Jump to content

Force setup not in v1.04, when?


Recommended Posts

Damn, being able to customize your forces quickly for a QB would make this game so much better. Can you atleast have options for what types of units we get? I get really annoyed when I set it to a tiny city map and it gives me all these jeeps and kornets and the enemy doesn't even have any armor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frustrating, I agree. Best to use the scenario editor and delete the units that you don't want. Then of course you know exactly what you're up against, but at least that isn't as random as the current setup. I tried to pit M-1s against T72s several times before giving up and heading for the scenario editor.

Picking individually was an excellent way to ensure you get what you want and was very useful when you wanted to field test combinations. Allowing players to cherry pick is not incompatible with being able to choose a force with an accurate OOB, I would have thought.

Not having individual choice takes away a freedom that players enjoyed, makes for less flexibility in the use of the game, and gives something else for players to gripe about. I really can't understand why such a small thing as this with such important ramifications was left out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As stated, there are no plans to significantly alter QB design for CM:SF. Version 1.04 took 4 weeks to produce and it had no QB changes in it. Adding point system to QBs now would probably take 2 months to implement, at least. It's not a small undertaking, plus we don't want to do it like CMx1 anyway. We're planning on taking a fresh look and trying to bring the best parts of both systems together while HOPEFULLY avoiding the problems inherent in each.

Sivodsi,

I tried to pit M-1s against T72s several times before giving up and heading for the scenario editor.
Well, the Syrians don't have much better than T-72s, so it's not like Cherry Picking would make a dramatic difference.

Picking individually was an excellent way to ensure you get what you want and was very useful when you wanted to field test combinations. Allowing players to cherry pick is not incompatible with being able to choose a force with an accurate OOB, I would have thought.
Perhaps not fundamentally incompatiable, but the safeguards against it were not seen as worth doing at the time due to the more focused nature of CM:SF's TO&E. It's not like CMBB when you had dozens and dozens of different infantry formations, a couple hundred vehicles, and more weapons than I can think of to choose from.

nd gives something else for players to gripe about.
Players griped plenty about the point system in CMx1, so we expect griping no matter what we do :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The force size & selection for QB's is a joke. Now that most of technical issues are resovled in this patch, maybe we will start getting some badly needed improvements for QB's in the next.

Using the editor takes some of the suprise out of QB's, not know what you are going up against was part of the fun in QB's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

Since the game is making its own force selections from some type of available pool of forces, is it possible to display to the player the general options that game will be selecting from, and then let the user choose? This would, IMO, reduce the frustation of picking an armor force for Syrians and not getting any tanks.

As for the point system in general, my suggestion is to take the same approach that miniature games do with army lists. Flames of War is far from perfect (but I bet you'll like their company name tongue.gif ), but the army list system generally seems to work. Example: if you build a Soviet infantry force you have to have X points of infantry (drawn from specific options), then a cafeteria list of other options to round out your force.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...