A BUNCH of answers to your questions!

[kipanderson]

Steve, hi,

Thanks for all the info. Everything sounds stunning, as I knew it would.

Do not know if you will get round to reading this but on the off chance you do can not resist just making a few comments/ asking the odd question.

1) Go carefully on C&C restrictions on AFVs and infantry squads. Remember that in CM we play the role not just of company and platoon commanders but also AFV and squad commanders. If as an AFV commander or squad commander I see a threat and can not react because my crew/men are not trained well enough that may be realistic. But be careful not to code in such a way as to “assume” that “I” as the crew or squad commander, am stupid. It is important not to “over limit” the options of AFV and squad commanders beyond that which may be reasonable in representing the limitations of their crew or men. Hope you understand my point even if you do not agree with it.

2) Soviet PT 34 mine roller. During the last half/third of the war a common feature of war on the Eastern Front. It would also make for some great and challenging tactical problems in is use. Any chance it will be included?

3) Maximum length of battles in operations. I have always considered it a shame that the “maximum length of battles in operations” is just 30 turns. Any chance of giving us the option of longer battles in the operations editor? Constant frustration for me, I would like 40-60 minute battles in operations. I admit this is a minority view.

If you do get round to reading this, thanks for your time,

All the best,

Kip.

PS. John Waters, hi, good to see you are still out there, how are things?

[Stoffel]

Steve sorry for asking it may sound boring but what about a SOP menu for standard actions like the one that is available for tacops?

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kipanderson:

PS. John Waters, hi, good to see you are still out there, how are things?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Kip, good to see you as well. Yes i'm still around just been extremely busy with RL, best way to contact me is email as I dont get to check boards much anymore.

Regards, John Waters

[RCHRD]

I want to pre-order. If you wait until the game is in production you will have thousands of people ordering the game in the first hour. How are you going to manage that?

[ex PFC Wintergreen]

Sounds like Battlefron still has a **LOT** of work to be done for CM2.

[The Commissar]

*sigh*

By the time I get to this thread, Steve has left. Oh well, I'll ask anyway in the vain hope of being answered

Steve, is there any plans for "house debree" or some such things which decrease that disturbing "a box in an open field" effect you see in every country home (ie: small house outside a city standing in grass). Im guessing this is probably too difficult and needs to wait till CMII

Is my dire prediction correct?

Thx in advance, appreciate you taking the time out for us hapless junkies!

[Clinton]

What about Russian female soldiers. Many AA guns of Stalingrad were manned solely by women who then turned the guns on approaching tanks and refused to flee. They were also feared for suprise attacks in small groups out of brush and trees targeting commanders of tanks and such....Are they in or out?

[Battlefront.com]

More quick responses:

Rare AFVs are in general not being added. However, we intend to include a few. The IS-3 is likely to go in, the Panther F, E-100, and Maus are not. They were only prototypes and feel that it isn't good to start adding stuff like this in favor of even rare things. The IS-3 was produced in the thousands, but of course only after the war concluded. That means we really do know that the vehicle worked. Who knows if the Germans could ever have gotten the Maus into combat and if so how it would have functioned.

As far as external campaign stuff is concerned, trust me... we are thinking about cans and string If we can do something realtively easy, we will. But opening up the file format is 100% never, ever going to happen. We will not put the integrity of the game as a whole at risk (and risk isn't the right word because we know all too well that our worst fears will come true) for the sake of allowing a minority of players the ability to possibly enjoy some 3rd party application. Obviously we would love to make everybody happy here, but we will not do it in a way we know will certainly cause harm.

We are tweaking serveral aspects of calling down artillery. Adjusting fire is one of them.

No plans to make MGs in tanks jam, but we might add this. In any case, from what I gather they jammed far less than field deployed MGs.

I'll suggest to Charles that it would be good to have two kinds of ground attack aircraft - Fighters and Fighterbombers. But no, we will not have specific types of aircraft for purchasing. Not a good use of our time.

We would never penalize any unit in any way that would harm historically correct employment. We will also not remove control from the player as that is something we have always been against (i.e. a "command level wargame") personally and as a business. No worries here.

We have no plans for mine roller tanks. They were requested for CM1 but all arguments for them were very unconvincing. We are not aware of T34 mine detonation vehicles being plentifull enough in a CM sized engagement to call them "common". We will check some sources on this though.

I'm not sure if Operation battles can have greater time lengths, but I suppose it wouldn't be hard to add.

No SOP menu for CM2. The engine rewrite will likely have stuff like this. It requires a ton of coding and testing, so it is no small feature request.

In regards to the rush to order, our new online system will be able to handle the load. A lot better than taking the preorders ahead of time and then dealing with all the bum credit card numbers, expiration dates, and other related problems. I didn't sleep for three days for CM1's launch while processing probably 1/5th the number of preorders we will receive for CM2.

What we can and can not do with buildings for CM2 has yet to be determined. We have our wish list, but most likely buildings will remain as "boxes" until the engine rewrite. Different sized and shaped boxes are definitely a go though.

No simulation of females or particular ethnic minorities (and the SU had tonnnnnnnnnns of 'em ) no more than we are going to specifically simulate all the various different nationality "legons" fighting for the Axis powers. On the battlefield none of this mattered in CM terms.

Steve

[LGMB]

Soldiers,

Is this turning into a Wine cape challange?

Lets try to keep to questions and not suggestions.

[LGMB]

Sorry Db post

[ 06-08-2001: Message edited by: Lord General MB ]

[Panzer Leader]

Seteve Wrote:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> As far as external campaign stuff is concerned, trust me... we are thinking about cans and string If we can do something realtively easy, we will. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Steve, that is the best news I've heard yet, and EVERYTHING you've said so far sounds great! Thank you thank you thank you.

I totally understand about letting the mice into the grain elevator (or whatever the phrase is) with the code. You are right to give that answer, but Hey! we gotta ask!

[Vanir Ausf B]

Steve has stated that CM2 maps will be bigger, but what I am more curious about is their shape, not their size. Specificaly, will large pt. QB maps be deeper and more square for attack/defend type games than the curret long and skinny shape we get (long and skinny is fine for MEs)? Deeper and more square with VLs staggered front to back as well as side to side would be ideal for attack/defend or assault.

Also, will the PBEM format be slightly altered so that the second player's computer generates the map (and units in computer pick games) so the first player can't "peek" and make a new game if he doesn't like what he sees?

[PzKpfw 1]

Thx for the reply Steve:

I am curious why the IS-3 is being modeled soley on it's post war production run, as it never saw any combat in WW2, the reason being the war production IS-3's had serious

mechanichal & armor problems Ie, the weld seams on the front hull failed & would crack open during cross country travel etc.

While serious engine & drivetrain problems

persisted well into into 1947. These problems were a result of rushed production with insuficent testing, (sound familiar) that prevented the IS-3's use in anything but for propaganda purposes in the Sept 1945 Berlin Victory Parade.

The IS-3 production run in WW2 was very small as only 1 plant Chelyabinsk began production in mid 1945 in tandem with IS-2 production with 1,500 IS-2's being produced compared to 150 - 200 IS-3s. Will CM2 model the IS-3's mechanichal faults & armor problems?. Post war the IS-3 bugs were worked out & a total IS-3 production run from 1945 thru 1951 totaled only around 1,800 IS-3's, with the IS-3 program being terminated.

Concerning the Panther F, I would add that they were gearing up for Ausf.F series production in 5 plants starting in March 1945, & that Ausf F chassis's were found on the assembly floor at Dalimar Benz alongside Ausf G's as well as several schmalturm were taken by the US & UK R&D teams. Their is also the question as to whether or not II/PzRgt.2 was equipped with Ausf.F's in the final Berlin battles.

As to the Maus I could care less cept to add that according to Zaloga & Grandsen; both the Maus proto's did see combat, 1 at Kummerdorf & the other at Zossen, with 1 being scuttled by its crew & the other being captured intact by the Soviets.

Regards, John Waters

[ 06-09-2001: Message edited by: PzKpfw 1 ]

[Lee]

Thanks for considering differentiating between fighters and fighter-bombers/

ground attack aircraft. That will give scenario designers more room

to tailor the threat from the air.

[killmore]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

As far as external campaign stuff is concerned, trust me... we are thinking about cans and string If we can do something realtively easy, we will. But opening up the file format is 100% never, ever going to happen

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that case how about a simple command line utility which creates a saved game file from a simple text file and utility that extracts units from saved game file into a text file.

You don't reveal saved game format and you give us great tools.

[vonHoff]

Hi

I want to say something to this tread.

I did not read it all but I saw 2 things I want to coment on.

1) Japan never declared war on Russia and vise versa

2) German Zeis optics where much better then all Allied optics. German Tank crews til '43 had a higher hit rate then there Allied counterparts, thats Fact and no fiction.

"... on the western front its about the same..." not really, not true for early war in the west.(maybe past '44)

1 more thing...

German guns/tanks had a high production standard, US, UK had a normal production standard and Russia a low one...

The Russian tank used AP-Ammo without balistic cap, what made the accuracy less reliable too. So if I see a quote that russian tanks hit nearly as good as German tanks do..sorry thats just not right.

[Kwazydog]

VonHoff, keep in mind that Steves comments were refering to Combat Mission 1 which does cover the entire Western Front from D-Day onwards. Thus the action there took place only from June '44 to '45. I dont think Steve was referring to the entire conflict between the allies and the Germans

Dan

[ 06-09-2001: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

[Vanir Ausf B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

The IS-3 was produced in the thousands, but of course only after the war concluded. That means we really do know that the vehicle worked. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have to chime in on the side of John Waters here. Everything I have read indicates the early IS-3s had serious problems that made them fit for little more than parade duty. If they are in I think the Panther F ought to be as well.

[Username]

I still dont know what quake is by the way.

I can apreciate the fawning and the drooling but am a bit perplexed by the lack of concern towards spotting and shot placement. Its to be expected I guess.

I will open a thread towards a final plea towards "spotting" and other issues related to it but expect little response from BTS. It will be a challenge of my abilities to rationalize what I think can be done in the "end game" mindset that I think BTS has adopted. All for the best I am sure.

Lewis

[Freak]

BTS - I'm a little confused on which vehicles are included in CMBB:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I heard you are including the IS-3. If this is true, why?

---------------------------------------------------------

Because it is one mean motha tank The Pershing was added even though it saw combat only once or twice. From our perspective, there is really no difference between a super rare vehicle and a vehicle which never saw combat. So the IS-3, Super Pershing, night visioned Panther, Sturmtiger, Maus, etc. are all in the same boat. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If the IS-3, did not partake in WWII does this mean that the Maus or Panther F are included in CM2 BB?

[ 06-09-2001: Message edited by: Freak ]

[Schrullenhaft]

Lewis - I'm sure BTS would love to change the "spotting" code in CMBB, but according to Steve this is going to require far too much in the way of code changes. It can only be realistically done with the engine rewrite. I guess that there is only so much that they can tweak with the current engine without messing up a lot of the TacAI's engagement routines.

As for shot placement, I'm not sure what the engine limitations on that would be. I'm under the impression (from what little I can recall of threads in the past) that it is quite a bit simpler than many people here may assume. Some of this, again, is due to engine (and CPU computation) limitations, but there may be some further enhacements that can be done within the current engine.

Freak - Steve has said that the IS-3 will be in since it was actually produced (albeit after the war) in large numbers. While its actual combat record in WWII is highly questionable, it nevertheless made it in. The other German tanks (Panther F, E-100, Maus & night vision Panther) won't, but I thought I read that the SturmTiger is in... I can't remember exactly on that one.

[ 06-09-2001: Message edited by: Schrullenhaft ]

[AUSSIEJEFF]

Hi Steve,

Great job you guys are doing . . . don't stop now!!! heh

Just a quick one . .

There are so many threads starting to pop up all over the place for CM2 (including this one).

I also see you have a private CM2 forum (presumably for registered members of the development team).

However, would it be possible to open a new "Public CM2 Comments" forum, where ALL further posts relating to CM2 can be housed?? Seems to me it would be more reasonable to have a 'one stop shop' for public CM2 posts than having an increasing number of CM2 related posts popping up all over the CM1 forum.....

Hope you can accomodate this request.

Best of luck with CM2

AussieJeff

[Freak]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Schrullenhaft:

Freak - Steve has said that the IS-3 will be in since it was actually produced (albeit after the war) in large numbers. While its actual combat record in WWII is highly questionable, it nevertheless made it in. The other German tanks (Panther F, E-100, Maus & night vision Panther) won't, but I thought I read that the SturmTiger is in... I can't remember exactly on that one.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am slightly miffed. I am having trouble understanding why a tank which wasn't in action in WWII (at least from information I have read) is being included in (as close as it gets to realistic) WWII game (simulation). I know that Steve said it was because the IS-3 was one motha tank, but I am having trouble understanding this mainly becouse there are lots of motha tanks (maus comes to mind) which would be cool to see in the game as well. I guess my main concern as well, as fickle as it may be is that; what QB's will become or potentialy may become if a tank which was not really involved in WWII is in the game and is an option in a QB. I guess the short answer is to just make game parameters clear before the game has begun, so that the unwanted tanks are not picked.

Anyway, I am just trying to understand the decsion of modeling vehicles that were not operational in WWII battle. It just doesnt make any sense to me to do it mainly because of reasons above, and because there are other cool AFV's which in my mind could equaly be modeled in the game as well.

[kipanderson]

Steve, hi,

Thanks for answering all my questions, can not ask for more than that.

Great picture of mine roller on page 94/95 of the Steven Zaloga book, Red Army Handbook. I believe it was a common feature during last third of war. Will have to wait and see what your sources say.

I have two reasons for thinking it was common.

1) Turns up again and again in books; this may be because it makes a good picture.

2) In “the” handbook on Soviet forces, by which I mean War Department Technical Manual TM 30-430, November 1945, Handbook on USSR Military Forces, it is taken to be as standard a feature of Soviet operations as mine ploughs are in the US Army today.

All the best,

Kip.

[Culex Pipiens]

1)it will be possible to make pre-turn barrage?

2)will be present also land-lease units?

3)the italians/rumanians/bulgarian etc are in the game?

4)when you make a map will be switchable to .cmc or .cmb without remaking it?

thanx :confused: