Will the manual for CMBB be better than for CMBO?

[Brian]

Its something that has worried and annoyed me for some time about CMBO. Basically its really basic and IMO pretty inadequate. Too much information isn't there and what is, tends to be poorly written. The index sucks and the lay out of the book leaves a great deal to be desired. One hopes that the CMBB one will be much better. Does anybody know if BTS has thought of getting say a technical writer in?

The game is excellent but I suspect that over 80% of the queries that appear here shouldn't and wouldn't, if the manual was more comprehensive.

[Holien]

Hmmm I think it might help to explain what things could be different and how?

I must admit that I tend to find manuals in general not much use apart from getting you over some basic hurdles of gameplay mechanics.

I think the FAQ section here and the BB in general are useful to expand the knowledge base on specific WWII issues.

What would you want improved specifically?

H

[Kurtz]

Originally posted by Brian:

The game is excellent but I suspect that over 80% of the queries that appear here shouldn't and wouldn't, if the manual was more comprehensive.

Assuming, of course, that people would actually read the manual.

Well, with a better manual (although I think it's good) we can tell all newbies to RTFM instead of telling them to Do A Search .

[Stixx]

Anyone remember the Falcon 4 manual!!!

Ahhhh Those where the days!

I too would like a much more comprehensive manual.

[Holien]

So what would people include or change if they want a bigger manual.

It is all well and good saying I want with no reference to exactly what is required.

So what would you include?

Give BTS some pointers.

For me the manual was enough to get me into the game and was therefore fit for purpose.

Sure there were things I wanted to know more detail on such as exact calcs for working out victories but that is not necessary and through the good work of the people here I now have that info.

Several pages with info on the weapons and vehicles used would be good as I make use of the great work put into the Xls sheet on points values. Again it is not necessary just a nice to have.

So what things do people think are essential and were missing from the current manual.

H

[Lah]

I think the manual was exellent compared to other games but there are ommissions that could only be found on this forum.

All technical data could be included on the CD or released later as there would be too much to put in a manual.

It would be nice to have a 'tips' section with misc info like placing AFV's in tree cover hides them better from air spotting (?).

[maxm2]

I think it would help to be specific also. I spent so much time reading the forum and playing the demo before CM came out that I haven't used the manual much, but when I have it has been very adequate. It is one of the few game manuals I have that has a decent index.

[Xavier]

You must be joking... :confused:

I find CMBO manual very clear and very complete. But may be I just received the edition manual for NSCFG...

[Wilhammer]

I have to agree that the CMBO manual was adequate, and even better than most. I strongly disagree that it was badly written.

What more does the manual need to have? Should it give us a history lesson on the Russo-German War? Should it discuss doctrine and how it influenced design?

I think if BTS were to write a supplemental BOOK that goes into detail about these topics, they might as well charge us $50-$75 for just a book.

If it tells me how to play the game, how the interface works, and gives me some designer/developer/playtester notes, I am happy.

Give me a bibliogrpahy, and I might buy other books.

I imagine writing and publishing a manual is NOT cheap, and can take as much effort as designing the game. I don't need a manual as comprehensive as the game.

The board serves, correctly so, to meet, greet, and discuss with the designers the finer points.

[lassner.1]

Perhaps Brian is seeking something akin to an ASL manual. But, as BTS has stated, that will never happen: they want *you* to figure out how the game behaves without their spelling it out through charts and formulas.

[Pak40]

Brian,

I disagree, the CMBO manual was very well done. It may have lacked a little in the scenario design section but overall the manual was well written and quite comprehensive.

I have seen countless questions about the game on this forum which, if the askers were to have read the manual, would have already been answered.

Technical questions, statistics, and in depth strategy belong in a Strategy Guide, not the manual. BTS has to cut the line somewhere so that the cost of producing the manual doesn't become outrageuous. If not, then we'd all be paying $65 dollars instead of $45 for the game.

[Mattias]

I concur with the current majority, I found it both complete and easily understandable.

[Edited to remove needless repetitions]

What exactly do you miss in it?

--

M.

[ April 10, 2002, 10:03 AM: Message edited by: Mattias ]

[Vanir Ausf B]

Although the search engine refuses to find it, I distinctly remember Steve saying that the CMBB manual will be much improved over CMBO, with a lot more technical information about how the game works.

I very seriously doubt they would hire someone to write it for them. Nobody else knows the game as well as they do.

[Brian]

It appears that not many of you have actually read the manual or more particularly the index. Hands up if you can tell me, from the index where one finds these items:

Roadblocks - effects, removal, etc.;

Smoke Dischargers - how do you use them?

Bogged (the index says to "see Status" where is "Status" in the index?);

Immobile (I suppose I could always look under "Status");

Victory Flags - how to place them on the map;

HQ's - effects on, on-table mortars firing.

There are numerous others. Now, I appreciate everybody approaches the use of manuals in different ways. Some believe they are the last resort, when all else fails or the reverse. Me, I like to use a program and if I encounter a problem, I then utilise that handy thing in the back called an index. This manual's is pretty bad IMO.

What I don't want is the Squad Leader idea of massive numbers of charts and so on but clear, concise explanations of the various aspects I need to understand about how to make the game work, preferrably in a numbered form of annotation.

As an example of a well laid out manual, I recently recieved a copy of Panthers in the Shadows - I'm not comparing the games, just the manuals. PITS appears on first reading, much better laid out and in some areas better written IMO than the CMBO one.

[MikeyD]

I'd guess (and we're all just guessing here) the CMBB manual will be much better... and be the source of many more complaints! As the game parameters expand there's going to more of an opportunity for misunderstanding why the game works like it works. Remember, we (in the U.S.) live in a country whos VCRs all flash 12:12 because we can't figure out the manual!

[Le Tondu]

Originally posted by Holien:

So what would people include or change if they want a bigger manual.

It is all well and good saying I want with no reference to exactly what is required.

So what would you include?

Give BTS some pointers.

H

Now, those are very fair questions.

While I concur that the CMBO manual isn't bad, it could do to have some added features. It might not be an easy adventure, but here is my two cents in answering your questions Holien.

1.) It would have been nice to have seen a unit list with the different unit costs in terms of points listed. I know that some tweaks may have been made up to the present version CMBO, but that was for a game that has been publicly acknowledged to have beeen released "unfinished".

Now we have CMBB that won't be released until "it is ready". (Good news, IMO.) I presume that means that it will be pretty much done when it is released. No reason NOT to publish the different unit costs now. Sure, it may take some pages in the manual (assuming that there will be one), but they would be highly welcomed indeed.

2.) How about a little more developed section regarding tatics? Newbies would especially like it. With all of the work done in this area since the release of CMBO, this should be a breeze.

3.) How about a section about modding and how to do it? That shouldn't take up too much room.

4.) A list showing the composition of the different platoons, companies, battlions. How about showing how many men are in each and what kind of equipment they used?

OK, I'm done. Time to get back into my bunker.

[Commissar]

Originally posted by Kurtz:

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

The game is excellent but I suspect that over 80% of the queries that appear here shouldn't and wouldn't, if the manual was more comprehensive.

Assuming, of course, that people would actually read the manual.

Well, with a better manual (although I think it's good) we can tell all newbies to RTFM instead of telling them to Do A Search .

</font>

[Holien]

Hi Brian,

Fair points and I will check the manual and see if can add some more to your list.

I work in IT and it is always difficult trying to get people to give solid examples of problems rather than gut feelings.

Le Tondu has given some good points as well and if these can be incorporated in the manual then it will add to it considerably.

I hope BTS can see this from amongst the other points because by gicing solid examples and pointers then things can be improved, if they have not already been.

H

[Wilhammer]

OK, now we get into constructive criticism instead of blanket condemnation

1. The index needs work. A solid index is everything to a good technical document. Lets give CMBO's a 5 out of 10 rating. They have one, but it does have some glaring omissions.

2. Designer notes. Lacking, for the most part. I do want to know what was in the designer's head that caused him to make certain decisions. Some of the Great SPI games of the Good Old Days were outstanding for having excellent designer notes.

3. Player's Notes/Tactics. Yep, definitely need that. Too much of the casual gamer's perception of WW2 warfare is seriously flawed.

4. A brief historical outline. Briefly cover the campaign, but more importantly discuss the doctinal evolution, especially how this affected C&C and combat training. Newbies are going to be pissed when Soviet 41 and 42 armored groups act like lemmings.

==================================

HQ's - effects on, on-table mortars firing.

Correct me if I am wrong, but HQs controlling mortars was NOT in version 1.0, which the manual was written for.

Bogged and Immobile are kind of self-defining words. However, it would be nice for them to tell you that you cannot de-immobilize a vehicle, and that bogging is in need of a more detailed explanation; ie. what ground pressure on each terrain type raises a red flag.

[ April 10, 2002, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: Wilhammer ]

[Brian]

Originally posted by Wilhammer:

Correct me if I am wrong, but HQs controlling mortars was NOT in version 1.0, which the manual was written for.

My manual states "Manual Version 1.2", Bill.

Perhaps adoption of a loose-leaf binder style manual might be more useful than a conventionally bound one - it would allow easy updating through downloading of PDF files done in the same format.

[Soddball]

Personally I'd prefer the current style. You might not be able to update it, but loose-leaf binder ones get caught, torn, damaged etc much too easily - or maybe I just live in a rough neighbourhood

It would be nice to have complete unit lists, but something that may be worth considering is including some recommended reading for players interested in the eastern front - or possibly, if the game is planning to target a larger number of people, a potted history of the eastern front?

[Moon]

Hi guys, interesting thread, especially for me, as Steve and I wrote the CMBO manual - and we intend to do the same for CMBB

Points about the CMBO manual noted - both good and bad. Not much we can do about that obviously (unless we do a major reprint of CMBO sometime).

The problem with game manuals, as opposed to writing books for example, is that the timing of the manual must coincide with the release of the game. That means that large sections of the manual are actually written during development, otherwise, although the game is finished, it couldn't ship until the manual was done. Not sure how many people here would want to wait for 2 months until the manual is finished?

In the case of CMBO, which introduced rather significant changes in later patches, the manual has been updated, but this can lead to various "ptoblems", the index being one of the most significant one. But enough looking back.

For CMBB, the situation is slightly different, because the basic game code is written AND we have the experience of this very board to improve on areas that have been lacking. The CMBB manual will also be somewhat differently structured (including a section especially for folks familiar with CMBO to quickly come up to speed on the most important changes).

However, many requests from further up in this thread simply cannot make it in. It's easy to say "add a few pages describing units". CMBO will feature something like 1000 different units! Even if we were to list their names, that is 1000 lines of text, or - based on a standard 30 line page - 33,3 pages!

And a brief historical outline? Well, we're covering 5 war years! Such an outline will either be totally useless for those more knowledgeable as it will be not detailed enough, or it will be totally useless for those less knowledgeable, because it will not be detailed enough - if you know what I mean

One of the restricting things in manuals is the cost. It's fairly cheap to reproduce a CD, but printing a manual costs serious cash. If we were to add a hundred pages of units, 40 pages of historical outlines, the game would cost around $100. Now some folks here might be willing to spend that, but most wouldn't.

In short - CMBB's manual has the same objective as CMBO's had. Show people how to play the game, give a few hints, maybe even a couple of tactical lessons, and explain the most important game mechanics. It simply cannot do much more than that. Even with game mechanics - you have to remember that the game is NOT build on to-hit tables, cover modifiers and the like. It's much less rigid than that, and short of writing down the actual game code (which won't happen), there are limitations as to what and how some things can be explained.

Having said all that - depending on the space we'll have on the CD and other variables I don't want to mention right now, we might be able to provide some more info this time around, being it through PDF materials on the CD or otherwise. It's simply not decided yet.

I do hope, however, that from this lenghty post you can see that we're actually giving this a lot of thoughts. As players, we value a comprehensive and printed manual ourselves, so we want to deliver that as best as possible.

Martin

[Jeff Duquette]

I find the present CMBO manual to be superior to many computer wargame manuals. Quite comprehensive actually. For those that owned the original Talonsoft EastFront game (not East Front II, but the original) you probably know what a truly bad game manual looks like.

[Holien]

Thxs Moon

H

BTW You have to love the power of this BB and the net. We have had a discussion over a course of several hours with people from all over the world adding to the debate and giving positive feed back to the people that are slaving away to satisfy us with the next game. If I could only get that from the people I try and deliver systems to.

[Compassion]

Anotherthing to add:

Was recently going through the game with a new player and we started an Attack QB... I was describing the different point rations used to an Attack, Assault, and Probe and was suprised that the actual ratios were not listed in the manual.