What u want to see in CMX2

[Stingray]

My Christmas wish list is as follows:

1. Ability for tank bow gunner and AA MG (if available) to target seperately from main gun.

2. Off/On toggle switch for grid lines.

3. Visible aircraft with spectacular crashes.

4. At least two men graphics for crew served weapons: MGs, mortars, ATGs, guns, bazooka, etc..

5. Improved graphics for bazookas, mortars and piats.

6. Hatches that open and close.

7. Flares for night combat.

8. Bunkers and pillboxes that can be entered or exited by troops.

9. Ability to emplace ATGs and guns inside buildings and rubble.

10. Boobytraps inside houses and buildings.

11. Engineering units ability to pre-set Bridge/Building demolition.

12. Paratooper/Glider air drops.

13. My two front teeth !!!

[Cthulhu Dreams]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

What is it with all these engine mod requests?

I know that if I'd put as much work into something as the BFC guys have into CM, letting the general public have the source code is not the first thing I'd do.

Apart from anything else, there is nothing else out there that is similar to CM, so why let other people have the code so they can make cheap knock-offs?

Possibly something to change 3d models so modders can sort out the last few little models, but changing data would lead to massive arguments and restrict who you can play against.

When did we ask for engine mods?

Engine mods are like the difference between Q# and call of duty

Real mods instead they "plug into" the existing physics and graphics backbone, and offer additional fuctionality.

So for CM, you could let modders at their own units, graphics, terrian, game modes or whatever, but the physics would always be the same.

[rune]

Won't happen. By allowing you to change the units terrain, graphics, we would still see a glob of cheap knock offs, with no income. BFC is not Valve as someone correctly pointed out. Also by allowing mods to the data. how soon would it be before cheating occured int he online play? Look at what happened to Microsoft Combat Simulators for a good example.

It will be more easily modifiable for BFC to make changes, instead of the time consuming process it is now.

Rune

[Sergei]

I think it still would be reasonable to let scenario designers to tweak unit properties like in Steel Panthers scenario editor. It wouldn't enable cheating because you can cheat already by editing the scenario before you play (I always add a couple of 8" arty spotters to my OOB when hosting the game... oops!). In a Quick Battle you'd naturally only be able to use the original TO&E's.

[Denwad]

concur

[birdstrike]

- ability to override TacAI and select the type of round fired by a tank or gun

- more detailed ammo stats for small arms

- some sort of ammo resupply

- no more borg-spotting

- and instead of contour-lines and stuff, how about an additional map window that can be opened ingame, made up like a WWII style topographic map including heights, and important landmarks;

this way, the realist enthusiansts would still have to find the actual places on the battlefield by themselves

[LongLeftFlank]

As a lifelong wargamer and junior league WWII grog, I personally love the game as is. I am also pleased to see that BFC is focusing its further development efforts on incremental refinements of the features that make the game unique to begin with.

I also get as much enjoyment out of reading the forums as I do out of playing the game.... the game has attracted an amazing global community of extremely bright and sophisticated (if not always in a socially mainstream kind of way) people.

However, all that being said, I can also readily imagine how competitive and fluid the games marketplace is right now. While a lot of grog purists are fighting tooth and nail against any move by BFC to broaden its appeal (and increase sales volume) to the despised "twitch" crowd, consider this fact: Nobody will be well served if sales aren't sufficient to keep BFC profitable and its creative independence intact. (Perish the thought!) they will inevitably either fold up or sell out to a large commercial house that will force the game in the populist FPS direction with predictable consequences ("our users don't care if there were no King Tigers in Normandy on D-Day").

So I believe that it's critical for CM2 to add some "sizzle" that will broaden the appeal of the game and draw in the next generation of grogs who don't have the same childhood/family connection to WWII that most of us do. The essential question is how to do that with without either creating a programming nightmare or turning the current game into another FPS?

One "out of the box" idea I had was to build in OPTIONAL media -- downloaded just as mods are now, or sold on a separate CD) that plays brief (2 second) animated audio/ video "clips" when trigger events occur, just as game voices are triggered ("Ich gevunden!") in the replay phase.

So on occasion when an artillery shell lands on a German squad, you get a brief clip from some doc footage showing landser hunkering down, etc. Of course you'd need to have a big enough library that the clips didn't get too repetitive and annoying (although the voices do that too sometimes).

By now a lot of you are reaching for your flamethrowers, but stay with me just a moment. Yes, this might require new technology investments by BFC that I haven't thought about that might make the idea infeasible. On the other hand, it might create some interesting new opportunities for ambitious modders who want to create cool animation clips (although additions to the library would need to be policed -- no Travelocity ads or porno).

This feature would add a lot of visual appeal without messing with the game. More important, it could educate and capture the imagination of younger gamers who never grew up on World at War and have no idea what real landser getting pounded by Katyushas looked like . Hard core gamers and processor have-nots could simply disable the feature (as could those of you who would rather die than look at Anzio footage during your Cassino scenario). A brief stock clip of Stukas or Thunderbolts diving in would also be a lot easier to mod than actual animated planes.

Sorry about the long post, but I don't speak up that often. Best regards...

[Nelson 1812]

To be able to select the number of points, (for both sides) 1750 foe example, and to also alloicate them points into Infantry, Support,etc!

Did I use the word Foe!

[Midnight Warrior]

1. Explicit modeling of radios and radio nets with radio traffic .wav files.

2. user selectable mouse wheel control to change viewing elevation, viewing elevation angle, step through units, or step through HQ's.

3. Aircraft "gun camera" view.

4. Easy way to identify scenarios that one has played from scenario list.

5. Embedded mod manager function tied to each scenario

6. User editable text file for each unit to keep notes for after action reports (e.g. as an expansion on the kills report

7. Way to export surviving units to other QB scenarios (build your own campaign game).

[Stingray]

Originally posted by Stingray:

My Christmas wish list is as follows:

1. Ability for tank bow gunner and AA MG (if available) to target seperately from main gun.

2. Off/On toggle switch for grid lines.

3. Visible aircraft with spectacular crashes.

4. At least two men graphics for crew served weapons: MGs, mortars, ATGs, guns, bazooka, etc..

5. Improved graphics for bazookas, mortars and piats.

6. Hatches that open and close.

7. Flares for night combat.

8. Bunkers and pillboxes that can be entered or exited by troops.

9. Ability to emplace ATGs and guns inside buildings and rubble.

10. Boobytraps inside houses and buildings.

11. Engineering units ability to pre-set Bridge/Building demolition.

12. Paratooper/Glider air drops.

13. My two front teeth !!!

Since I have been extra good this year; can I add these to my list?

14. Real snipers (not sharpshooters) the "one shot one kill type up to 500 meters" to target TCs and HQs personnel.

15. In game Mod Manager that can be activated after the scenario has been chosen.

16. For scenarios lasting more than 30 turns- ammo resupply capability.

Thanks Santa !!!

[junk2drive]

for mod manager requestors

after you read your side's briefing, before you hit continue and see the loading 3d files, alt tab to desktop, use your mod manager, then full screen the game and hit continue. not too hard.

the mouse wheel. after 10 months i accidentally found the pan up pan down with shift + a or z

a wheel mouse function would be nice for this.

[Kip Watson]

Great game, best I've ever played, but of course that leads to lots of things to wish for!

A) Scenario Design

- ability to rotate map

- ability to cut and paste terrain elements

- more detailed and varied buildings and ruins

(eg. clusters of buildings or ability to subdivide terrain tiles)

(eg. ability to place buildings on tiles that change elevation)

- more flexible fortifications, including bunkers/pillboxes along the lines of trenches that can be occupied by squads and weapons (as mentioned elsewhere)

- scenario designer can vary squad composition (even just a little)

- designer can vary MG ammo on AFVs

- designer can send 'messages' to player (eg. on move 10 message comes up "Warning, enemy aircraft coming your way")

- ability to include simple graphics (eg. maps) in briefings

- ability to import maps from CMBB/AK/BO...??

- designer can apply damage to buildings

Forces/Units

- Actual cavalry

- mine clearing tanks

- display of aircraft

- optional (to designer) player control of aircraft

- TRP for aircraft?

- include beaches, amphibians and landing craft

(including German for hypothetical invasion of Britain?)

- some additional fortications (see also above) (eg. tank ditch, tank obstacles - basically same function as roadblock but looking different)

C) Game-play

- more varied QB purchasing rules (eg. light armour, medium armour, heavy armour, combined arms light, combined arms heavy, infantry-and-extra-artillery etc etc etc.)

- a few simple if-then/multiple orders (eg. a bit like scoot-and-shoot and move-to-contact-then-hide, but expanded like; move-to-contact-then-area-fire-with-explosives, if-see-enemy-tank-then-reverse, if-see-enemy-tank-then-turn-to-face, area-fire-with-grenades-then-assault)

- area fire 'ahead' (as opposed to area fire at a point) while moving command (for advancing in forests etc)

- Infantry movment commands like, move-and-stick-to-cover (to save micromanaging) and 'seek-cover' (like hide, as in move-to-contact-and-seek-cover)

- a CONVOY COMMAND!!

D) I-know-it-won't-happen-but Dep't...

- extend into post-war/cold-war/arab-israeli?

E) You guys rule, and thanks for inviting suggestions.

[Kip Watson]

Here's another thought.

It would be cool in scenario design to have a bit more variety in Victory Conditions. Eg. the following:

- one-sided Victory Flags, that could be applicable and/or visible to a particular side. In other words, you may not know for sure what your opponents objectives are. This would be quite cool and add nicely to Fog of War.

- Victory conditions that give extra victory points for the destruction of specific enemy units (artillery springs to mind), like in a search-and-destroy mission.

- 'Dynamic' exit zones, which could even be applicable to different parts of a force. Eg. Are you breaking an encircled force out, or a relieving force in? Similarly, Exit Zones that are invisible to an opponent.

[Joachim]

Originally posted by Kip Watson:

Here's another thought.

- one-sided Victory Flags, that could be applicable and/or visible to a particular side. In other words, you may not know for sure what your opponents objectives are. This would be quite cool and add nicely to Fog of War.

It's called dynamic flags. Currently works in scenarios only. The attacker chooses one from several flags. The defender doesn't know the objective.

Gruß

Joachim

[Kip Watson]

Hi Gruß Joachim.

Yep, I understand Dynaic Flags - and they are really cool. That's why I was thinking of something like a further developed alomg the same lines. As in more complex victory conditions (Dynamic flags are essentially only one active flag and some dummy flags).

Imagine victory conditions completely visible only to one side (with a Dynamic Flag you can see them you just don't know which one is active). Because VLs basically correspond to something in your orders, but your opponent may have quite different orders.

For maximum victory you would have to hold your VLs as well as deduce your opponent's objectives.

Really, you could have some real FOW-fun with it.

[Michael Dorosh]

You guys may want to check the thread in the General Forum called "CMX2 Details" - there is an online article with some details of the next game engine in it...and it isn't somebody's half-assed idea of a joke, but a real article.

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=9;t=014773

[fabs2002x]

1) More ammo or the possibility of re-supply.

2) a total re-modelling of hedgerow terrain for Normandy bocage scenarios. There should be two options:

- something that works like the "roads with trees" now do to model roads and tracks running between parallel hedgerows.

- Individual hedgerows to separate fields where there are no roads or tracks present alongside.

The hedgerows should be shown as earthen banks about 1m high on which shrubs and trees grow, that is what they looked like mostly, as opposed to the "manicured" effect currently portrayed.

Infantry should be able to gain strong protection from fire by setting up "inside" the hedgerow terrain, which should be just a narrow strip.

Hedgerows should not be passable by tanks, but it should be possible to blow gaps through them using engineers.

Infantry should be able to move through or along these obstacles but at a very high time cost.

Most of my other pet ideas have been mentioned by previous posters.

[fabs2002x]

Oh, and something that will mean roads won't bend in all sorts of curious ways when negotiating undulating terrain.

[Kip Watson]

Sorry to be a post-hog, but here's another couple that have been mentioned at Blitzkrieg WC

- Pacific theatre (I don't know how many time I've seen this, but it gets mentioned even more than the wish for Cold War era)

- An ability to play the whole movie back from start to finish of game (this is a really good idea)

[Pzman]

Originally posted by fabs2002x:

Hedgerows should not be passable by tanks, but it should be possible to blow gaps through them using engineers.

For German tanks anyway. After a while the Americans and other allied nations built cutters designed just to cut through Hedgerows. I don't think engineers would spend too much time throwing demo charges at them either as they had more than enough mines to deal with already.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Panzerman:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by fabs2002x:

Hedgerows should not be passable by tanks, but it should be possible to blow gaps through them using engineers.

For German tanks anyway. After a while the Americans and other allied nations built cutters designed just to cut through Hedgerows. I don't think engineers would spend too much time throwing demo charges at them either as they had more than enough mines to deal with already. </font>

[Pzman]

True, and known about, but on CM's scale it really seems to be the only way to do it. Lets hope that it changes with the new game engine to something more realistic, but using demo charges on bocage doesn't seem very realistic to me either.

[Kip Watson]

Unrealistic? Considering the time scale it seemed about right. In the heat of battle I can imagine engineers using HE for all manner of things, blowing a path in a mine field - sure (although they wouldn't fling it they'd ignite a string of charges?). Blowing holes in Bocage, high walls, buildings' outer/interior walls (blowing building to rubble even), roadblocks and various fortifications... Why not? That'd be really cool!

And hey, what about bangalore torpedoes, even!

[JonS]

erm - you guys do realise that using dems charges to get through bocage was standard practice?

Busting the Bocage

[Kip Watson]

The extra orders that came with CMBB (covering arcs, advance, assault etc) were so cool compared to CMBO, and it would be neat to have a few more of them, for example

- creeping artillery barrage

- area fire possible across an wide-ish area instead of focussed at a point (like with sweeping MG suppressing fire)

And it would also be cool to be able to synchronise units in some way. The convoy command is one that gets mentioned a lot, but what about:

- A 'formation' command, possible for infantry but particularly for tanks (of course this would need to depend on state of morale and quality of the HQ but it would save a lot of micromanaging) (and even a 'stay on road' command)

- some different options for infantry under the same HQ unit using quick fire and manoeuvre tactics, eg: covering fire and assault and 'leapfrogging'. As it is, one minute (plus any additional unit delay) is too long for synchronsing squads really.