+++++++hello and and question++++++++

[Jinxx]

Hello,

This is my first post on the this message board. I have been playing CM since my friend bought be a copy for Xmas.

Ill give you a little background on myself. My name is Joshua Morris and living in southern CA, (originally from nothern CA , GO SHARKS!)

I am a game designer and producer for a company called Taldren. We are the makers of the Starfleet Command Series. ( A game based on Starfleet Battles)

I am a fan of this game and was wonder if the team had thought about doing something we did with SFC and SFC2. Instead of switching fronts and now focusing on the eastern front, wouldnt it be possible to leave the models and weapons for the allies in the game and still add the Russians?

SFC now has 8 races in the games and will soon have 16 (8 playable Pirate cartels). I would think it would be great to continue to add to CM until the product had all the nations forces in the game. I would be happy to buy a new version every year.

I think this would acomplish 2 things.

1. Older forces could continue to be played with 1 CD.

2 Old forces could be played with new engine/ bug fixes. Allowing the team to not worry about correcting small bugs in CM1 as they know they will fix it in the next version.

I think you could still focus on the new parts of the game like have CM2 focus on east front campaigns, but is there any reason that we shouldnt be able to play the other allies in custom missions and multiplayer?

Just a thought, anyone like to comment?

excuse me if these points have been brought up before, Ive been working on the new SFC expansion pack and havent cuaght up on the boards recently.

Josh

[ 04-10-2001: Message edited by: Jinxx ]

[Tiger]

Yeah we all know what great bug-free games SFC and SFC II were *cough-dynaverse-cough*.

A cookie-cutter mold for the different fronts won't do for the CM series I believe. Each theater of WWII requires special attention to make it feel just right, something SFC and SFCII were sorely lacking, IMHO, i.e. done for convienience. I also believe it's much easier to simulate a fantasy sci-fi setting than actual historic events using such a method.

No offense Jinxx but I really wanted to enjoy SFCII but stopped playing it after a week and don't currently have it on my system. I am still playing CMBO a lot since I first installed it last July, 10 months ago. You guys at Taldren could learn alot from the BTS crew, not vice-versa I hope

While your idea for this topic seems to make sense, it just doesn't: Given the craftsmanship BTS put into CMBO, I think a level or two of this craftsmanship would be lost trying to create a universal set of rules to work for every theater of WWII. Something that works right in one theater may not work correctly in another, unless you're satisfied with a more generic, homogenized "feel".

-JMTCW

[ 04-10-2001: Message edited by: Brummbär ]

[Marlow]

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

Yeah we all know what great bug-free games SFC and SFC II were *cough-dynaverse-cough*.

You guys at Taldren could learn alot from the BTS crew, not vice-versa I hope <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Easy now, that's not the way to welcome someone to the board.

Besides, I've played SFC II, and it is better than about 90% of the games out there (bugs and all).

Welcome aboard Jinxx

[Jinxx]

Woohooo!

Now i have another board I can take abuse on!

Does anyone stop and think before they open up and flame someone?

I wont clutter up this message board with SFC stuff but we have had 3 patches since youve played and the game is really looking good. We arent stopping now either.

I would like you to TRY to answer my question if you could.

Why wouldnt the American and British forces trasfer easily into CM2? How many speacial rules are there for eastern combat as opposed to western?

Why wouldnt you want to play American vs Russians in a 1946 scenario?

What is the harm of my questions?

If you dont like SFC2 then that is fine but i don't think it invalidates my questions.

P.S. send me your address and Ill give the the 3.50 Taldren made on you.

I commend this company on the great game they have made and would only like to try to make a suggestion that could make it better.

Josh

[Marlow]

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

Why wouldnt the American and British forces trasfer easily into CM2? How many speacial rules are there for eastern combat as opposed to western?

Why wouldnt you want to play American vs Russians in a 1946 scenario?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I for one have no idea why there would be special rules for the Eastern front. As far as I am aware, bullets fly the same everywhere. I would love to see backwards compatibility with CM:BO so that improvements in CM2 would apply to my beloved Yanks.

[Wesreidau]

Josh,

In all likelyhood there will be a series of new rules for communicationns, command and control, arty, MGs, and so on.

Problem would be they would need to retrofit each and everyone one of CMs units, and then test them with the half dozen trusted peeps used, makes a lot of extra work for a not-guaranteed benefit.

Myself, I think there's enough in the eastern front to keep me busy for a long long time so I'm not worried. While it would indeed be 'cool' the extra work just isn't justified IMHO.

Also, don't forget that with all the new terrain that will probably get added the AI will probably change as well..

In the end all they will be able to keep is the models since everything else will be adjusted. To add in all those models as well as all the eastern front ones would be a lot of work! (even where there are cross-overs)

PeterNZ

[Jinxx]

I could see that it would be extra work...

I wasnt sure how much of a rewrite the game is going to be.

I not sure I agree with "not a garenteed benifit" Playing Americans with the updated system seems like a pretty large benifit to me =)

Josh

[Tiger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Woohooo!

Now i have another board I can take abuse on!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No abuse given. You asked for discussion, that's what this board is for. I gave reasons why I thought this wasn't a good idea; SFC's track record being an example, since you're the one who brought it up as an example first. As I said before: no offense, and none taken.

If you release a buggy as hell game for the x-mas sales rush you should expect to get some grief over it, esp when suggesting the formula for those games be applied to a well-done beloved game.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Does anyone stop and think before they open up and flame someone?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do developers stop and think before releasing these titles buggy as heck for the x-mass buying rush? I didn't think so.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I won't clutter up this message board with SFC stuff but we have had 3 patches since youve played and the game is really looking good. We arent stopping now either.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fair enough but I've already lost intrest in SFCII, thanks anyway. I may give it another go one day.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> like you to TRY to answer my question if you could.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll give them a try based on my limited abilites.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Why wouldnt the American and British forces trasfer easily into CM2? How many speacial rules are there for eastern combat as opposed to western?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do a search and you will find BTS's reply to this. Basically the game engine is not set up to do this currently, and would require an engine rewrite. IIRC BTS has said they are only intrested in doing fairly historical works.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Why wouldnt you want to play American vs Russians in a 1946 scenario?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dunno, same reason I wouldn't want to play the Soviets vs the klingons?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What is the harm of my questions?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No harm. What's the harm in my reply? I don't prescibe to the theory that all ideas on forums are good simply because they're put there. We're all entitled to our opinions, biased or unbiased as they may be.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you dont like SFC2 then that is fine but i don't think it invalidates my questions. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Never said I didn't like SFCII, just that I had lost intrest in it pretty quick, as a number of my friends had. Mostly the game-stopping bugs.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>... send me your address and Ill give the the 3.50 Taldren made on you.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

send me your address and I'll send you the remaining $83 I spent buying one SFCII for myself and a friend (for x-mass). Maybe you could use it to put a little more polishing in your games before you release them (Sorry bout the publishers making you do it but you know....)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I commend this company on the great game they have made and would only like to try to make a suggestion that could make it better.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My only problem with this is Taldren's track record. For what it's worth, I thought the original SFC was better than SFCII, bugs and all.

I stand by my comments about the CM series losing a level or two of craftsmanship by following your idea. This doesn't mean my reply is better than your suggestion, only that we disagree.

[ 04-10-2001: Message edited by: Brummbär ]

[109 Gustav]

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

I not sure I agree with "not a garenteed benifit" Playing Americans with the updated system seems like a pretty large benifit to me =)

Josh<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A benefit to us, yes, but unless BTS were to sell the patch, it wouldn't benefit them. As far as they are concerned, CMBO is finished, and won't be patched unless there are critical bugs with a large effect on gameplay.

If they can update CMBO significantly, ie a total rewrite of the Western fromt for CMII, then they would be justified in selling a patch or new game.

[Jinxx]

Rough day for the new guy...

anyway, If the engine can't handle it or if it would be to much work fine. question answered.

I just found it irritating that in Close Combat, they never did release a game that combined all the efforts they had made up to that point. They made 5 games each focusing on a battle or campaign in the war, ignoring the fact that they had a great multiplayer game that would have benifited from having all the sides playable.

I think that my proposed method might actually allow the game to cover other theaters that wont be possible do to lack of interest. I personally would buy CM4 or 5 : pacific theater if I knew i could still play the russians from CM2. (heck ill buy it anyway, but others might not.)

Wargames are a niche market, it gets even tougher when you try to handle even smaller niches then the standard westfront/east front.

Another possible suggestion would be to make a universal WW2 game not unlike what Piquet did for miniature gaming. In that system everyone would buy the "basic rules set" with maybe a army or 2 and then add in modules of thier choice. This would allow the base game to continue to improve and still allow the guys to make money selling expansions to the core system.

There is a benifit to not having a publisher and selling directly to the poeple, they wouldnt have to make as much on each addon to make it worth it since they would gain all the profits.

My only reason for starting this thread was the hope that one day I would have the "ultimate ww2 game" at this level. They have succeded with American, Brits, and Germans, I would just love to see the game and comunity continue to grow as opposed to be fragmented over several games.

I want a system that the comunity can find out who was better Russians Vs Americans or or the Japanese vs Russians. or X vs Y.

I understand the shortcomings of computer programs and the dificulty of scaling to what i have asked but I also know that nothing is impossible and I dare anyone to tell me that it wouldnt be fun =) (I always lose that dare)

Anyway, thanks for your replies, I will try to be active on this board when i have a chance.

CM is the best WW2 game i have played, I will buy any new products that they put out, I would just like the right to let them know what one of their customers would like for the future.

Josh

[ 04-10-2001: Message edited by: Jinxx ]

[tailz]

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

Hello,

SFC now has 8 races in the games and will soon have 16 (8 playable Pirate cartels). I would think it would be great to continue to add to CM until the product had all the nations forces in the game. I would be happy to buy a new version every year.

I think this would acomplish 2 things.

1. Older forces could continue to be played with 1 CD.

2 Old forces could be played with new engine/ bug fixes. Allowing the team to not worry about correcting small bugs in CM1 as they know they will fix it in the next version.

I think you could still focus on the new parts of the game like have CM2 focus on east front campaigns, but is there any reason that we shouldnt be able to play the other allies in custom missions and multiplayer?

Josh

[ 04-10-2001: Message edited by: Jinxx ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I rather like the "cookie cutter" reference in another post. I am hoping for significant differences between CMBO and CM2 (otherwise all BTS would have to do is release a .bmp modpack of Soviet vehicles.) I am assuming the tactical differences and styles of combat are significantly different on the East Front (long range steppe duels for instance), Soviet numerical advantages, equipment performance differences... and to do it properly I would assume the AI has to be specifically programmed for these different tactical doctrines, as well as their evolution throughout the war.

This is, IMHO, very different from SFC/1&2... 8, 16, 50 races... sorry Jinxx, a phaser is a phaser is a phaser (or a drone, or plasma, etc.) No consideration of terrain or elevation, LOS etc.

As a 'grog' (though not as knowledgeable as many on this forum), I am drawn to the accuracy of the the CM engine, I like how it is geared to specifics and not diluted trying to cover all aspects/forces of WW2. I also don't mind buying a new version, as long as it is different. (ie West Front vs East Front, vs Med etc.) Buying new versions of the same game (SFC 1 vs 2) is rather less appealing. (though both were/are a lot of fun for a quick shoot'em up)

Sorry you took so much flack on your own forum BTW (I usually just lurk over there)

I trust you don't feel flamed, (I am by no means a big East Front fan, but based on my experience with CMBO... been in the HD steady for near a year now!... I can safely say I'll be in it for the long haul with CM2)

[Kwazydog]

Hi Guys,

I just wanted to let you know that Peter up there has pretty much hit the nail on the head. It is something that we would like to do and I don’t believe it has been ruled out yet, but our decision is that if we would have to compromise our goals for CM2 in any way for this feature, then it will have to be left out.

CM2 is going to be one *big* package though, so I think there will be enough to keep people more than entertained even if this isn’t something we can do. Hehe, I’ve just finished building so many KV models that you couldn’t count them on two hands

Guys, lets try and keep things on a nice and polite level. Jinxx's question was about Combat Mission, so its probably best if we stick to that

Dan

[Berlichtingen]

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

Yeah we all know what great bug-free games SFC and SFC II were *cough-dynaverse-cough*.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That was uncalled for. Your opinion of SFC does not invalidate his suggestion. Lighten up

[Berlichtingen]

Oh, and welcome aboard Jinxx

[Ellros]

Hey Dan...

Any chance you could maybe? possibly? give us a peak at one of those KV models? Pretty please?

[Kwazydog]

Hiya Ellros

I cant quite yet unfortunaetly. Hopefully we can start to give you guys some more eye candy soon though, there are just a couple of behind the scenes factors at the moment that we are waiting on.

Dan

[Tiger]

Berlichtingen,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>That was uncalled for. Your opinion of SFC does not invalidate his suggestion. Lighten up<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

umm, Jinxx is the one who brought up SFC in the first place and I never said it invalidated his suggestion, only that it reinforces why I don't agree with it:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...was wonder if the team had thought about doing something we did with SFC and SFC2. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now I think that does has something to do with what he asked, especially since he asked for discussion on it.

Pitting Soviets vs Americans (or Soviets vs Japenese in the Pacific or French versus the Canadians....) on the East front ala 1946 what if scenarios personally holds no fascination for me, especially if it means leaving something out of the historical context. This doesn't invalidate others' opinions but we all have them and are all entitled to them.

[kmead]

Welcome to the board, my aplogies for your baptism by fire. Thankyou for being so open about yourself and what you do. Sorry that someone reacted so adversely to your job, an area that does not reflect who you are or what you believe in.

You had an excellent suggestion. I truly wish it were possible.

If you look at your CMBO CD which is happily a Mac/Win (for me as I have both and use both at work) combo it is pretty full. As you know if CM2 is Barbarossa to Berlin and is indeed Barbarossa and onward there are a lot of German units that have to be added and a truly stupendous number of Russian units. Without compression I suspect they will have a hard time getting it onto one disk.

Welcome to the board and thanks for the thread. Not all of our dogs bite.

[Jinxx]

I understand now about the art space, but this leads me to my second suggestion.

Make a core game that would be able to be updated and backwards compatible and sell the expansions to the core set.

This would allow the expansions to be filled with tons of art. The core game no matter how complicated would never grow beyond 1 CD Im sure.

Just a thought.

josh

[Jinxx]

Brummbär

The fact is you were rude. Explain it anyway you want.

your continued posts only reinforce it.

leave me alone, I'm getting the answers I want from other people that can take the time to answer my questions, and take a few seconds more to make it polite.

Josh

[Panzer_Meyer]

Jinxx, Welcome,

I have SFC, it was a good game, but with bugs, I have the patches and it is good. But right now I devote my time to CM and DoD (HL mod) and TRIBES2 (GOOOOOOD).

I would also want the ability of all the CM games to merge together so you can have all kinds of battles at any time. But for me it's not a big deal.

I rather wait for CM2, knowing it will be better (in it's own right) than CMBO.

I myself being a HUGE eastern front enthusiast, all the books I have relate to the eastern front . There is a lot to learn concerning the eatern front, becuase of it's enormpus size. All the different equipment ranging from the early battle all the way to the late, and heavy equipment at the end of the war.

WHOOT, WHOOT, CM2 !!!!!!

[Mattias]

Jinxx,

With all due respect, I think you are underestimating the complexity of the subject matter.

All wargames are more or less "scripted" to enhance the flavour of a particular theatre of operation. At the tactical level it would be an Herculean task to build a core game like you suggest, simply because "bullets do not fly the same way all over the world".

The Operational Art of War is an example of a game that attempts something along the lines you are suggesting, but though it succeeds quit well it is still much less detailed than CM.

Advanced Squad Leader is perhaps the best comparison. A basic system of core rules with addon rules for different theatres.

M.

[Jinxx]

Bingo! ASL

make that ;>

IIRC this game started out as an SL project.

While i do understand that what i am asking is hard, most good things arent easy.

Again, just a suggestion of what would make *ME* very happy...doesnt mean that other want the same thing...tho i dont see why they wouldn't if it were possible.

Josh

[Tiger]

My last post was not directed to you Jinxx. I'm not going to apologize for being rude for my opinions when I have personal experience of finding them out the hard way.

Your ideas have merit but I disagree with the SFC references you made, that's all.

Happiness and peace

[GriffinCheng+]

Hello Jinxx! Welcome aboard! I am aka "SFC_Griffin" out there.

I think nobody treats you like a "newbie"! And I think I treat newbies well. BTW, you style of subject is too hard to miss.

First off, I like SFC and SFC2 very much, despite of the bugs, and I don't play D2 at all.

I understand the difficults Taldren facing in SFC series, that is a licensed product anyway and in tightly control by a big publisher, unlike CMBO.

Somehow I think if SFC is implmented as turn-based, WEGO system, many complaints about the fleet control and fighter/PF AI problems goes away completely.

This is just a thought.

Anyway, afaik, CM2 will stick with Eastern Front battles only. CMBO is still an independent product, but CM2 will be the largest (in terms of equipment list and terrian types) of all planned series. Anyway, we have already seen a lot of potential for mods and TCs. If you do not aware, there is already a TC called "Desert Fox Deserts" prepared by a group of good men which protrays a number of battle happened in North Africa from 1940-1943. Even though most equipment in CMBO is far "advanced" to be used, it is fun and highly playable. Their URL is at Desert Fox Desert Rat (Yes, this is an ad! Sue me! )

Griffin.

P.S. I suggest you try TCP/IP play, if you haven't, it is great!