Chops Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Apparently word is, that the new game utilizing the CMX2 engine will revolve around the conflict of 1861 to 1865 involving the Yankees and the Rebs. Combat Mission: American Civil War. Won't it be outstanding re-creating Pickett's Charge..sending your troops to the slaughter house in a hail of grape shot and cannister shot. Wow, the possibilities! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Wacky Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by Chops: Apparently word is, that the new game utilizing the CMX2 engine will revolve around the conflict of 1861 to 1865 involving the Yankees and the Rebs. Combat Mission: American Civil War. Uh, just because you want something to happen doesn't mean it will. CMx2 is one of those times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 you should really discuss this in the General forum. BTW seeing as I am out of my wacky tobaccy, can I get some of what you are smoking?? Oh yea <font size="10" color="#FF0000">Hi Mom</font> [ October 29, 2003, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: Dogface ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpkr Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I just want to know what kind of guy registers, waits two years before posting anything, then posts three very odd comments about a civil war game in an engine not designed for such? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpkr Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by Dogface: <font size="10" color="#FF0000">Hi Mom</font> Font grog. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Won't it be outstanding re-creating Pickett's Charge..sending your troops to the slaughter house in a hail of grape shot and cannister shot. Wow, the possibilities! No it won't. The amount of ACW games that are around seems to be in inverse proportion to my interest in that war and it already gets far more Wargame exposure than it desrves IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runyan99 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by Ant: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Won't it be outstanding re-creating Pickett's Charge..sending your troops to the slaughter house in a hail of grape shot and cannister shot. Wow, the possibilities! No it won't. The amount of ACW games that are around seems to be in inverse proportion to my interest in that war and it already gets far more Wargame exposure than it desrves IMHO. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Warning: Emotional rant mode on I disagree. There are legions of people interested in the ACW. I for one, do want a CM style ACW game.Yes. Pretty much all of them are Americans. You'll probably find that there aren't so many people outside of the US that are as interested in the ACW. Oh there are some, sure, and I'm not saying it's not an interesting war in it's own right....it is. It's just that I feel the ACW gets more than it's fair share of wargaming time because of the potential custom base of the American market. There are plenty more wars that are as interesting, if not more so, and plenty wars that have had a greater impact. Yet the ACW seems to 'punch above its weight' in the wargaming stakes basically because of American interest. If England had a current population (and therefore a customer base) of 400 million people then I'm sure that we'd see an awful lot more interest in the English civil war, which was as interesting, and possibly an even nore important war than the ACW. But because most Americans can't see history past what happened inside their own national interests and because there are lots of Americans as customers then we get an endless spew of games about a war that doesn't merit such a high profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I'd like to see a CM-style game (if that means a WEGO system blended with a brilliant design, depending on the case what that means) made of every single war that there ever was. But as far as BFC goes, I'd like them to concentrate on WW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 I'd like to see a CM-style game (if that means a WEGO system blended with a brilliant design, depending on the case what that means) made of every single war that there ever was.Agreed....as long as it conveniently, and somewhat mysteriously, missed out the years 1861 to 1865 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Ant is far too harsh. This Canadian is fascinated with the American Civil War - and judging from the number of ACW re-enactors in the United Kingdom, as well as the amount of ink devoted to such subjects in MILITARY ILLUSTRATED and other periodicals coming from the UK - I would say many more Brits than he thinks are too. As for his comments about "most" Americans not being interested in anyone's history but their own - there are also a fair number of WW II re-enactment groups in the States that I've been in contact with that focus on the history of the Canadian and British armies. The leading collector/seller and author of Canadian Army badges is an American (born and bred there, from what I understand) and the leading chronicler of German Army uniforms and insignia for the longest time was Jack Angolia, another US national. The "most" comment might be accurate, but "most" people in every country in the world place history low on their priority or interest lists. Among those with an expressed interest in history, many Americans, in fact, do show not just passing fancy with "foreign" subjects, but often rise to the top of their profession/hobby. Ambrose wrote about Pegasus Bridge, for example. [ October 30, 2003, 09:55 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj. Battaglia Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 In general, it would be highly unrealistic to have a CM-style game for ACW. You could do 3D and have WEGO, but you would be best to have the smallest unit be company, have longer turns, and possibly have a longer command delay as well. Not to mention no gamey puppchen. Ant, your conclusions about the ACW being over represented because of the size of the US market may be correct, but let me be a bit picky. In general, computer game titles, including a lot of war games, are made for the mass market, whether US, Europe, or Asia. The realistic combat simulation, of any period, is somewhat of a niche market. Just look at a lot of the offal that gets passed off as WWII, for example. So you can dress up baloney in lesser-known (to Americans) wars, but it is still baloney. And that's most of what is out there. But on the other hand I do think the market is bigger than some of the big publishers realize (although they probably only think in millions anyway). I would bet that if you came out with a title that covered a war that the US had no part in (or predated the US) in as groundbreaking a way as the CM series does WWII, most of the people who bought CM would buy it as well. We (gamers into realistic sims) are a hungry bunch. We will snap up Cromwell or Agincourt or Balaclava or Jan Smuts as readily as we will Breitenfeld or the Peloponnesian Wars or Mitla Pass or Japanese Civil Wars. It doesn't have to have a US flag. But it does have to be good. Now light a fire under some UK game programmers (or Kazakh for all I care!) so I can re-enact Killiecrankie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Maj, as further evidence of your point look at the popularity of IL-2, for example (or even CM:BB), or even Operation Flashpoint (it has US units but doesn't represent a "real war"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Hey guys I did warn you it was an emotional rant...so using logic and facts simply isn't fair Yes your points are all true and valid of course. It's just that, as I said, I think the ACW gets over exposed because software companies tend to aim for the US market without even realising that a lot of the people they're aiming their products at have wider interests than they seem to give us credit for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 There was an American civil war? Was that when Newt was fighting Bill? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by Ant: software companies tend to aim for the US market without even realising that a lot of the people they're aiming their products at have wider interests than they seem to give us credit for. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj. Battaglia Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Originally posted by Ant: . . . without even realising that a lot of the people they're aiming their products at have wider interests than they seem to give us credit for.Yeah, wider interests like realism! I understand you were ranting, no problem. But deep down, the root cause of what you were ranting about is that not enough product, representing any period, is out there to satisfy those interested in realism. And I think there are more who fall into that category than big publishers realize. We have to be patient and proactive. The more who are intersted in realism, the more non-popular (and I say popular only because you point out the size of the US market) topics will be covered (or you could have a baby boom in the UK--get cracking!). And besides, if you did "Battlefield 1645" you couldn't have ore miners and Tesla coils. In some ways you should be happy no one has perverted English history! And Michael, I was also thinking about Talonsoft's Battleground series that covered Napoleonic campaigns and "Age of Rifles." Both had pretty good success. With the last one, the beauty was covering battles like Port Arthur, etc. But these are the exceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noiseman Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 ACW buffs may want to check out this site Mad Minute Games, Take Command 1861 for a good looking game under development. It is a real time game unfortunately, but has a great deal of potential. Real time could conceiveably work in an ACW environment if realistic command delays were implemented. If I was a designer, I would allow players to issue orders directly to units, but they would not be implemented till a visible rider rode from the General to the unit. No orders could be cancelled, another aide would have to go to the unit with overriding orders. Chain of command can be simulated by having the (player) Divisional aide ride to the (AI) brigade commander who than spawns his own aide to ride to his subordinate regiments. Limiting the number of aides per general would make for some interesting situations, as well as the fact that aides could be killed in transit so that orders might never make it to units. This encourages the player to adhere to the realistic principal that 'the simplest plan is usually the best plan.' Limiting the number of aides per general could be used to simulate command structures and skills for play balance. For example, a player in the role of Lee can be much more nimble with subordinate commander Jackson's units than than with Ewell's because Jackson would have more aides to transmit orders to simulate his superior skill (There could be TacAI differences too, but let's not get into that Vietnam here ). To sum up: Interface-wise the player would simply click on any unit icon to issue orders, but game-wise a realistic animated chain of command courier system is simulated with the inherent uncertainty of the real world. All that being said, a WEGO system is still the better way to go as "real" real time would bore the pants off most players. The messenger system would work just as well in a WEGO environment. In an ACW/Napoleonic environment where the basic 'building block' unit is a regiment or battalion, a messenger system makes sense whereas the squad level size of CMBB/CMAK makes makes 'runner' animations inpractical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Okay, this topic is not about CMAK so I am locking it up. There are many things that the CMX2 engine will be, and it will open up many more possibilities to expand the series even further but there are no plans at this time to do a Amercian Civil War game using it. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts