The_Capt Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 A thought and a question. Thought: The CM engine could probably be used to model any number of small unit actions from cavemen to modern. I am speaking of something like TalonSofts Battleground Series. Question: Has this issue been discussed and is there any plans for expansion of the series beyond WWII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 WW2, if something else, theres going to be a one buyer less...:/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 WW II is terrific! However, add a CM engine for Napoleonics, ACW... and I'd buy 'em all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 9, 2001 Author Share Posted January 9, 2001 Oh c'mon! WW2 was not the final word on combined arms tactics. Even Steel Panthers went modern. There would be an issue of scale (ie larger maps) but systems are only getting faster. I think an Middle East game would be a blast...ATGMs, BMPs, mmmm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 We would love to expand CM outside of WWII, but not at the expense of it. At the moment that is our only choice. So our plans for the next 2 years do not include anything but WWII games. After we rewrite the CM game engine, we MIGHT be able to do multiple game development concurrently. Modern warfare is at the top of our list for non-WWII based games. But obviously we have interest in other periods, like Napoleonics, US Civil War, and Korea. We also would love to do Mideval, fantasy, and sci-fi too, but there is only so much we can do in a lifetime so it is doubtful this will ever happen. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 Nevermind! [This message has been edited by Phoenix (edited 01-09-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 Steve, For a modern version, a Gulf War theater is a must. Let's see what the Iraqis could have done under someone's command other than dumb-assed Saddam. Of course a Warsaw Pact and NATO conflict would be a must also. But just a question though on the CMII engine though.......what kind of major changes *would* you make to the engine? Inclusion of 3D aircraft? 1:1 unit ratio concerning infantry each showing individual weapons including AT-assets? ------------------ "Live by the sword, live a good LOOONG life!"-Minsc, BGII "Boo points, I punch."--Minsc, BGII Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 9, 2001 Author Share Posted January 9, 2001 You guy (BTS) ever think of licensing the engine "a la" Quake/Unreal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priest Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 NOOOOOOOOOO! When it comes down to it Steve and Charles make CM what it is. Their attention to detail and research is what has allowed CM to please so many. As the games developed went farther away from them the quality would spiral downward. Now this is not always tru. Half-life was never interesting to me but my Rainbow Six friends tell me that CounterStrike (based on the half-life engine) is excellent. but generally it goes down hill. Although Steve and Charles could always expand and keep hiring guys like Matt and Kwazy. That could span the workload and keep the quality because these guys would be as fanatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 CM XXI: War of the Rings CM XXII: Nordic Invasion of England 800 CE .... By this time Steve and Charles will 120 years old! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolfpack Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: But obviously we have interest in other periods, like Napoleonics, US Civil War, and Korea. Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ahhh...Civil War? Man, you know how long it's been since a good Civil War game came out? Never being a fan of SM Gettysburg and games of it's like, I have to go all the way back to No Greater Glory. Now there was a fun game I'll never be able to play again....Thanks Windows 2000...bastards...mumble mumble. ------------------ It is nearly always better to be beaten and learn, rather than to win and take no new knowledge from that victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
argie Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: ... and Korea... Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I hear Korea? Mmmmhhhhh... Ariel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: CM XXI: War of the Rings B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> LoL! I can just see commanding a platoon of fat, furry-footed midgets... Actually, LOTR would be cool...I loved the books as a kid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by argie: I hear Korea? Mmmmhhhhh... Ariel<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, Korea during the 17th Century had some really interesting conflicts between the Chinese and the Japanese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Capt: You guy (BTS) ever think of licensing the engine "a la" Quake/Unreal? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Not gonna happen. Ever. And CM isn't really an "engine" that can be modded like Quake and the others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 I would love to see a sci-fi game based on the CM engine. Probably more than I'd like to see non-WW2 historical CM games, actually. What can I say, I'm a geek. The last sci-fi strategy game that I really enjoyed (okay, so it was turn-based tactical, close enough) was the original X-Com, and that was...'93 I think? Mmm. X-Com tech tree and strategic level + CM tactical engine. Drool. Drool. ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super [This message has been edited by Chupacabra (edited 01-09-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 Double post. [This message has been edited by Chupacabra (edited 01-09-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deanco Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: We also would love to do Mideval, fantasy, and sci-fi too, but there is only so much we can do in a lifetime so it is doubtful this will ever happen. Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK, thanks for that info. I am oficially shutting up about that subject from now on. However... In terms of "licensing" an "engine" goes, I think there is something in CM that deserves, nay, cries out to be licensed. For want of a better term I'll call it the TacAI. What I really mean is the routines used to determine the "human" behavior of the units, their realistic reactions under fire and stress, and the slightly random nature of their reactions to boot... am I the only one who thinks that this AI weewees on all other game AI's from a great height? I have a dream. I wanna see an RTS or whatever where you bandbox the units and tell them to attack, but if the battle is going bad, the guys will run away or refuse to move ala CM or Close Combat. Whether or not this can appeal to a mainstream crowd is a matter of opinion, of course. But there are 250 RTS games where you bandbox the units, and they march to their deaths. There are none where they have human reactions, except CM, CC, and possibly a few others I'm not aware of. IMHO that could be the "next big thing" in RTS, and that's why I'd like to see the TacAI licensed out to other developers. OK I'll shut up now. ------------------ DeanCo-- CM interface mods: http://mapage.cybercable.fr/deanco/ so many games...so little time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted January 9, 2001 Share Posted January 9, 2001 Pheonix wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And CM isn't really an "engine" that can be modded like Quake and the others. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Correct. Although this will change a lot when we rewrite the engine, it will still take a very talented and dedicated bunch of people to transform it into a game of CM's level of quality and attention to detail. We rather not let the engine get out of our grasp since we would then lose control over making sure that some piece of crap wasn't churned out using our engine and good name. But folks... we can't cross a bridge until we come to it. We aren't close to it yet, so let's keep in mind that this discussion is way ahead of its time. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Ingram Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 CM is a brilliant war game concept. The we go idea (rather than realtime or you go I go) is so good I don't know why nobody thought about it before. The concept could apply to any wargame. (for me I'd probably buy anyone of them though I'd love to see a Napoleonic version). I think that a lot of software companies are going to think about designing games using this concept. I'll know in the years to come who to thank for a revolution in wargames. Thanks BTS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Capt Posted January 10, 2001 Author Share Posted January 10, 2001 "We Go" concept has been seen before. First time I saw it was in the old SSI "Computer Ambush". Still a good idea reintroduced within brilliant packaging does not lessen the life affirming entity which has become "COMBAT MISSION". HOO-WAA!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The_Capt: "We Go" concept has been seen before. First time I saw it was in the old SSI "Computer Ambush". Still a good idea reintroduced within brilliant packaging does not lessen the life affirming entity which has become "COMBAT MISSION". HOO-WAA!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> First I saw it was Global Conflict. It was similar to CM in that there were 60sec turns with order phases in between. It was 2d, overhead, futuristic though. But the mechanics worked pretty good. 1992-93 time fram IIRC. ------------------ Jeff Abbott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonMcGuire Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wolfpack: I have to go all the way back to No Greater Glory. Now there was a fun game I'll never be able to play again....Thanks Windows 2000...bastards...mumble mumble. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Whistler (the successor to Win2K) has a compatibility mode which provides a pretty good runtime envoironment for Win95, Win98, and Win2K apps which don't run under Whistler natively. I've actually dug up a few games that worked under Win98 and not Win2K and they ran in Whistler's compatibility mode. Worth a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 Hrm, okay, here's a question - how's Whistler at dealing with DOS-native applications? I wanna be able to run Aces Over Europe again, dammit! ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 First time I saw "WeGo" was Chris Crawford's Eastern Front on my Atari 800. However, there is a subtle (yet fundamental) difference between these older forms of "WeGo" and games like TacOps and Combat Mission. The earlier games tended to have orders issued at one time by both sides, resolved things in sequential order instead of simultaneous order. So you would have one mini-battle, then another, then another, then another. Put another way... Eastern Front - Each side plots its moves, then combat is resolved. One unit fights another, then system moves to another unit which fights another. War In Russia - Each side plots its moves, then combat is resolved. One group of units fights another group (i.e. target hex), then system moves to another group (target hex). TacOps - Each side plots its moves, then combat is resolved. Units move simultaneously, but combat is resolved one unit at a time. HOWEVER, from what I can tell (never asked the Major about this) damage is not sustained until everybody has had their shot for the particular slice of time being resolved. So this is pretty close to "realtime" resolution in actuality. Combat Mission - Each side plots its moves, then combat is resolved. Units move simultaneously, and combat is resolved simultaneously. This means two units can shoot/move at the same fraction of a second instead of waiting for something else to happen first. There are other variations on the WeGo theme, but these are the most relevant ones I think. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts