So far I don't like CMBB...

[dalem]

Steve, all-

I hope you folks haven't been taking my comments in these various threads as general complaints. I have been trying to be careful to point out that I feel that I am lagging behind the game curve, not that some huge design mistake has been made.

That being said, I do think the fatigue model could be toned down a bit. I mean seriously - aren't these front line guys already exhausted when the battle starts? How much more tired can they really get?

-dale

[Lars]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Hell, I just saw TV ads for a friggin SOUNDTRACK album for Grand Theft Auto 3! I SOUNDTRACK!! Hopefully this will put things into perspective a bit better.

Not a chance for you to make any money there then. I've had Mussorgsky in my collection for years. Next time, maybe you'll give Madmatt a synthesizer to play with.

dalem, you putz, you owe me a setup.

Send an all armor battle, that way you can't whine about how you're not having any fun.

[Diceman]

Being in the niche market BFC is aiming at, my reaction to CMBB has been two-fold. My first reaction is "this is great", and second, this might not have as broad appeal as CMBO because of the slower pace required. CMBB is not as forgiving to hasty tactics and mistakes as CMBO.

Having said that, reading Steve's post reminded me that most of the people who I showed CMBO to that had a negative reaction to it, would also have a negative reaction to CMBB; therefore, I didn't bother introducing CMBB to them - with the noted exception of old wargaming buddies of mine. Some very old wargaming buddies of mine wrote CMBO off as "having potential." These same guys have taken to CMBB. Why? Because in there eyes, the game has matured into the potential they were hoping for.

This does not invalidate Stephen’s reaction to the game of course. CMBB is more demanding than CMBB IMHO, as well as many others. This will appeal more to some than others.

[Duke of Earl]

...Bottom line is to keep one's own opinions in perspective and to understand that liking or disliking the changes does not mean anything in a larger sense.

So... does this mean that Ann Margaret is not coming then?...

Cordialement, Duke of Earl

[Battlefront.com]

Soddball,

Thanks for your input, I am glad CMBB is selling so well. Has your linking up with CDV made a significant difference in European sales?

Yes, for both CMBO and CMBB this is true. It obviously cuts into our direct sales, but at the end of the day we have more customers AND more revenue from Europe thanks to CDV.

Tom,

"It ain't over 'till the fat lady sings" That means until we can count CMBB's sales for the same length of time as CMBO's, anything can happen. But currently, CMBB sales are outpacing CMBO's for the same period. And we are just getting into the Christmas selling period too

Why is CMBB selling more than CMBO? Could be for a number of reasons, some of which might have nothing to do with either game. For example, we are doing more marketing now than before and our website looks better. Who knows for sure why things are better than 2 years ago. However, I can say that one reason that has nothing to do with the increased sales is "we took the fun out of it". Games that truely are not fun to play don't sell more or even the same as the preequals.

Steve

[Schoerner]

Steve's (BTS) reply hit the point IMO exactly.

We have the new orders, and now we tend to use them much to excessively.

Maybe we should remember ourselfes of playing CMBO and that only in certain situations we wished to have additional orders.

Steve, maybe BTS should should make a graphical separation in the orders menu for the new more specialized orders, to prevent people thinking, that they should be used always and everywhere.

[Stoffel]

I can only say,like many other soldiers here in my unit and other players in my country,GREAT GAME!!

We absolutely like the realism,for example not having to worry about single squads take out an mg by simply running at it over 200 meters or tanks firing at crews miles away while another tank crawls slowly towards them.

Covered arcs to give units area fire commands(like in real life)to create even better overlapping fields of fire.

My advice is,try bigger maps so units have more space between them.

Normally a batallion defends a wider area than the 600 by 1 km maps I ussually see in QB.

Try 3 by 4 km maps,this gives you room to recon the perimeter and explore gaps in an opponents defensive line.

Use your support weapons and infantry to smash trough such a gap with your companies in a few echelons.

try to think creative,outthink your enemy!

be patient and learn tactics,but more important enjoy the game as it is now!

Henk

[Abbott]

CMBB is more demanding than CMBO IMHO

Agreed.

So... does this mean that Ann Margaret is not coming then?...

LOL!

[ November 01, 2002, 03:18 PM: Message edited by: Abbott ]

[Battlefront.com]

Dale,

Don't sweat it. Even if you don't change your opinion over time, there is nothing wrong with that. It just might be that we have to agree to disagree on some things, which is not only understandable but totally acceptable to me. We know darned well we can't make the "perfect game" in everybody's eyes, so there will always be some disatsfaction with whatever we made.

And a quick reminder to people like Stephen and Colonel_Deadmarsh... we had a TON of "negative" feedback on various aspects of CMBO. Not just from a whiney minority either. Some people think the cat's meow is to rush a company of Veteran Volksgrenadiers against a company of Veteran Amis and not have much of a problem getting in close for the kill. Others found this to be horribly frustrating and totally unfun to the point of not playing certain people in rematches or participating in ladder tournies.

So if a player's idea of fun is to use "gamey" tactics to beat the other guy, I guess we did "remove" some of the "fun" in CMBO. But in doing so we made CMBB more of what CMBO was always, ALWAYS, supposed to be. And the next game will continue that trend of improvement towards the unobtainable goal of perfect simulation of tactical warfare. And in our opinions, perfect means most realistic.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

"It ain't over 'till the fat lady sings" That means until we can count CMBB's sales for the same length of time as CMBO's, anything can happen. But currently, CMBB sales are outpacing CMBO's for the same period. And we are just getting into the Christmas selling period too

Steve

GREAT!!

thanks for the VERY prompt reply!

Congrats I am/we are VERY happy that your company is so financially successful! I wish you ALL the very best of luck with your CMBB sales and yes Christmas is coming and that should be also benificial .

-tom w

P.S. Thanks to Matt I got my replacement copy in the mail a few days ago !!

[Bartokomus]

Hate to speak after BFC had their say, but my thoughts focus exclusively on the designers of the scenarios rather than the game, which to me is an exponential leap in quality.

I think what needs to happen is that the scen designers are going to need to start evaluating whether a particular battle or engagement is NECESSARY to model in a scenario. When i say necessary, i really mean "do both sides have even a small chance of winning?"

I have found myself disappointed with the types NOT quality of scens on the cd's. i can recall very few scens in cmbo that were as wide open as many of the ones in cmbb. Maybe Taurus over the Odon would be the most open i can recall. the wide open nature of many of the battles can be problematic because of the better modeling and horrendous disparities of forces that occured.

My point can be made with many of the cd scens: i am playing Approach to Sevastopol right now as the AXIS in pbem. without being a SPOILER, the armor that the reds have is too much for what you have. their guns are better and more of them. i have already tried to go hull down and duke it out with the few Stugs i have, but i lost 4 to his 1 t34. now some KV's have shown up and i have 1300m of open ground to cover with all my HT's and light armor. Here is the crux of it: i am totally confident that the designers are modeling the situation correctly, but how much fun is it to advance under heavy fire with infantry and light AFV's while 10 heavily armored long distance guns shoot at you? Please don't focus on the fun word; if you don't that word you can use something "tactically feasible"!!

I would guess that the Eastern front is a much more difficult front to model over the West for two reasons:

1) much of the landscape is composed of huge, wide open spaces, that give the advantage to the bigger gun/better optics.

2) there is a much greater disparity of equipment. you can see a Mk II against a T34 or KV quite realistically.

These two points combined make for a difficult mix. I know the Shermans were problematic against the big cats, but the terrain was usually condusive to hiding and maneuvering to get closer for a kill shot.

I am starting to find some scens, especially at B and T, that have poor LOS and therefore are really enjoyable.

So to shut up now, i will summarize my confused rambling:

1)the game is great

2)the scenarios are a high quality, but;

3)designer might need to ask sometimes: "is this going to have any element of fun/enjoyment?".

i know sometimes it's not about fun, but if you're going to spend 35 turns getting the #$@^( shot out of you, with no where to hide and nothing to hit back with, it will probably suck.

Murray

[aka_tom_w]

"So if a player's idea of fun is to use "gamey" tactics to beat the other guy, I guess we did "remove" some of the "fun" in CMBO. But in doing so we made CMBB more of what CMBO was always, ALWAYS, supposed to be. And the next game will continue that trend of improvement towards the unobtainable goal of perfect simulation of tactical warfare. And in our opinions, perfect means most realistic."

I think that point is so significant it just could be my new signature line

Lets see...

what does that look like.....

-tom w

[Abbott]

Bartokomus,

You have made some good points. Scenario design (for me) at this point is a tough time consuming process, trying to find "balance" of forces is difficult. As the player base gains more experience with CMBB I believe these issues will be solved.

Personally I have found many of the CD's scenarios to be excellent, only my inexperience has halted me from victory on several occasions.

[Boo Radley]

As for myself, I'm still trying to find way way through the new orders so that my men don't get fatigued as quickly or scurry for cover at the crack of a twig and I'd have to say that I'm better at it than I was a month ago, so that my frustration level isn't nearly as high as it was. Am I having fun? Yes. Well, except for when I do something boneheaded, like let Panzer Leader get half of his attacking force BEHIND my defensive positions. That chewed the moose big time.

I still think someone should come up with a "clown tank" mod.

[Bruno Weiss]

Steve's back! Horaah! Man, I missed Steve in here keeping the peace on Saturday nights.

[**YK2**]

Originally posted by Battlefront.Com

But currently, CMBB sales are outpacing CMBO's for the same period. And we are just getting into the Christmas selling period too

Why is CMBB selling more than CMBO? Could be for a number of reasons, some of which might have nothing to do with either game. For example, we are doing more marketing now than before and our website looks better. Who knows for sure why things are better than 2 years ago. However, I can say that one reason that has nothing to do with the increased sales is "we took the fun out of it". Games that truely are not fun to play don't sell more or even the same as the preequals.

Steve

Hmmmmm ok, so in the beginning CMBO was born, you had say X amount of orders in the first month, which eventually reached XXXXX amount of orders by the time CMBB hit the market.

It's pretty clear that CMBB would have without doubt peaked the sales of CMBO in the first month.

CMBO had in the end a loyal following which grew from hundreds to thousands and even without dangling a carrot in the form of screenshots, previews, and publicity the new game was bound to peak in the beginning.

I don't play either game :eek: but I follow quite a few of the threads on this forum and was quite amazed at the amount of posts screaming out "How long before CMBB is up for grabs" or words to that effect.

Yes Indeed... sales HAVE peaked in the first month and IMO they would have done so with or without the so called "Fun Aspect".

I wish all of you at BTS every success for the future (even the Bald one) you sure deserve it.

P.S.

I just hope that by the end of the year no-one at BTS has that feeling (I know it so well) of having put ones foot in it

[Joques]

Originally posted by Capt. Toleran:

I find that infantry are not that brittle at all, once you figure out what you can and can't get away with.

Amen. I don't get all the gripes about "brittle infantry". If anything, I often think that infantry perform above and beyond the call of duty in CMBB. At least they're tougher than I'd ever be. I've gotten away with murder in CMBB, plotting insane open-ground assaults and then sitting gawking at the screen going "My (regular) squads actually survived that?!?"

[Pvt. Ryan]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I can say that one reason that has nothing to do with the increased sales is "we took the fun out of it".Steve

I don't know about that. I bought my copy of CMBB because it had a sticker on the box that said, "Now with 50% less fun!"

While reading up on the Eastern Front I have wondered why my vehicles don't bog every five seconds and why my troops don't just run for the latrine. I am truly enjoying CMBB so far and am learning a lot in the process.

[ November 01, 2002, 04:33 PM: Message edited by: Pvt. Ryan ]

[Bruno Weiss]

Well I'll say it. CMBB is flat out fun. It is immersing, engrossing, and has kept me glued to the screen since the day it arrived. IMHO, it far exceeds the realism factor of CMBO. CMBB requires more from the players in the application of real world military tactics. I wouldn't trade it for anything.

[rune]

My reply on the scenario can be seen in the scenario forum, under Atlas's thread. Just because one person doesn't like a type of scenario, doesn't mean everyone won't. I wanted and think I accomplished a good mix of scenarios.

SPOILERS

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

You obviously haven't finished the scenario. You get more then stugs, and do get things to accomplish the goal. However, the forces are the best my son could find reference to. The over-whelming guns aren't. The better shot T34s have a match. I know in testing people lvoed this one, it forces you to use good tactics to advance.. Not a bad attempt for a 13 year old. The point here, and on the other thread, same as the game. You can't please everyone with every scenario...but we did the best we could and tried to get as close to history as we could. Very few fictional battles on teh CD if you look.

Rune

[ November 01, 2002, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: rune ]

[Abbott]

The point here, and on the other thread, same as the game. You can't please everyone with every scenario...but we did the best we could and tried to get as close to history as we could. Very few fictional battles on teh CD if you look.

I believe that enjoyment from scenarios is not always in winning them as well, I have yet to beat that #$@#$% Cemetery Hill as the German player! However I find it very enjoyable to play and do plan on a German victory at some point.

[AnonymousOxide]

I like the new system... no I love it. My HMG's and even LMG's pose a huge risk to on-coming infantry. My enemy can no longer move a platoon of soldiers towards my foxholes in open ground and expand 2 squads, at the least, to make it to the forest.

But yeah, I dig what you people are saying, and I would be more than open to BTS including a "semi-realistic" CMBO infantry mode option in future games for the peeps who just want to have some fun.

In CMBB, you can't make progress with you troops if you don't have a good plan, and that's where I fumble sometimes too. -My generic military strategies will break on occassion.

[Henri]

Wow, this thread is really taking off. I might as well put in my two cents.

Actually everyone is right. CMBB IS more realistic than CMBO, and it does require more management.

One problem that is impossible to avoid is that the player is simultaneously playing the role of Battalion commander, company commander (for more than one company sometimes), platoon and squad leader and individual soldier (FOs and snipers). That IS a bit much, and it wuold be nice if one had the possibility of delegating orders to some of these people. Personally I would prefer to do that (yes I have Airborne Assault) with a game of this level.

But anyway CMBB does grow on you as you play more and more. And some of the complaints that we make initially become less important as we gain experience -on my first play, I complained about Soviet Armor bveing too weak and lost all my tanks in the Jaegermeister tutorial without killing a single German tank; the next time around, I had twelve Russian tanks left when the scenario finished!

I'll get back to playing CMBB right after I have my fill of Srategic Command that I received on Wednesday...

Henri

[Agua]

Originally posted by Abbott:

I believe that enjoyment from scenarios is not always in winning them as well ...

Agreed.

[Commissar]

If the game is not your cup of tea, then it's not your cup of tea. Perfectly fine to not like the game.

If you find that your old tactics don't work, then what needs to change is your tactics, not the game. If you were arguing that the modeling of the guns is incorrect due to this or that then you would have something for the developers to consider revising. Nobody's perfect after all. However, if one is basically arguing that the game should be patched because the extra realism is bumming you out then you have bought the wrong game. To use one of BFC's analogies, There is no sense complaining that the apple you bought doesn't taste like an orange. If you wanted an orange then you should have bought that instead of an apple.

I'll admit that the new modeling and the more accurate lethality of MGs in general gave me mighty headaches and significatly increased the time it took me to achieve my objectives, but once you get used to the added realism and change your tactics accordingly, there is no reason you can't trounce the AI as often as you did in CMBO, unless you are just unlucky or putting the screws to yourself. It just might take you longer, that's all.

If you still don't like CMBB, no problem. Buy yourself a game that's more to your taste and sell CMBB.