Even more ranting in praise of the Cold War for CMX2 :)

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Airpower was vastly more dangerous to ground targets than in WWII, yet far away from the kind of lethality seen today.

Which brings up a question I want to ask, how will airpower be simulated in CMx2 compared to CMx1?

[David I]

Did Steve mention Horses?

DavidI

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Smaller, but deeper, more specific to time period and place would be a change for the good.

To give an example. I am very much hoping that when it is again the turn of the Eastern Front, in a winter time period, there will ship fully weathered, winter camo on the AFVs, and winter uniforms.

The problem with mods, particularly AFV mods, is that you end up with a range of camo styles/colour saturation settings in the same game. However good the mods, and some are stunning, this looks unrealistic to me. Far more detailed modelling of the AFVs will also be possible with a smaller range in each game.

Plus, as Andreas mentioned, it will allow more specific terrain graphics. All very good news.

All the bones thrown by Steve have so far been hugely encouraging just what I hoped for… with just one “possible” exception.

Steve did warn that we may not be able to edit whatever replaces CMBB/CMAK style operations. As someone who spends 90% of my CM time in the editor…this is a bit of a blow. CM fans do not come more hardcore…but I have only ever played a truly tiny number of the shipped scenarios and operations. I like to build my own maps, from topographical maps, then build my own scenarios or ship the map off to some other trusted scenarios designer such as Andreas. The thought of “having” to play the shipped operations, or play no operations, would be a blow.

For example, I am currently building a 3km by 6km operational map in CMBB from topographical maps of the Korsun area.

Deeper and more specific to place and time is very good news. But within the limits of the given time and place a loss of editing ability would be a shame. In my very predujice view .

All the best,

Kip.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by David I:

Did Steve mention Horses?

Well, it is going to be a bit tricky to do Ancients, Napoleonics and ACW without horses, isn't it?

I hope we'll also have camels, elephants, war-dogs and flaming pigs.

Hamsters I can manage without.

All the best,

John.

[flamingknives]

Wot, no hamstertruppen?

[Andreas]

Originally posted by John D Salt:

I hope we'll also have camels, elephants, war-dogs and flaming pigs.

All the best,

John. [/QB]

You have got my attention now, oh wearer of the orange knit-vest.

Where on earth were flaming pigs used in warfare?

[junk2drive]

Didn't I see Andreas and JonS at AHF talking about exploding bats ????

[Andreas]

You may very well think that, but I could not possibly comment.

[junk2drive]

Nah, you two were in another thread.

Here is the post I was thinking of:

"One of my favorites was the incendiary bats! The idea was to drop them over Japanese cities, and let them roost in the eaves of the wooden buildings. The time-delayed incendiary bomblets would go off, burning large swathes of the city! Sheesh!!"

[Harper88]

Hopefully it will also include King Arthur's cattlepult.

[MrSpkr]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by John D Salt:

I hope we'll also have camels, elephants, war-dogs and flaming pigs.

All the best,

John.

You have got my attention now, oh wearer of the orange knit-vest.

Where on earth were flaming pigs used in warfare? </font>

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by MrSpkr:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by John D Salt:

I hope we'll also have camels, elephants, war-dogs and flaming pigs.

All the best,

John.

You have got my attention now, oh wearer of the orange knit-vest.

Where on earth were flaming pigs used in warfare? </font>

[Michael Emrys]

I was always fond of scythed chariots. Not really that great tactically against an enemy that was hip to them, but wonderful terror weapons against the uninitiated.

Michael

[Hortlund]

Will there be swallows in cmx2?

[Battlefront.com]

Obviously CMx2 is no CMx1 with a more narrow focus, so I'm not even going to bother getting into Rollstoy's question. However, if someone wants to toss him a bunch of links to bones I've tossed out, I am sure he'll be happier

The concept of narrower, deeper focus is to make each game more intense and well rounded. However, you have to remember that we aren't going to take the 1 year we had spent on simulating a whole front and reinvest it into a narrow slice of the front. Instead we are going to take SOME of that time and flesh out a more focused setting and spend the rest of that saved time on doing something else entirely. Example:

Our first WWII ETO game might be just Normandy between Americans and Germans from this date to that date. You get it into your hands after only 12 months of development instead of 24. You have a blast with it... then 6 months later maybe there is a "module" that is released that offers something different... like Commonwealth in Normandy from this date to that date. Price is lower than the full game, but the full game is required. The "module" can be done by an auxillarly development team which allows us to keep going forward on the next title. So 6 months later you might have CM- Pigs In Space; The Baccon 6 Conundrum.

What this means is that in the same time it would take to make a single "broad front" WWII NW European Theater of Ops you get two "narrow front", though deeper, ETO games as well as an entirely different game.

If you extend this out a bit further using past history as a guide, the 2nd full game (Pigs in Space) would take 24 months to develop. This means in 12 months you are getting what would (in the past) have taken us 48 months to make. Under the new development philosophy in that 48 months you'd have 4 "primary" games and perhaps 8 "modules". HUGE difference.

Now, to the jaded reader this might sound like a money grubbing ploy on our part. Far from it!! The reality is we make games because we LOVE making games. It is very frustrating for us that we have to spend so much time doing one thing when there are dozens of things that we also want to do. Think about it... for the last 9 years we have done nothing more than WWII ETO! While we are by no means sick of ETO combat (still our favorite), we will be if we have to spend the next 9 years on just ETO

To put this in a way that I think you guys can all relate to... think of all the wargame ideas you've had over your life. Now think about how disapointint and frustrating it is to not be able to play those ideas in actual games of your own design. Now imagine that you make games for a living and have the expertise and ability to theoretically make all of them come to life. BUT... you are tied to a philosophy that allows you to do only one every 9 years. Dontcha think ya might be a little bit jazz'd about changing things a wee bit in order to scratch all those itches instead of gouging one so deep that it leaves a scar? Dontcha?

I'm not saying that you guys don't understand this... but the record of "narrow front" and "module" type games is not all that good. Usually the games aren't really that deep, the modules that exciting, and/or the prices pegged correctly. Guess I felt I had to reassure you that we know this VERY well and will absolutely not be going that route. We like money, but we like making the best games out there far more

Steve

[c3k]

Steve,

Well, disappointment sets in. Already I see the faster cycle time resulting in a loss of quality. (Sigh). "Pigs in Space"? Steve, flaming pigs were NOT used in space. Lobsters were. Especially Lobsters of Doom. The pigs were purely planetary devices. Sheesh. How could pigs burn in the vacuum of space?

Thanks for keeping us in the loop. It sounds like we'll have lots of great games to keep us busy.

Regards,

Ken

[kipanderson]

Steve,

It does all sound great, The fact that ETO remains your favourite is very good news… all of it sounds good. I am very hardened to the fact that not every title will be my thing, but that I will still end up with more titles I do enjoy than was possible with CMX1.

I am just very narrow minded… WII plus the now vetoed Cold War , are close-ish to the only subjects that “float my boat”… to use your phrase.

Steve… just to ask, “if” you are willing to make a guess in public, what is your best guess of when we will know the settings of the first two games?

You have us all very well trained in that it is “done when it is done”, but are we talking nearer September or say, July, for the release of the titles/settings for the first two games? The first game to follow at the turn of the year.

More titles with narrower focus is better for sure.

All sounds like fun,

All the best,

Kip.

PS. CM series and Civil War Bull Run are the only PC games I play… I really am “very” picky … hence the above question.

[ May 22, 2005, 12:11 PM: Message edited by: kipanderson ]

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by c3k:

Steve,

Well, disappointment sets in. Already I see the faster cycle time resulting in a loss of quality. (Sigh). "Pigs in Space"? Steve, flaming pigs were NOT used in space. Lobsters were. Especially Lobsters of Doom. The pigs were purely planetary devices. Sheesh. How could pigs burn in the vacuum of space?

Thanks for keeping us in the loop. It sounds like we'll have lots of great games to keep us busy.

Regards,

Ken

With the right chemicals, you can make nearly anything burn nearly anywhere. Trust me.

[Battlefront.com]

With the right chemicals, you can make nearly anything burn nearly anywhere. Trust me.

Well, with a name like "flamingknives" who is going to doubt you?

Back on topic...

I can assure each and every one of you that Space Lobsters of Doom is as much on our radar as it always has been. I am someone who lives in an area where Lobsters are kinda like the sacred cows of India, except boiled with lots of butter so as to draw in those tourism Dollars. Have no fears about our seriousness in this matter of Lobsters!

Now, completely off topic...

When will you guys know what we're going to do next (and right after that)? I don't know. I'm thinking mid Summer. We really don't want to announce anything until we have the game a little further along visually. Pictures and small QT movies are worth thousands of words, so it would be more efficient for us to have a larger discussion with those sorts of materials available to you guys.

Steve

[junk2drive]

Here's a coming game at wargamer.com

Cuban Missle Crisis

Turn based with RTS

[dalem]

Sounds to me a little like the ASL run.

ASL rulebook released with Beyond Valor - gave us the basic rules and 90% of what we needed to fight the Germans against the Russians. Then a series of modules that each added some rules or refined extant rules while bringing us a new "front", time period, and/or participant.

Seems familiar, seems reasonable, seems yummy.

-dale

[Schrullenhaft]

I've really enjoyed the completeness of the CMx1 series. CMBB & CMAK offered a lot of equipment and units not found in many other games. Romanians, Hungarians and Italians are hardly ever represented in other 3D games of the Eastern Front. While the CM series hasn't reached deep into esoteric units/vehicles (for a number of reasons), it has been great to have a certain sense of completeness to the OOB.

The new "module"-based game concept for the CMx2 series sounds great if it will allow BFC/BTS to develop/update more games. However I am weary that the "completeness"-factor will disappear. Would an ASL-like 'Axis Minors' module be released for the Eastern Front or would this be seen as something that wouldn't generate enough sales and not be considered ? Or take the Napoleonic-era, would only Waterloo and Austerlitz be done and the rest forgotten ?

I wholly understand BTS/BFC's business decisions in going with a limited scope of time frame and participants; I just hope that, like me, they want to see the full range of units and armaments depicted.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

When will you guys know what we're going to do next (and right after that)? I don't know. I'm thinking mid Summer.

Oh goody. Now we can devote the next ten threads to speculating on what Steve means by "midsummer". Does he mean the old traditional usage that puts it somewhere around the Summer Solstice? Or is he thinking more in terms of halfway between the Solstice and the Autumnal Equinox?

Stay tuned...

LOL.

Michael

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

Hi,

Well I guess that is the end of that…

Thank the maker....

[Ardem]

Yeah this has got me quiet concerned for the future of the CM series from what battlefront have said. But it is a wait and see.

One thing I hate is lack of customisation, we have a great community of modders and scenario developer. If BF wish to hamstring them to get more bang for buck and narrow the ability for unti selection or creation of unique ways of playing CM, then it won't be long till another company out there fills the gap.

A lot of the FPS development companies understand that modding and creative juices is what drives communities which keeps them purchasing their games. I am afraid if BF take this line in CM that will be isolating their community and if you do that you will start loosing your customers and the CM series will die.

But again its all wait and see their is a lot of gaming developers now heading down the realistic RTS or WeGo systems and RTS bar levels games are dying. And my loyalties will always lie in the company that allows it community to create not just participate.

PS Pacific War will suck, like all other pacific war games.