CMx2 bones a plenty (renamed)

[Stan Hope Park]

As I recall you chose the starting year, army, and front. You then bought your "Basic formation" (approx 1 battalion), you then went to your 1st battle at which time you could buy "Support" units. You fought the battle afterwhich the time advanced a couple of weeks or a month (depending on your losses and whether you moved to a different front). You took on replacements and upgraded units, units gained experiance and then you advanced to the next battle.

Hmmm! This is similar to what we have already (Bitlong).

Has anyone come up with a set of rules for solo campaigning of the *other* variety of campaign (meta)?

I wonder eternally about cobbling something together with a hex grid. You can write orders and introduce delays to reflect C3, but at the end of the day you wrote the orders. There is no fog of war without artificial intelligence or another member of the species.

Does the Solo Wargame Society still exist? Do they have a website?

[Stan Hope Park]

P.S. I guess this explains why Close Combat V is *the* version to mod nowadays.

[hoolaman]

I am hoping (and assuming) that if the new engine can be adapted to pre-vehicle eras then there will be a much better treatment of footsoldiers. I am guessing that to do so formations will form an aspect of the new engine.

I always though that it was a failing of the old/(current) CM that a squad behaved and was represented a lot like a vehicle with 10-12 redundant pieces. Maybe it was convenient to represent a squad with a cardboard tile in 1970's era tabletop wargames, but not on the PC in 2006.

It would be nice if a small unit action, say controlling a platoon or maybe a company of infantry, was better represented. I want to control the cohesiveness of an advance via formations and small manouvres, or send out one or two man scouts. I hope to see each man and his morale and experience.

I hope (squad/team) formations are at least represented, with maybe an option for "Auto NCO" to pass such mundane details on to an AI system when dealing with larger battles.

Another cool feature would be to recieve orders from the next higher command level as the battle goes on. Imagine on turn 12 you get orders to retreat and your assault turns to a delaying withdrawl.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by fytinghellfish:

but I'm curious to know if you (BFC) don't have an interest in, say, modern combat

CMX2 first release will be modern combat.

[hellfish]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

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

but I'm curious to know if you (BFC) don't have an interest in, say, modern combat

CMX2 first release will be modern combat. </font>

[Ruthless]

Second Kip's request that maps, troop positions, and results are output in to a (human) readable format at the end of a match (and able to be read in in the same format) so that users can make their own campaigns.

[Agent-006]

Hmmm. Is it possible that the new BFC product will ship with a model editor, particularly for buildings and terrain? One of my only gripes with the CMx1 games was that you often could not give a map the buildings or terrain that suited it the best.

Or am I just dreaming out loud

[Battlefront.com]

Dreaming out loud

We'll never release something like that. Too hard to do and no economic incentive.

Steve

[Agent-006]

Ah I understand. How about something a little bit more basic, but still good. In the map editor, you could make it possible to build a stand alone 'wall' for a house, and allow the designer to choose the size of these walls. In this way a map designer could connect the walls together themselves and have atleast a little bit more variation with the buildings.

However I realise this brings up possible problems with having the building properly textured. I suppose this could only be fixed by having the map designer fit the texture after the building has been made.

[Mord]

The things I have always hoped for in the game are mostly visual. I've always hoped for some kind of casualty toggle, where you can decide the amount of bodies on the screen. I like to review the maps at he end of the battles to see where the hardest fighting took place and one marker per 12 men never seems to do it justice.

Another thing would be the trees taking on damaged effects as they are pummled.

The third would be more men per crew. Something less static looking. Loading guns and firing, an extra man feeding an MG42 while it fires. Maybe even boxes of ammo around the gun emplacements to make it look more like it's emplaced.

My fourth would be more overall animations in the squad units. And maybe a toggle to show up to five men per squad.

And the ability to place wrecked vehicles on the maps when you make them.

And here's to hoping that modability stays the same!

Mord.

EDITED: P.S hey Steve have you guys noticed how we haven't had fourteen different speculation threads every two days since you popped up? Kinda nice!

[ January 14, 2005, 03:30 AM: Message edited by: Mord ]

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by Agent-006:

In the map editor, you could make it possible to build a stand alone 'wall' for a house, and allow the designer to choose the size of these walls.

Walls never satisfied me in CM. These are too small and not acceptable to correctly depict european cities and villages. The small walls may be usefull only for mediterranean coutryside, but not for Normandy.

Also, in the editor, a small fix could make a big change in designing : put the wall in the tile's edge, instead of the middle...

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Bogdan:

Also, in the editor, a small fix could make a big change in designing : put the wall in the tile's edge, instead of the middle...

Here's a new suggestion: instead of having linear features like roads or walls as tiles, have them as lines that can be drawn over any tiles, like for instance a road with fences right on both sides, instead of 20 m apart from it. Also, buildings that are placed as objects that can be rotated to any direction.

Oh, wait. I've suggested this before. Still, I think it'd make map making so much more flexible if just the forests, fields, ponds etc. features were limited by the grid. IMHO it'd be much preferable to having a smaller grid.

[Thomm]

Personally, I would like to have a game which displays individual soldiers, is continuous-time, *but* can be stopped at any moment! Then, you should be able to rewind the action to whatever time you desire and watch it from any angle and in any speed. Being able to pause for giving orders is not enough, IMHO. An inability to give oders during turns consumes too much time, on the other hand!

The complete game state should be saveable at any time, including the "movie" of past events.

If desired, detailed information about all actions and events should be available (who hit whom when with what effect).

The game should be able to handle a lot of persistent smoke! That is, whereever a bullet or shell strikes, dust and smoke will hang around for *several* seconds. This will highlight locations of heavy fighting.

Objects are shaded by sunlight and throw shadows on themselves and the environment.

Buildings can be demolished in an iterative and physically meaningful way (not the all-or-nothing system we have now).

Just a small desireable feature list ...

Best regards,

Thomm

[flamingknives]

I'd like to see longer turns, so you could set up an assault on an enemy position, and it would have played out by the time you get to give orders again, rather than being able to react on the fly.

Maybe.

And higher formation AI, so platoons would react as platoons, not a motely array of squads.

And weapon heat tracking, coupled with rapid and sustained fire options and ammo resupply.

[YankeeDog]

Getting back to the whole "campaign" question, if they haven't already, I would encourage BFC to take a good look at the operation Storfang campaign done in CMBB by Nils Eikelenboom and his team.

IMHO, it's pretty remarkable what they've managed to get out of the current engine in terms of an immersive, operational campaign-based series. It think they've done a pretty remarkable job of balancing realism with an immersive, storyline feel.

My only criticism of Operation Storfang is that it is so large (both in terms of the individual battles and the overall scope), that it can become a bit daunting to play. But the same idea could obviously be executed with a smaller-sized operation as the background, and incorporating somewhat smaller battles.

Given how fun Storfang is, I'm really looking forward to seeing what BFC can do with some kind of operational campaign system that's actually built into the game, rather than grafted on post-fact.

Cheers,

YD

[c3k]

Why CMx2 will never model cavalry or any early, pre-gunpowder conflicts: the clue is staring us in the face. Go back to Steve's most recent posting. I quote, "Cavarly", "cavlary", "mideval", and, how can any ring "rull" them all?

It's obvious from the above, that Steve has a mind-block in place about all these subjects. Damn. I guess I'm stuck with guns and tanks.

Oh, and another just for Steve.

Regards,

Ken "because I've NEVER misspellled anything"

[Sirocco]

Will QB Operations and Campaigns be added?

[Battlefront.com]

I'm really not here to introduce new information, but I will remind people of stuff we've already said will be in CMx2 Specifically, 1:1 man representation and terrain graphics which are based on much smaller "tile" sizes.

Significantly smaller tile size was simply not possible back when CM was originally coded. Tile size is the root cause for pretty much all the "shortcomings" noted about the graphical representations over the past 5 years. With the new system (which basically doesn't use tiles at all) all sorts of things have changed. However, because CMx2 games won't contain hand crafted scenarios (like other games, especially FPS types) there will still be a bit of generic feel to individual objects. The only way to avoid that is to eliminate Quick Battles and the Editor, which I am sure you guys don't want

We are looking into ways of allowing people to add customized skins for objects on a scenario by scenairo basis. It won't allow for customized building shapes. Too early to say if this will happen or not as it is still on the "if we have time" list.

And a reminder that we are not talking about having some sort of über campaign system for CMx2. It will be more along the lines of CMx1 Operations but with a lot more control over the battles in the Campaign and the inclusion of "story" driven elements to give meaning to battles. Those of you who are hoping for some sort of "take my Battalion from Normandy to Berlin" or "simulate the entire Battle of Stalingrad" are going to be disapointed if that is what you think we are doing. Almost all the reasons we had for not doing this in CMx1 are still valid for CMx2. What has changed is our ability to make a more "propper" campaign system as many had requested as opposed to the more "on the fly" type system used for CMx1's Operations.

c3k, Hehe... boy, and that email was only typed at just after midnight. I'm usually still fresh as a daisy at that time. Guess not

No, there will be no "on the fly" Campaigns in CMx2.

Steve

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

No, there will be no "on the fly" Campaigns in CMx2.

I'm sure I'm in a minority, but I have never enjoyed pre-made scenarios, with operations being a little more enjoyable. I find it difficult to motivate myself past the setup with them. I much prefer QB's, and the ability to play through QB operations and campaigns would really expand the game for me. It would be a nice option to have.

[Battlefront.com]

The problem with on the fly is that we have to do a lot of coding to make things come out even remotely OK. Lots and lots of people bitched and griped about shortcomings in the Operations, and those weren't 100% on the fly either.

Many of the perceived shortcomings were a matter of opinion. Others were simply related to the difficulty of handling so many variables "correctly" each and every time. The development efforts to iron out these problems to the satisfaction of most is simply too great. Plus, it doesn't do anything for those who want a more story driven campaign, and those are (we think) the vast bulk of our audience. So the choice is rather clear for us.

Quick Battles and premade scenarios will of course remain a part of CMx2, but the story driven campaign will likey be the primary way the majority of people play the game.

Steve

[Kingfish]

Since '99 I have played CM, and since '99 I have asked for only one thing, and while I understand entirely why we didn't get it then, I will now ask again in the hopes that the 'clean slate' of CMX2 will allow it...

The

Follow

Command

[Sirocco]

Well, personally I'd like to see at least a QB operation model added, with the ability to define reinforcement schedules for both sides, but appreciate how difficult it would be to satisfy everyone.

I take it scenarios and operations can still be created, but campaigns will be limited to what's "in the box"?

[Stan Hope Park]

Specifically, 1:1 man representation

This is excellent news, especially for those of us who have graduated from certain other game systems!

I don't need to know their exact psychological state; I just need to know that they're there!

terrain graphics which are based on much smaller "tile" sizes

This is good too. It doesn't sound like much, but will, I am sure translate into much more detailed maps.

won't allow for customized building shapes

Shame, but there has to be *something* to look forward to in CMX3!

And a reminder that we are not talking about having some sort of über campaign system for CMx2

Fair enough. This was always going to be a tough nut to crack. Thank you for being straight with us.

... but what about the unit file hoovering up the enemy's orbat at the close of play? We can now recycle maps into the next game; what about that elusive enemy? The impression I get from my fellow posters here is that this would be a relatively easy step (?)

What has changed is our ability to make a more "propper" campaign system as many had requested as opposed to the more "on the fly" type system used for CMx1's Operations.

No, there will be no "on the fly" Campaigns in CMx2.

What is meant by "on the fly"?

Sorry, if this is a daft question.

[Bonxa]

Well one thing I just have to ask is if Full Movie Playback is on the must have list? I think it will add a whole new dimension to the game as has probably been discussed to death elsewhere.

This thread seems to answer a whole lot of questions so why not this one too?

[Other Means]

I can't wait.

Not much more to add - everyones already gone into what I'd like.

But for the love of god be quick.