force 2 and they are by far the most fun nation to play with. What would the US Marines do in the Ukraine and in a CWGH in Germany anyways?

I'm choosing to interpret "advancing the timeline" as a confirmation on the BAOR in CMCW. Up to '83 for the Chally 1 or up to '89 for the Warrior. I will not brook any alternate views on this matter.

[Sunbather]

37 minutes ago, SergeantSqook said:

I'm choosing to interpret "advancing the timeline" as a confirmation on the BAOR in CMCW. Up to '83 for the Chally 1 or up to '89 for the Warrior. I will not brook any alternate views on this matter.

Haha, alright.

Thinking critically about it, the easy way to go would be to implement West and East German Forces and be done with it. The only new assets needed would be some ramshackle Leopards but mostly you could get away with just American equipment "lend-leased" to the Germans. Of course I hope that I am completely wrong!

I guess the question is: will this be like the trim modules for Shock Force 2 or a like the big, fatty module that is Fire and Rubble? I am all for the latter!

Edited January 30, 2023 by Sunbather

[Sunbather]

I also dearly hope that there will be snow in Cold War AND Black Sea. Would it really be so mind-bending to put forward the timeline a mere few months when it comes to the story of Black Sea?

I think the current embargo on the module could be used to squeeze in some Brits and some snow, hahaha.

(I am serious though.)

[SergeantSqook]

33 minutes ago, Sunbather said:

Haha, alright.

Thinking critically about it, the easy way to go would be to implement West and East German Forces and be done with it. The only new assets needed would be some ramshackle Leopards but mostly you could get away with just American equipment "lend-leased" to the Germans. Of course I hope that I am completely wrong!

I guess the question is: will this be like the trim modules for Shock Force 2 or a like the big, fatty module that is Fire and Rubble? I am all for the latter!

So the reason I'm going with BAOR over Germany here is that there's not really any reason to advance the timeline just for Germany since both the Leo 2 and the Marder would be available in the current timeline. I think BAOR is the most likely one you would specifically move the timeline forward for. Though that's still not a guarantee.

[Ts4EVER]

Will the FB module contain the French stuff from FI as well?

[Flibby]

I hope that this is taken in the spirit in which it is meant - CM may just need a reasonable competitor in order to push the series forward.

We all enjoy and appreciate the effort that is put in by BF. We would not be here otherwise. It is unfortunate however that CM is resigned to years of semi-releases and updates rather than the great leaps forward that I think we would all appreciate.

The gulf in the trajectory between OpenGL and DirectX have been there for all to see for decades now. Unfortunately it doesn't really hold water to say that it's a surprise that development is limited by not taking a decision to re-engineer the engine in DirectX years ago.

The new modules, battle packs etc are all well and good, as are the steam releases, but I can't think that I am in a minority who would sacrifice significant releases for a period for the knowledge that a new engine was being created, with current technology, which would allow an even more realistic experience. Much less talented game designers are out there creating games which, given the 'CM Treatment' would solve a lot of the on-going issues which cause issues with the current experience.  I realise BF aren't a tripe A developer, but it's not as though we see a new release every year anyway. And they have moved to a different engine before.

At the moment the competition is either too 'gamey' such a Regiments for example; or like Mius Front, has a UI which is totally unintuitive. Both things which CM excels at. Then we have Squad Battles by John Tiller for example which are great games but very abstracted given they are trying to emulate Squad Leader. Even Second Front which I had high hopes for looks like a cartoon and I can't take it seriously. 

Anyway - I'm going to keep playing the games because there's nothing better, and therefore little incentive to update the system. Perhaps I'm part of the problem.

[Grey_Fox]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

There will be no replay feature for CM2. I've explained why and I don't really care if you accept it or not.  It just isn't a viable commercial feature.  Period, end of story. 

You guys have also asked that we ship a pony with every game for a long time, and that's not going to happen either

Steve

That's profoundly disappointing. The reason I know about CM and bought the games is due to AAR videos on youtube created by the likes of @Hapless

I've created my own videos in a similar style, and it is an incredibly time-intensive task to load and reload saves in order to create recordings. The replay feature present in CMPE would make life an awful lot easier for people like me to create videos. I recently made a video which contained 11 minutes of footage, and it took approximately 3 hours to record and edit it, without any attempt at music or voiceover.

Making it easier to review game footage  would allow more videos to be made, which would then reach a wider audience and create additional revenues for you at zero cost beyond the implementation of the existing CMPE replay feature into the commercial games.

For PBEMs, the save files already exist in the incoming and outgoing email folders. Why not make use of them?

@Hapless

Edited January 30, 2023 by Grey_Fox

[THH149]

I'm pretty sceptical about the PBEM++ feature tbh, as I've had several bad experiences of the game not continuing. 

I'm looking forward to successful tournaments and ppl in the game request saying theyre willing to use PBEM++ before I make a similar offer.

But, new CM content is always welcome! (Oddly, i find CMBN more difficult than CMBS, 'cos I can't see **** before I'm dead from point blank fire!)

[SgtHatred]

52 minutes ago, Flibby said:

I hope that this is taken in the spirit in which it is meant - CM may just need a reasonable competitor in order to push the series forward.

We all enjoy and appreciate the effort that is put in by BF. We would not be here otherwise. It is unfortunate however that CM is resigned to years of semi-releases and updates rather than the great leaps forward that I think we would all appreciate.

The gulf in the trajectory between OpenGL and DirectX have been there for all to see for decades now. Unfortunately it doesn't really hold water to say that it's a surprise that development is limited by not taking a decision to re-engineer the engine in DirectX years ago.

The new modules, battle packs etc are all well and good, as are the steam releases, but I can't think that I am in a minority who would sacrifice significant releases for a period for the knowledge that a new engine was being created, with current technology, which would allow an even more realistic experience. Much less talented game designers are out there creating games which, given the 'CM Treatment' would solve a lot of the on-going issues which cause issues with the current experience.  I realise BF aren't a tripe A developer, but it's not as though we see a new release every year anyway. And they have moved to a different engine before.

At the moment the competition is either too 'gamey' such a Regiments for example; or like Mius Front, has a UI which is totally unintuitive. Both things which CM excels at. Then we have Squad Battles by John Tiller for example which are great games but very abstracted given they are trying to emulate Squad Leader. Even Second Front which I had high hopes for looks like a cartoon and I can't take it seriously. 

Anyway - I'm going to keep playing the games because there's nothing better, and therefore little incentive to update the system. Perhaps I'm part of the problem.

This mirrors my thoughts almost exactly. Problems in the game last for years without being addressed, both gameplay and technical, and nothing ever seems to move forward. Even the new content seems lesser these days (CMRT, CMBS, and CMCW seem to have the same list of quickbattle maps, more or less.). Hell, I posted about the T-90 issue in CMBS 9 months ago, and finally heard a month ago that it was fixed and we would see it "very soon". Well, very soon has been a month so far, and now it seems like maybe there are months left to go. Not that it matters, without some sign of life from Battlefront, I doubt I can convince any of my friends to turn up for another CM2x game. This copy paste of last year's status update has not helped. Seeing features for the Professional version that have been wanted for years veto'd from ever seeing the light of day on the commercial version is especially demoralizing. 

 

Battlefront seems to be a company with the output capacity of a single guy in his garage, but the agility of a company with 50000 employees. It's frustrating.

52 minutes ago, Flibby said:

for decades now. Unfortunately it doesn't really hold water to say that it's a surprise that development is limited by not taking a decision to re-engineer the engine in DirectX years ago..

I will disagree here. There is nothing wrong with OpenGL for an older game. I wouldn't recommend it for new projects, but it is still strongly supported in Windows environments, and some top quality games run great with it. You just had to have implemented it correctly, or if not, kept up with maintenance when your spaghetti code breaks down with new driver updates. As for Apple support, nothing can really be done about that. Apple has always been willing to pull the rug out from under customers and developers with little notice.

Edited January 30, 2023 by SgtHatred

[SergeantSqook]

2 minutes ago, SgtHatred said:

a single guy in his garage

I'd hope they at least let Charles have his own study inside the house

[Dr.Fusselpulli]

6 hours ago, Sunbather said:

All I want is more British Forces!

We need the BOAR in Cold War and we need the Brits in Black Sea.

Heck I am not even British but the only modern Brits we got are in Shock Force 2 and they are by far the most fun nation to play with. What would the US Marines do in the Ukraine and in a CWGH in Germany anyways?

I hope we see German forces before we see BOAR. Don't get me wrong, I want to see the BOAR as well, but a war within Germany should include German forces, especially as both German armies were quite substantial during that time.
And you are very wrong about the assets for German forces. It is not just "add the leopard".
As jeeps you would have the DKW Munga for the late 70s, and the Iltis for the 80s.
As trucks you would have Unimog 404 for the late 70s and the 435 for the 80s.
Recon would be done by the Luchs.
Until 1983 the Bundeswehr used the Kanonenjagdpanzer, the spiritual successor of the StuG.
As the Antitank vehicle you would have the Jaguar 1.
And don't forget the beloved Gepard and the Roland Kette.

Of course, Germany used American assets as well, at the time the M48 in a Germanized version as well as the M113 as a Germanized version.
Germany also used the M109 Paladin in it's own version and later get's the MLRS (Called MARS in Germany).
But those are artillery assets without 3D model.
Germany would also have the LARS rocket artillery system, which is something comparable to the GRAD system.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Dr.Fusselpulli

[Mechasaurian]

7 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

There will be no replay feature for CM2. I've explained why and I don't really care if you accept it or not.  It just isn't a viable commercial feature.  Period, end of story. 

You guys have also asked that we ship a pony with every game for a long time, and that's not going to happen either

Steve

I will echo others in wanting a reiteration of this explanation. No one else in the CM-focused circles I hang out in seems to have any bloody clue why a replay feature would not be "commercially viable," not even the ones who hang around in the forums a *lot.*

There is, in fact, reason to believe that a replay feature would be a massive shot in the arm for the CM community. It would definitely reduce the work on content creators like Usually Hapless and Grey Fox. Heck, I might even consider some CM videos if I had one big replay file/vid I could use instead of loading dozens of PBEM files and sitting through the loading screen each time.

I mean...what could the explation possibly be? The replay function plainly exists, it works, and commercial customers want it. So...???????????????????????

[Aragorn2002]

2 hours ago, Dr.Fusselpulli said:

I hope we see German forces before we see BOAR. Don't get me wrong, I want to see the BOAR as well, but a war within Germany should include German forces, especially as both German armies were quite substantial during that time.
And you are very wrong about the assets for German forces. It is not just "add the leopard".
As jeeps you would have the DKW Munga for the late 70s, and the Iltis for the 80s.
As trucks you would have Unimog 404 for the late 70s and the 435 for the 80s.
Recon would be done by the Luchs.
Until 1983 the Bundeswehr used the Kanonenjagdpanzer, the spiritual successor of the StuG.
As the Antitank vehicle you would have the Jaguar 1.
And don't forget the beloved Gepard and the Roland Kette.

Of course, Germany used American assets as well, at the time the M48 in a Germanized version as well as the M113 as a Germanized version.
Germany also used the M109 Paladin in it's own version and later get's the MLRS (Called MARS in Germany).
But those are artillery assets without 3D model.
Germany would also have the LARS rocket artillery system, which is something comparable to the GRAD system.

Absolutely agree. But both the Germans and the British should be in. It would be ridiculous to keep one of those two out. The rest matters less, although I still hope the Dutch will be there.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Aragorn2002

[Dr.Fusselpulli]

Absolutely, I just expect them to be in a different pack. East German forces would be relatively easy, because they use only low tier Soviet Equipment, although in slightly different TO&E.
The Brits might make sense to bundle with Polish forces, which would have another individual asset, the OT-64 SKOT. Then you could also have the Czechs... which wouldn't make any sense at all against the Brits... but hey. they used the SKOT as well. 

[Bulletpoint]

posted in the wrong thread sorry

Edited January 30, 2023 by Bulletpoint

[A Canadian Cat]

10 hours ago, SergeantSqook said:

I'm curious why it's not viable for commercial. I missed whenever it was explained in the past

I have no idea if Steve will chime in but I'll take a shot at writing an explanation. This is from memory so have your salt handy: the issue is the memory, disk space requirements and load times. There is no way to make it work on machines that are not top of the line because there is just too much data to push around. For CM2 there is just no way to improve this since the game was never designed to handle what would be required - my impression is that would be dynamic loading and unloading of data. I'm not sure if that would even help with hard drive space either. While the professional edition can have specs that are much higher than the commercial edition there is no real way to manage that for the rest of us. Even those of us that have machines that can handle that what about those that don't? What about those that are borderline? What about when some dope tries to fight two battalions vs two battalions on a huge heavily forested map (me)? The support issues around all that is just too much for how the CM2 engine was designed.

 

10 hours ago, SergeantSqook said:

and having used it in CMPE it seems to work pretty well.

Oh interesting. I personally have not had the pleasure but I heard it was a bit cumbersome and subject to surprises here and there.

[JMDECC]

13 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

   CMCW - move the timeline forward and some other fun stuff

 

Does this mean the time frame CMCW is covering will expand (moving beyond 1982)? Or are we referring to a release time frame being moved up for a module or battle pack?