Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 OI, I can only play quickbattle with fixed troops!!!! How on earth is this gonna be fun when I play against people? So basically I'm stuck with the same every time? There aren't that many options in quickbattle you know... hmm.. I question this design, and if its removed due to realism, then you've made a poor choice..a VERY poor choice of people to listen too. Also, important commands hidden inside submenues = bad VERY bad hotkey for inf movment = o hotkey for vehicle movement = u doh? So far, it looks cool, but fails to deliver gameplay sorry Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 I always thought Quick Battles should be about the tactical decisions on the battlefield, though, not whether or not you outfoxed your buddy in the "shopping" phase? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 Can I have both please? I like my scones with my tea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lio Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Ehh give it a chance. Some of the movement and target commands have hotkeys that arent bound to the selected command tab. Otherwise then that i think the controls and hotkeys are great when you get use to em. You can cycle command tabs using T and Y. I dont know how they did it in CMx1 but CMSF is great. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 CM had right click menues which I found VERY useful. It had a pathing system that was great, and a way to see my plan before I sat it into motion. I did give it a chance, I bought it. However not being able to buy troops is a serious step backwards. Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocMcJansen Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Yes it is! I was shocked (well SHOCK force...ha ha...okay..bad joke) to see that I am not able to buy my own troops..can't understand it!! Please BFC give us a patch with this feature! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 I explained this elsewhere but with the current activity on the forum it's probably on page 20 by now... CMSF is using the concept of realistic unit formations (platoon, company, battalion) at the very core of the game. This is needed for the simulation of the entire Command&Control system, which is COMPLETELY different from CMx1. Read the C&C chapter of the manual... you'll see the game with different eyes. That's the main reason why buying a unit here and a unit there is more or less ruled out at this point. Instead, by setting the various options, you get a realistic mix of units for that. We intend to change and tweak and polish with patches so who knows what things will change, but please understand that there is a VERY good reason for why things are the way they are. Martin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Buying your own troops is almost as essential to the CM experience as WeGo is. Right now, as far as multiplayer games are concerned, CMSF fails to deliver either. Needs to be patched in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocMcJansen Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Couldn't say it better Exel!! Some things that made CM so great are lacking in CMSF... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 sigh. Steel Panthers III modeled modern combat, with the purchase units option. You've taken away this feature, and seriously gimped your multiplay ability. Whatever realism qualms you have, you should have as gamedesigners seen what realism to have and not have. WW2 online have almost made it so that we have to walk from Berlin to get to the battle, ...realistic, YES, boring YES.. last point. Realistic mix? units are ofen put into battle depending on what they have at hand, they don't wait for a proper 'mix' . Janster poster below is on the target tnx 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Originally posted by Moon: We intend to change and tweak and polish with patches so who knows what things will change, but please understand that there is a VERY good reason for why things are the way they are.We understand that, and it's great for the campaign and individual missions (even QuickBattles if you will) but buying your own units could still be there as an option at least for HvH play. Considering that units are mixed up* even in real-life, it's not completely unrealistic either. * A platoon of Bradley's might be given a solo Abrams for fire support for a given engagement, or two different units (eg. elements of SBCT and HBCT) operating at the same area might be forced to join forces ad hoc to fight an unexpected enemy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocMcJansen Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Yep...you don't have to include it in QBs vs the Computer..but for gods sake vs a human being!!! kann ja nicht wahr sein..man leck' mich am ärmel..wie kann man das rauslassen?!? so bitter.. sorry for my german...I had to *G* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Zoidberg Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 You can put me down as someone else a bit disappointed by the lack of troop purchasing. We're not all cherry pickers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 You guys make it sound like it was totally random what players get in a QB. It's not. You can tailor the available forces for both sides almost down to specific units. >Buying your own troops is almost as essential to the CM experience as WeGo is. To the CMx1 experience to be exact. The word is out still on the CMSF experience Janster - comparing CMSF with SP3 doesn't really make much sense. Martin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 One thing moon forgot to mention...how are you going to get fair games if you are allowed to buy units? Points? How many points for a Abrams versus how many points for a t72? How many points for an infantry squad with jaevlins vs. militia on the syrian side with rpgs? The game is about asymmetical warfare, you want to make it even sides. For head to head I can understand this... but how are you going to do the balancing? Remember the gnashing of teeth, and complaints about the Sherman 76mm should be 101 points and not 121. Would be even worse with modern weaponry. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 Yes it does, its your only competitor, and you both model modern combat. While you might be more detailed, its the same squads, troops and CnC being modeled. Look, the game might have many cool ideas, but you just gotta get that troop purchase back, its not gonna be flexible enough in MP. Golden rule is this = let the players have the option to choose. Options are good. Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 This was in my mind one of many very poor design decisions, that I am sure will be changed. While I can respect and even empathize with having to choose between realism and ease of play/fun decisions, CMX2 seems to be almost spastic in its balancing of these issues. The current design, in my opinion tries to be too many things to too many people (hard core war gamers vs. casual/real time players) and and fails to serve either well: 1. No WEGO in TCP/IP - .....WEGO was what made CMX1. The shift to real time play is a FUN decision, in order to support non-traditional war gamers. Period. It is not "more realistic" in any way, as it is impossible to actually control any number of troops in anything resembling reality in real time. It is however fun for some, no argument...However, in shifting the design to accommodate real time play, they have crippled a critical functionality for their core demographic (traditional war gamers). 2. The inability to purchase troops is a staggering omission. It is presented as a "Realism" decision, but has a significant negative impact on "fun." Sure, random troop battles are fun, but so is being able to purchase units. Given the already highly suspect ability to balance U.S. forces verses any modern OPFOR it is understandable why it would be proposed that forces be fixed. However, I believe time will show that it is indeed the opposite, at least on the Syrian side. This is because I believe that it will quickly become apparent that there are limited force selections that will be effective/competitive on the Syrian side. Without access to those forces a game will be pretty much decided at the start based on what forces are made randomly available. Now before any total fan boys blast my post with L2P comments, etc. Please understand that I am a huge fan of Battlefront and am only offering my observations in the spirit of constructive feedback, AND with full faith and confidence that many of these issues will be addressed in the future! My advice, admittedly of limited value, to Battlefront is to take another look at who they want their core demographic to be, and tailor the design to them.....as it stands now, CMX2:Shock Force has a serious identify crisis. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Someone in the community will eventually come up with a purchase system, the way Fionn invented the Panther-76 rules - if it is felt to be necessary. Will be interesting to watch. It is not even 24 hours since release, after all. So if any of you have a foolproof pricing system for all the units in CM:SF, post it here - I think we'd all be very interested to see it and test it out. The M1 balancing should be very intriguing, as rune points out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 Urk realtime for the pvp variant... Sigh..it's hard to deal with so many units on a realtime scale, things are over in seconds, and having to wade through menues will mean my troops are just ...that much dead. Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hub Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 I like the unit selection just as it is - it's quick, easy, and maintains formation integrity...don't mess with it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 quick...easy... wow, I guess I should compare it to Starcraft II then? Nothing is quick'n'easy with this game...why the heck unit selection should be is just silly. Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hub Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 As mentioned elsewhere by others, the meat of the game is on the battlefield,with formations and C2, not Wal-Mart style unit purchasing, where you'll take one of those, one of those, and two of those. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janster Posted July 28, 2007 Author Share Posted July 28, 2007 So we're doomed to have the same force makeup every MP game.. Do you see where that might go, in terms of replayability? I like it when I can buy my troops, you get more attached to them... Now all I want is just a lasso to rope and tell my troops to go there and and attack. Janster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Umm..you forget that US Marines are coming, then Nato countries. You are basing everything on the first release. Don't forget the modules. Oh and if you serious about group command, shift left click and select the units. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted July 28, 2007 Share Posted July 28, 2007 Originally posted by rune: One thing moon forgot to mention...how are you going to get fair games if you are allowed to buy units? Points? How many points for a Abrams versus how many points for a t72? How many points for an infantry squad with jaevlins vs. militia on the syrian side with rpgs? The game is about asymmetical warfare, you want to make it even sides. For head to head I can understand this... but how are you going to do the balancing?That's an interesting notion... considering how every other comparable game has managed to pull it off, including CMx1. Steel Panthers series are another great example, but so is the new World in Conflict. If anything it should be easier to balance the units by cost rather than trying to make them balanced unit-for-unit. If something is too good to be a gamekiller, it's not expensive enough. Originally posted by Hub: I like the unit selection just as it is - it's quick, easy, and maintains formation integrity...don't mess with it. Is there a reason why we could not have both? We can have the current preset unit mixes, and then we can have an option to hand-pick your units. Players can choose which setting to use. 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.