Michael Emrys Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by Becket: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael emrys: And I say that if we are going to opt for fictional situations, we should start with The Lord of the Rings! MichaelEgads! Think of all the gamey hobbit rushes! </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by Boroughboy: I would like to see an engine that uses a higher level of opereations. The smallest units being platoons.There is a problem with games at exactly this scale. And that involves such things as accounting for individual vehicle placement and facing within the unit. That's important for determining things like penetration. This can be averaged out for larger units without losing too much fidelity, but gets to be a problem at this scale. Better IMO to use companies or battalions. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awdougherty Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 I don't know how this would work, but I'd kind of like to see somebody tackle games like Air Strike and Air Superiority. Those were old Game Designer Workshop games simulating air to air and air to ground combat. I'm not saying do a literal conversion, but I dug those games. CMBB has replaced a few WW2 board games in my library, I'd like to see some other classics get a great computer counterpart. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by Von Paulus: Why you American people only think of your army ? Cold War is uninteresting at the level of tactical battles : There is nothing known !!!!!Well, There are the Arab-Israeli Wars. They're pretty interesting. FRANCE 1940 Would be Combat Mission 3, with Netherlands, Belgium, the BEF, French troops and Italian soldiers hmmm ... with the Balkans and Greece ... good ... better than Korea and/or Vietnam.Don't worry. That's scheduled for CM4, along with Poland and Norway. Plenty of action there. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by awdougherty: I don't know how this would work, but I'd kind of like to see somebody tackle games like Air Strike and Air Superiority. Those were old Game Designer Workshop games simulating air to air and air to ground combat. I'm not saying do a literal conversion, but I dug those games. CMBB has replaced a few WW2 board games in my library, I'd like to see some other classics get a great computer counterpart.As long as we are just fanning hot air about the room, there are a couple of boardgames produced by Yaquinto that I would love to see computerized: Flat Top and Bomber. Both superb simulations and both crying out for a computer. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by Michael emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Becket: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael emrys: And I say that if we are going to opt for fictional situations, we should start with The Lord of the Rings! MichaelEgads! Think of all the gamey hobbit rushes! </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 I take it you are not familiar with the full panoply of books and articles written about Middle Earth, its inhabitants, geography, history, etc., some written by Professor Tolkien himself, many more by others. I further take it you have never been party to any of the nit-picking debates that this profusion of material can give rise to. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Such as "who is Tom Bombadil?" "Was Sauron really Hitler?" "Exactly how powerful was Gandalf?" You think the Stug thread has taken off, you aint seen nothin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: When you think 'modern war' you've got to think outside the box! Modern War may be Abrams vs T80s, but it's also Reagan-financed mercinary death squads terrorizing El Salavador civilians in the 80's. The next CM game engine has definitely got to have a civilian component. The civilian component IS 'modern war'!I disagree. That is guerilla warfare, which is outside the scope of CM. There was certainly quite a lot of deliberate terrorization of civilians on the East front in WW2, but I don't see it in CM, and I don't miss it at all. Do you? Scipio: Well, I guess the current CMBB engine has still lost of 'errors' and 'problems' and limitations. To name something, the visibility engine is...you know? No starshells, fire doesn't change something, too, always static view range, no real dusk/dawn effects (don't tell me that visibility doesn't change within an half hour or more). The artillery system is still simplistic. The weather is always static. No horses , no motorbikes, no multi-turret tanks. No moving weels. The graphic is maybe the best of all wargames, but it's engine is somewhat 'clumsy'.What is your point? All this is known, and is why BFC is moving forward with a new engine. Perhaps you just enjoy stating the obvious? Originally posted by Michael emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />FRANCE 1940 Would be Combat Mission 3, with Netherlands, Belgium, the BEF, French troops and Italian soldiers hmmm ... with the Balkans and Greece ... good ... better than Korea and/or Vietnam.Don't worry. That's scheduled for CM4, along with Poland and Norway. Plenty of action there. Michael</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Becket Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: With only one reference book to refer to?One? One? *sputters* One? Oh, and SgtGoody, for merely mentioning the hated question re Tom Bombadil, you deserve to fall into the hands of a band of hungry Uruks. I shall now be forced to punish you mightily in the ROWIII Overflow Tourney. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Paulus Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Hmmm ... OK there's no Americans here. The only problem I see through Soviet-Western colnflict is that it's a fictional fight, moreover western troops were largely better... A CM3 with fictional fights makes me thinks to a C&C ... Pacific fights are very interesting but based on the navy and the air force, who's not the principal point in CM ... besides japanese troops were just massacrated in savage fights vs. Marines who took heavy losses at each fight ... for that reason I propose to stay focused on WWII with France 1940+Balkans/Greece+Norway or Sicily/Italy fights If you are looking for a good french Napoleonian game buy "Austerlitz : Napoleon's Greatest victory" at www.store4war.com A very good strategic game with fair graphics. Paulus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted January 14, 2003 Author Share Posted January 14, 2003 Von Paulus, hi, “moreover western troops were largely better” Not sure about that one , “some” western professional troops may have been, but I would put western conscripts at the bottom of the heap ! I will spare you the rant on why . All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertram Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Kipanderson, that is to much a generalisation. The cold war ran from '45 to '91, and the Nato and the Eastblok both consited of lots of countries. The quality of the soldiers, be they conscript or profesiional, of both sides varied considerable between the years and the countries. The post-Korea US conscript was something completely different from the post-Vietnam one, which was quite different from the late '80's one, both in morale, command training and equipment. Same goes for the other countries, but in different years. Bertram 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schugger Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 But even there the Russians have the Arena hard kill self defence system Well, that thing is already in the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Originally posted by Michael emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boroughboy: I would like to see an engine that uses a higher level of opereations. The smallest units being platoons.There is a problem with games at exactly this scale. And that involves such things as accounting for individual vehicle placement and facing within the unit. That's important for determining things like penetration. This can be averaged out for larger units without losing too much fidelity, but gets to be a problem at this scale. Better IMO to use companies or battalions. Michael</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavalryMan Posted January 14, 2003 Share Posted January 14, 2003 Totally out of the question. Doing this means pushing the new engine off our plates until it is done. The main problem we face is we can not do more than one thing at a time. So if we do x, then y doesn't happen until x is complete. And no chance of starting on z at all. SteveSo are BFC planning on expanding their team for the next phase, and if so where are the adverts being placed and when? [ January 14, 2003, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: CavalryMan ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scipio Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: What is your point? All this is known, and is why BFC is moving forward with a new engine. Perhaps you just enjoy stating the obvious?Yes, I always enjoy to hear myself talking. There's nothing better then a good monologue, cause I always have such a fine and intelligent interlocutor when doing so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted January 15, 2003 Author Share Posted January 15, 2003 Bertram, “that is too much a generalisation.” Yes, I admit that, it is very much a generalization . But the factors that make for good troops are well known, the factors that make for good combat morale are also now known, and although there will be many exceptions, if one knows how troops were trained it is possible to take a “generalized view” on the likely relative quality of the troops. All good fun, All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Originally posted by Spook: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Boroughboy: I would like to see an engine that uses a higher level of opereations. The smallest units being platoons.There is a problem with games at exactly this scale. And that involves such things as accounting for individual vehicle placement and facing within the unit. That's important for determining things like penetration. This can be averaged out for larger units without losing too much fidelity, but gets to be a problem at this scale. Better IMO to use companies or battalions. Michael</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hardcampa Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Just my ramblings. I don't see any point at all with moving away from WW2 if the engine is going to be a total rewrite. Opinions about an engine we don't know anything about is impossible. If the engine got per-pixel lightning (which I think we'll see almost every game use in 2 years from now), the quality of the models/shadows and light calculations will be totally lifelike. This alone will make a big impact on everything within the game if you use it to enhance reality. Like spotting the flashes of explosions from far away etc. Using the rising sun to your advantage isn't a new technique i.e. If the new engine calculates fragments flying around. Well then you got a totally new ruleset again. If this sounds too advanced to you people you should realise that the calculations I gave hints on above is being used today in games. That's nothing new, so what will 2 years from now hold... Once again, I think we can speculate but to predict and say what will be and not is ... way too hard before we hear any specifics. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMik1 Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Originally posted by Von Paulus: Hmmm ... OK there's no Americans here. PaulusNo, we are here, just watching........... BigMik1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted January 15, 2003 Share Posted January 15, 2003 Watching, yes, always watching... (heh heh) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.