Stan Hope Park Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 . [ March 06, 2005, 08:35 AM: Message edited by: 1327 ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 What's WW2 got to do with Space Lobsters? :confused: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 Originally posted by CSO_Talorgan: Steve said there'd be no über campaigning in CMX2. We all went into mourning. I didn't It seems obvious (to someone with no knowledge of programing) that marrying Combat Mission to an already established "strategic" or "operational" level game is the way to go. The "stategic" level game does its thing. Contact occurs. The "strategic" level dishes up a "tactical" level game with its own context and purpose. This is resolved by the player using CMX2. The results are fed back up to the "strategic" game and the cycle repeats itself. Uh oh. The classical 'I'm not a programmer, but this should be easy' Such people would never think of saying "I don't know anything about biology, but it should be easy to cross breed cows and whales to make really big beefsteak" Not that the idea is without merit, but for pities sake don't say 'it should be easy' when you know nothing about it! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 Strategic Command 2 and it's written by a company called ... ... Battlefront!! Why, oh why, can these games not be married? ... unless of course ... [/QB]Because it would lead to inbreeding of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salkin Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 I went into mourning for a short while actually. Here's hoping we get a strategic layer in one of the upcomming sequels to CMX2. //Salkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 No thank you. I want an operational layer, where I move battalions about. So at most Corps sized. None of that strategic namby-pamby. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Paulus Posted February 27, 2005 Share Posted February 27, 2005 In my opinion I'd prefer the tactical 3D system to be perfected before all that stuff. The (initial) main objective of the game is to simulate and even recreate historical engagements, am I wrong ? Eventually, that's the way I most appreciate CM. Playing historical and well-built scenarios is the most pleasant way of playing Combat Mission. A perfected system of operations, or something like that, would add much interest to the way you fight on the battle map. But not much more is necessry to make us happy if the 3D system itself is more realistic and eye-catching compared to CMx1. Paulus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salkin Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 Originally posted by Andreas: No thank you. I want an operational layer, where I move battalions about. So at most Corps sized. None of that strategic namby-pamby. What's the differens . Anyway , what I'm looking for is putting my battles in a context (and no I don't mean a story driven campaign...). If it's battallion sized, then so be it . //Salkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ardem Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 Yeah its a pity they couldn't marry the two or even provide a patch that allows stategic command to input the results of a battle instead of automatically calculating it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GJK Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 No mega-campaigns for CMx2, no pbem option for CMx2 and SC2 doesn't have hexes.... That's it, I'm going back to playing Ogre. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kip Watson Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 I have to be honest, this 'uber campaign' thing sounds wonderful in theory but in practice I am highly sceptical. If you're playing well at the strategic level then your opponent has to endure a CM battle (or even a whole string of them) of getting massacred - or vice versa. Would that be fun for either player? The 2 don't compliment each other as much as you might think. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salkin Posted February 28, 2005 Share Posted February 28, 2005 Originally posted by Kip Watson: I have to be honest, this 'uber campaign' thing sounds wonderful in theory but in practice I am highly sceptical. If you're playing well at the strategic level then your opponent has to endure a CM battle (or even a whole string of them) of getting massacred - or vice versa. Would that be fun for either player? The 2 don't compliment each other as much as you might think. Kip, an uber campaign wouldn't be very practical from the multiplayer aspect. I would use it for single player as would most people. I could be wrong though , there may be a few brave souls out there with enough time to kill to try it in multiplayer . //Salkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage2 Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 Why not have CMx2 engine allow a tab-delineated text file / spreedsheet import to create a battle and peramters, and then export results at the end of the battle? There would need to values for date, conditions, units, kills, damage etc... This would allow 3rd parties to create applications that would support operational+ level games OR a dynamic-persistent campaign system. It's clear that there's an interest in this from the number of folks that have hand-built dynamic-persistent campaigns and operational+ rules. If there are licensing concerns, make it clear that the exported or imported file can't be used or modified by any system or application that is not available for free. I think this is my first CM post in years. Sage 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malakovski Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Originally posted by sage2: Why not have CMx2 engine allow a tab-delineated text file / spreedsheet import to create a battle and peramters, and then export results at the end of the battle? Bingo. All CMx2 needs to do is be able to start a battle from an imported file, and then export useful end of battle data at the end. Then you can do whatever kind of uber-campaigning you like, as soon as BFC or someone else produces the software to handle the data and generate battles. Massive multiplayer campaigns become possible, et cetera... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willbell Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 An operational level multi-player is not impossible. But it is a whole "nuther" game, with CM as its base. Along the line of Sag2's suggestion. I have confabed with some programmers and the idea is imminently doable (unfotunately, they are all working on other blue sky projects that they find more interesting). The toughest part is setting it up taking into consideration that you can't get a bunch of players to be all playing at once. But that can be dealt with using a GM type campaign AI. Notice that I never used the word easy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage2 Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 Actually... once the CM devs implement a text-based import / export system, the problem become technicaly simple. You could modify the text file in a spread sheet, with java script, using an online web interface, an exe -- whatever. For a solo dynamic campaign, an exe or java might be a good way to go. For an online operational campaign, an online web submittion system might work well. Yes, it's highly insecure... But I think people would accept that and institute other controls. For example, and operational campaign could compare the submitted values between the opposing players submitting results for the same battle. It would add some nice freedom to the game, and as long as the produced text files are © Battlefront games, and "No modification is allowed with intention to sell" Battlefront could keep comercial control over the feature. Sage 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.