Next Game

[Folbec]

I have strong doubts on post Korea cold war :

- extended engagement ranges may make it impractical ; imagine the map size needed to use modern day copters against tanks, imagine the number of squads to manage on such a map. I fear it would feel more like work than a game (and I usually play 2000pts + battles).

- many weapon system were never really used in WWIII conditions, so relative capabilities would be endlessly discussed, without any way to know who is right.

[flamingknives]

extended engagement ranges may make it impractical ; imagine the map size needed to use modern day copters against tanks, imagine the number of squads to manage on such a map. I fear it would feel more like work than a game (and I usually play 2000pts + battles).

Helos probably won't appear in a 2000 pt equivalent scenario and it takes at least until the 1970s before ATGMs and helos are combined effectively. Even then, there is a max range of 3-4000m, not accounting for LoS, which would, in Europe, frequently reduce the range by quite a bit.

- many weapon system were never really used in WWIII conditions, so relative capabilities would be endlessly discussed, without any way to know who is right.

Quite a few were, especially in the mid-east. TacOps seems to do fairly well and that works with very moden stuff - i.e. still classified. Armour-projectile capabilities are well documented enough and a great deal of features that existed in WWII, such as reliability, are not modelled in CM.

[flamingknives]

One more thing on the second point - there's plenty of acrimonious and unresolved issues regarding WWII, just look in the CMBB forum for the spats between Rexford and JasonC.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Cold War 70s and 80s is certainly doable…if they want to.

In a NATO study from the 1980s, 90% of “first” contacts in Northern Germany were expected to be at between 800m-1200m.

When it comes to the technology, remember that the Cold War ended 15 years ago. The great majority of the data is known. Most its now unclassified, in the UK anyway. And even if not strictly unclassified, quite enough is know of the characteristics of the material to make an estimate which is just as likely to be correct as for most WWII equipment.

Reading journals such as Jane’s you would be shocked by just how desperate the arms race is, and always was even in the Cold War, between arms manufacturers. This is the single major reason why weapons data is often leaked. Then a few years later confirmed by published tests.

Anyway… I will spare you the full rant;) but I would hugely enjoy studying, and then playing with different set of toys, just for one game.

All the best,

Kip.

[Sergei]

Have I read this thread before? :confused:

[Ace Pilot]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

When it comes to the technology, remember that the Cold War ended 15 years ago.

Mr. PickyPilot would just like to point out that the Berlin Wall came down 15 years ago. The Cold War didn't end until the collapse of the Soviet Union, two years later.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

[Brent Pollock]

I'm with Sergie...I thought this WAS a "regularly scheduled thread"...

[Sirocco]

Are we there yet?

[Pzman]

No son, you'll just have to wait a little bit longer.

[MikeyD]

After reading all these CMX2 threads I've got this fear that BFC's going to snap and take revenge on us all by producing a 'My Little Pony" game for their new engine!

Which would be less annoying to correspond with on a regular basis, us or 8 year old girls? :eek:

[Pzman]

Well Mikey if they do, we can always send in the hamstertroopen to deal with them.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Panzerman:

No son, you'll just have to wait a little bit longer.

Are we there yet?

[Sergei]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

After reading all these CMX2 threads I've got this fear that BFC's going to snap and take revenge on us all by producing a 'My Little Pony" game for their new engine!

At least we'd get horses, then.

[Pzman]

You gamey horse wanters... go out and get a my little pony playset if you want to do that. If BFC does put in horses, I would like to know how they plan to model armor penetration.

[Necrobaron]

Originally posted by Panzerman:

I would like to know how they plan to model armor penetration.

Very carefully.....

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Actually, a big eastern design house trying to do a cheap knock-off would be quite good. We could all laught at how wrong they get it.

Put it this way, you can buy cheap torches made all over the place for a pittance, but I'll still choose a MagLite.

What the limey bugger said! I stand with flamingknives!

[WineCape]

I for one don’t mind what version of what war BFC will try to simulate in their next release. I will buy it. Why?

Team Battlefront.com has a well established record that they will only tackle those conflicts that they have an intimate knowledge of. Whether they want to revisit part/whole of WWII or not with their new game engine, all I ask for is as follows, all of equal importance:

</font>

• not to cater for exclusively top-end hardware systems with the latest whizbang technology,</font>
• to gradually up the ante with graphic visuals as hardware allows; never at expense of gameplay,</font>
• simplicity in the design of their gameplay,</font>
• gameplay believable enough to keep the serious grognards happy,</font>
• simplicity/elegance in selection/execution of play orders,</font>
• realistic - not necessarily brilliant - AI behaviour,</font>
• future releases should represent conflicts in “combined arms,”</font>
• a more comprehensive artillery model,</font>
• keeping future releases tactical in nature, not strategic,</font>
• keeping the action to squad-size slices up to a max. battalion-size,</font>
• keeping their hybrid turn-based/RTS element,</font>
• to keep the current play formats - if adding anything, not at the expense of a current format,</font>
• future releases are free of major sofware bugs (CM has still to crash my ageing Win98 OS!),</font>
• to keep their current after-sales service on the forum wrt patches, feed-back comment etc.,</font>
• written manuals to accompany game CD’s with all future releases.</font>
• always to under promise and over deliver.</font>

The above is Battlefront.com. Shine bright me MagLite.

Sincerely,
Charl Theron
Stellenbosch, South Africa


-----------------------------------------------------
Wine donations send to the following for contributions to Combat Mission:
</font>

• Staff @ Battlefront.com</font>
• John Kettler: His entertaining tourney AAR’s</font>
• Fuerte: PBEM HELPER</font>
• Nabla: CM Scheduling and Scoring program</font>
• Manx: He used to run the “sexiest CMBO modsite on the net”</font>
• Boots & Tracks: RoW tournament scenarios</font>
• Andrew Fox: Uniform Modslut supremo</font>
• Keith Miller @ Scenario Depot</font>
• Gordon Molek: CMMOS utility</font>

Co-creator & Sponsor of the following Combat Mission tournaments:

</font>

• The infamous CMBO “Invitational” (Ari Maenpaa)</font>
• WineCape Tourney I and II (KiwiJoe + Fangorn)</font>
• Rumblings of War aka RoW (Winners: Wreck = RoW I; Kanonier Reichmann + Ali + Jon_L = RoW II; Deadly 88 + Frunze + mPisi = RoW III)</font>
• Download and play the RoW III Tournament Scenario Pack</font>

[junk2drive]

not my cup of joe, but interesting use of words.

second paragraph.

Tin Soldiers - Alexander the Great™, is pioneering many new and exciting features. Favoring the grandeur and hand crafted look of miniature figures we are eschewing the current gaming trend toward ultra realism. Our artists spend their time drawing hundreds of individually adorned soldiers rather then countless hours animating clones of identically clad animations scratching their backsides! Don’t believe me? Check out these tasty morsels or go see more at the Screenshots or Armies links.

Our game is turn based (yea, I said it, turn based) but with a twist. We have developed an engine for simultaneous turn based strategy. A player does not take turns with his opponents, instead each opponent plans out their strategy and issues orders to their units simultaneously, then presses a play button and the battle rages as all the units execute their orders for that turn in unison, just like RTS but for the twitch impaired. In addition, our unique "reaction" system enables mid-turn adjustements to strategy.

Illustrated in beautiful 3-D views of the battle fields, the battle scenarios and troop placements are based on real historic events with entertaining, educational, and non-fiction cut-scene storytelling.

[kipanderson]

Charl, hi,

I agree with all you wrote, it is the essence of what BFC is all about with the CM series. However, I have just one qualification.

You wrote,

 “keeping the action to squad-size slices up to a max. battalion-size”

But allow us to play huge games, using the program optimised for the scale as above. I am talking two-three battalions defending against half a dozen battalion combat teams, all live on one 6-10km by 6-10km map.

Remember the next engine is likely to have live team play. This will often be used to add to the FOW by breaking down battalion combat teams such that each company, the armour, the commander and artillery spotters are all played by different people. But in my view it would be fascinating to have two or three battles, each around one battalion defending two attacking, all played live on the same map. An example would be the attack on St.Vith, during the Battle of the Bulge, all played to its real world scale but with each human player controlling no more than they might in a game of CMAK. If you follow my rantings.

The game program would process the turn and then instead of sending out two versions, as it currently does, would send out anything up to eight versions. Added to this an umpire’s version of the turn could also be produced so that the organiser/umpire behind the game could view the action live. The umpire would be responsible for saving the game at an appropriate time, then maybe editing it and organising another round of live play at a later date. Yes… I am hoping Saved games will be editable in CMX2.

I have some experience in helping to construct scenarios/umpiring weekends of live CM play. A huge operational game, as described above, would in my view lead to stunningly entertaining game play both for the players, and the umpires. A real generational leap.

All the best,

Kip.

PS. The current explosion in wireless networking also makes such get togethers a simpler undertaking. Of course, some of the players would no doubt be at remote locations....why not.

[UncleTio]

My heart's desire is an expanded, more complex QuickBattle generator. One that would create, say, scenarios with rivers, bridges, RR tracks, etc. (if, or not, you specified such). With more varied types of starting position (with defender in the center, maybe). With moving, or false, flags.

Maybe even some work on the AI (my work takes me on the road on such a schedule that it's really unfair to seek e-mail games with people who would like to finish a game within a reasonable time frame). Get a wi-fi laptop, I know.

Anyway, admire all you posters out there, who put so much time into the study of this great game subject matter. Hats off to you.

[Capt. Vance Astrovich]

OK, I just want to jump in on requests for CMX2.

-The replay movie of entire games. Huge files I know, but what a great feature!

-I would like to see the turns variable length; instead of just one minute, maybe let them run continuously real time til you hit pause. Then it could run for 1 minute or 2 minutes or 5 minutes while the boys carry out your commands and you only need to stop the clock and issue new orders as the situation dicates. In multiplayer mode, maybe put a limit on how many pauses or order stopages you could make. Just an idea that might need to be thought out.

-And yes, multi-player online gaming.

Capt. Vance Astrovich

[WineCape]

Hello Kip,

Remember the next engine is likely to have live team play.

This (possible?) addition will certainly be a stunning achievement on its own, I agree. But I think that BFC knows already in what direction they want to go with CMII, with the help and input of all here on the forum to guide them.

BFC still adheres to the under-promise and over-deliver concept, which is refreshing indeed and makes sense. Hence their reluctance to promise anything concrete yet with CMII. I rather not have expectations of vague promises from BFC and then all falls flat because so-and-so feature was not included in their next engine release, as per so many gaming companies the last few years.

BFC will surprise us again - pleasantly. Of that I have no doubt in my mind.

Sincerely,

Charl Theron

[ June 21, 2004, 05:00 AM: Message edited by: WineCape ]

[yacinator]

I have 3 suggestions for CMXX :

1. I'd like for it to happen in Vietnam/Cambodia.

2. Have a diffrent kind of modding where u actualy change the game's code so that u can have diffrent units or terrain tiles or new commands. U can redo a whole game like that and actually make it muuuuuuuch better. Anyone who has played Desert Combat (a mod of BF1942) knows that.

3. A multiplayer system with servers like other games and with more than 2 ppl and a chain of command. 1 player is randomly appointed Company CO and other guys LTs. Each LT has a platoon to command and sum supporting weapons and these r the only units they can command. The Company CO tells the LTs where to move their platoons and if they "disobey orders" they will be "relieved of their command" (kicked of the server) by the AI or the Company CO. And after u get kicked u have to watch a slide show of ur courtmartial and ur prison cell or ur execution. And u have to read a letter that describes ur actions and points out how pathetic and stupid u r.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by yacinator:

2. Have a diffrent kind of modding where u actualy change the game's code so that u can have diffrent units or terrain tiles or new commands. U can redo a whole game like that and actually make it muuuuuuuch better. Anyone who has played Desert Combat (a mod of BF1942) knows that.

Once the new engine is done, the current engine might be opened, but given the history, I doubt BFC will sign out control of their product to all and sundry, especially since there is nothing else like it on the market.