Module Question

[C'Rogers]

I understand the basic concept of the CMx2 will be more depth less volume. And that modules are meant to add volume to the scenario chosen by the main title.

What occurred to me though, and what I don't think has been mentioned in depth, was how much volume will be added by the modules? To use an example let's take the the WWII game that will be out after SF, which I will presume will be Eastern Front (just to make my example easier). Suppose the game is widely successful and it is a few years later after many, many modules. Would this game now have the volume of CM:BB, or even with many add on's will the game not approach that level of scope?

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Yes I too am curious about how the module system will work.

Will BFC be using the HPS type methods of a dedicated team of amateurs to keep modules coming? Will there be just one or two modules per title or if a given title is particularly popular, such as NWE and Eastern Front, will the modules keep coming for a couple of years?

BTW… Steve has already made clear that no title, Eastern Front to take an example, will ever end up with as much coverage as was the case in CMBB. But I too would like to see the more popular titles have a long run of modules. As we will have to pay for the modules I guess there is hope that this will be possible.

I should add that I am very much sold on the idea of depth, a narrow focus, for each title. For example the greater detail in the graphics that a narrower focus will allow. If it is Stalingrad, it will look more like Stalingrad with the AFVs and uniforms more specific. (In fact for the Eastern Front title I would prefer Korsun or the L’vov operation as a title over Stalingrad, but each to their own .)

All good fun ,

All the best,

Kip.

[MikeyD]

Gee, I haven't considered what a CMSF module would be like... probably because I don't know what the base game is like!

If the base game comes with Abrams, Bradley, Hummer, and Stryker, maybe a module would include M1117 AC, M113 APC (I refuse to call it a 'Gavin'), and that tracked plow/earthmover thingie - whatever its designation is. Y'know, if BFC keeps accumulating Russian and U.S. equipment they won't be very far off from having all the makings for a hypothetical WWIII Fulda Gap game! Just repaint everything green and discard anything made after 1990.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

[QB] Hi,

Yes I too am curious about how the module system will work.

Will BFC be using the HPS type methods of a dedicated team of amateurs to keep modules coming?

Would that not require giving knowledge of the game code to these amateurs - something they have been singularly unwilling to do since 2000? Each module would need new 3D models, no? As well as research such as ballitics data that has to be consistent from module to module. 88mm shell performance needs to be identical in an Eastern Front module to a Western Front module, for example.

If it is Stalingrad, it will look more like Stalingrad with the AFVs and uniforms more specific.

Unpainted T-34s coming off the Stalingrad assembly lines maybe, but 95% of weapons and uniforms would be unchanged from game to game regardless of which operation you placed it in. The German Army was extremely - uniform - when it came to uniforms. Photos of Germans in Stalingrad are remarkable for the complete lack of distinctive insignia; perhaps the only interesting units were 24 P.D. who wore golden yellow waffenfarbe rather than pink of panzer and schützen troops, and the insignia of Hoch und Deutschmeister who were also, IIRC, part of the 6th Army? Otherwise, there was nothing to distinguish the bulk of German forces in Stalingrad from each other.

There were also no distinctive items of kit issued only during that time frame or in that location - one or two examples of such surface in other places, such as the fur lined parkas issued to SS troops that are so prominent in photos of one of the Kharkov battles (though I honestly don't know if they were unique to that time and place). For the most part though, nothing distinctive like the US M1942 airborne jumpsuit that is so synonymous with paratroopers in Normandy.

(In fact for the Eastern Front title I would prefer Korsun or the L’vov operation as a title over Stalingrad, but each to their own

At the company level, there would be room within these operations for much more variety - Stalingrad could mean fighting across Steppe in summer heat (if one has a company attacking during the approach to the city in September 1942) just as much as it could mean urban combat in freezing cold. All will depend on the depth of research the designers do.

[ November 15, 2005, 11:34 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[juan_gigante]

I think that a CM:SF module is much more likely to be something like "the British/French/German forces" or "U.S. Marines" or "Some extra crap for the Red team" than "M113 APC"

[kipanderson]

Michael,

Of course BFC will still have to do a lot of the work. The HPS games can be modded very easily, not the more complex CM games.

The research can easily be done by amateurs. My guess is that it will be a mix of amateurs and more new staff from BFC. Plus maybe outsourced graphics and models.

It would be fun to know what BFC has in mind.

When it comes to Korsun and L’vov one reason I am fan is that mid/late war Eastern Front interests me far more than early war. Of course, Stalingrad could “just” fit a definition of mid war. That is the winter fighting could.

Early war, including summer ’42, the Soviets were too amateurish for my tastes, to make a fun game. Also the toys, equipment, are more fun in the later war period. In my view.

In all the years of CMBB I must have only played one or two early war games. They just do not take my imagination, “each to their own”.

CMSF will be fun, I look forward to it. But as a general rule it is very much First World v First World warfare that interests me. Too great a difference in competence reduces the fun for me. Differences in style and equipment are good, but I prefer both parties to be good at what they do. Hence mid/late war Eastern Front is just the job for a guy with my prejudices .

All the best,

Kip.

[juan_gigante]

I think that an East Front game would be either Stalingrad (name recognition) or late war (cool toys to play with).

[kipanderson]

Hi,

“I think that an East Front game would be either Stalingrad (name recognition)”….I tend to agree…and from my own selfish point of view could just about live with the later, winter Stalingrad fighting as a setting . But would still prefer late war .

Also, there are many big changes to CMX2 over CMX1 but in terms of game play CMX2 is clearly optimized for close in city and urban warfare. In terms of the quality of the simulation it looks to me as though the biggest leap forward will be in close quarters combat.( If only because CMX1, certainly without absolute spotting, simulated the slightly longer range fighting so well already.) Stalingrad would show this in a very flattering light.

Time will tell.

All the best,

Kip.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

Also, there are many big changes to CMX2 over CMX1 but in terms of game play CMX2 is clearly optimized for close in city and urban warfare.

Clear to whom?

[Dillweed]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

Hi,

“I think that an East Front game would be either Stalingrad (name recognition)”….I tend to agree…and from my own selfish point of view could just about live with the later, winter Stalingrad fighting as a setting . But would still prefer late war .

Also, there are many big changes to CMX2 over CMX1 but in terms of game play CMX2 is clearly optimized for close in city and urban warfare. In terms of the quality of the simulation it looks to me as though the biggest leap forward will be in close quarters combat.( If only because CMX1, certainly without absolute spotting, simulated the slightly longer range fighting so well already.) Stalingrad would show this in a very flattering light.

Time will tell.

All the best,

Kip.

From what I understand of the module concept a Stalingrad game (in my uninformed opinion the most likely setting for an eastern front game, if a EF game is made*) would only feature, say, the city fighting of the fall, where modules would require different units and terrain. Say, the summer push across the stepps or the winter counter offensive.

To say the CMX2 engine is designed primarily for urban ops is, as far as I know, incorrect. Urban settings are just being more accuratly modeled. AFAIK the CMx1 combat model was for the normandy area of CMBO. Bocage, some more open areas and the occational farmhouse. Cities were treated as very large groupings of individual farmhouses.

I believe ourdoor more long range engagements will be properly modeled as there were no major urban engaments in the western front of the ETO. So if the engine was urban centered CMBOx2 would either be of VERY limited scope or really lame. The other possibility is steve was telling the truth and the engine is very flexible.

*Remember there will be only 5 CMx2 games. We already have 3 settings

1)Modern

2)WW2 western front

3)Sci-fi/SLOD

I'd say eastern front is a good bet for 4 or 5, but there are a whole lot cool settings for wargames. Eastern front does not have Americans (not a dealbreaker as we've seen with CMBB, but not the best thing for sales) For the record, I'd love a Stalingrad or Berlin game.

[ November 15, 2005, 03:09 PM: Message edited by: Dillweed ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

I believe ourdoor more long range engagements will be properly modeled as there were no major urban engaments in the western front of the ETO.

Aachen, and Fauborg-de-Vacelles (sp?) are two that come to mind off the top of my head. Also of course Arnhem and Nijmegen.

And my favourite, Groningen. If an entire division fighting there doesn't count as "urban combat" I don't know what does.

Hoogerheide and Woensdrecht also come to mind.

And the fighting on the approach to Hamburg, two men of the GD won Knight's Crosses for hunting tanks in urban terrain in April 1945.

If you want to count Italy as part of the Western Front, then Ortona certainly qualifies.

[Splinty]

If we're talking Eastern Front I think something like a Kursk Pack would be more interesting than Stalingrad. Perhaps each of the major battles of Operation Zittadelle (sp?) would fall into the module concept. For example a Prokhorovka module.

[Dillweed]

Somehow, I'm having a difficult time picturing CM: Fauborg-de-Vacelles.

You're right of course. To be honest, I hadn't heard of several of those. Unfourtunetly, there are the marketing considerations. I'd go so far to say that if the battle did not appear in some form in Speilberg movie/mini-series we're not likely to see it. So Overload beaches, bocage, Market Garden or the ardennes are my guesses.

Arnhem would indeed be a cool game, but it suffers from the killer lack of americans previously mentioned. My guess for game #2 would be a Normandy title centering on an american infantry company with modules for brits, commonwealth and airbonre.

[C'Rogers]

Remember there will be only 5 CMx2 games. We already have 3 settings

I thought, though I may have misread or missed correct post, that they had a top five list, not that there would be only 5 CMx games.

On a second thing that I may be wrong on, I thought they hadn't "officially" announced what the third game would be.

Just would like to clarify those two points from someone who follows the forums more closely than I.

[Peter Cairns]

I doubt they would have put in the effort they have to build the game engine up from scratch and put it at the core of their future buisness strategy, if they plan to stop producing games for it within three years.

Peter.

[Fly Pusher]

What is not clear to me is the way that 3rd party scenarios (which are a large part of the phenomenal game replayability of the previous CM generation) will be able to cope with added modules.

If designed for the lowest common denominator (the modules shipped on the install DVD) then the buildings, vehicles and weapons, and hence the degree of replayability, is likely to be significantly constrained (depending on exactly now narrow the initial release is set up).

If designed to exploit additional follow up modules then does this mean that these scenarios can ONLY be played by the small subset of people whose module collection includes all those required by the scenario ?

Will scenarios all have to list the modules required to allow them to work ?

It sounds like a sure way to piss of those new to the fold. What if they cannot run 90% of scenarios because of module requirements ? Also imagine the outcry if they then buy an extra module specifically to run a scenario that they turns out to suck.

Remember folks – the vast majority of CMBB etc players never bothered with mods and do not waste their lives hanging around in fora like these. Its unlikely that they will all rush out to download the latest module to add rare Finnish über AFVs even if they are equipped with AT toothpicks and alcohol/air explosives. Even less likely if they have to pay for them.

Hoping for the best. Fearing the worst….

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

I doubt they would have put in the effort they have to build the game engine up from scratch and put it at the core of their future buisness strategy, if they plan to stop producing games for it within three years.

Peter.

Like they did with CMX1 you mean?

There could be a CMX3 three years down the pike.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

“Urban settings are just being more accurately modeled.”

Exactly… that is all I meant . From Steve’s posts it looks to me as those the biggest leap forward is in close in fighting due to the increase in control being offered. I meant no more .

When it comes to the Eastern Front I would be truly shocked if there were no Eastern Front title. But life is full of surprises… no Eastern Front title for CMX2 would certainly be one of those surprises.

All good fun,

All the best,

Kip.

[Dillweed]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Peter Cairns:

I doubt they would have put in the effort they have to build the game engine up from scratch and put it at the core of their future buisness strategy, if they plan to stop producing games for it within three years.

Peter.

Like they did with CMX1 you mean?

There could be a CMX3 three years down the pike. </font>

[Battlefront.com]

Yeah, we have a Top 5 list of topics and then after that all bets are off. We might still be using the CMx2 engine, we might not be. And what topics will be covered after that are unknown.

Here are some topics which should answer the basic questions raised here (in order of detail):

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=000159;p=2

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=000165

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=000489

Steve

[C'Rogers]

This is taken from the second thead.

Title will be a fairly broad military action. Could be West Front 1940, could be all of the American Civil War. It will not be a specific battle, like the Bulge or Bull Run. That is what the Modules are for.

Steve

Ok that is the post I missed which I was searching for. My previous mistaken conception of the design was that the title was going to be a fairly centered but big event (ie Battle of Gettysburg) and that the modules would add similair but broader materials (Vicksburg, Antietam) thus leading to a whole overall picture after many modules (the whole Civil War). Judging from the above quote I had it a bit backwards.

As an off topic note, because I am sure BFC's main problem is that they don't have enough people telling them what game(s) they should be making, would really enjoy seeing an Civil War game.

[Colin]

Originally posted by Fly Pusher:

What is not clear to me is the way that 3rd party scenarios (which are a large part of the phenomenal game replayability of the previous CM generation) will be able to cope with added modules.

If designed for the lowest common denominator (the modules shipped on the install DVD) then the buildings, vehicles and weapons, and hence the degree of replayability, is likely to be significantly constrained (depending on exactly now narrow the initial release is set up).

If designed to exploit additional follow up modules then does this mean that these scenarios can ONLY be played by the small subset of people whose module collection includes all those required by the scenario ?

Will scenarios all have to list the modules required to allow them to work ?

It sounds like a sure way to piss of those new to the fold. What if they cannot run 90% of scenarios because of module requirements ? Also imagine the outcry if they then buy an extra module specifically to run a scenario that they turns out to suck.

Remember folks – the vast majority of CMBB etc players never bothered with mods and do not waste their lives hanging around in fora like these. Its unlikely that they will all rush out to download the latest module to add rare Finnish über AFVs even if they are equipped with AT toothpicks and alcohol/air explosives. Even less likely if they have to pay for them.

Hoping for the best. Fearing the worst….

Why would it be a problem? Perhaps you'd have a shortage of scenarios if a bunch of really popular modules came out and you didn't buy any of them.

I really don't think it's unreasonable to have a map only playable if a module is installed. If a map designer wants to use elements added in a module it's only logical.

[Bertram]

Hi Dorosh,

I support Groningen. Would be nice to see what they make of the town I was born in and am living in at the moment .

You wouldnt be influenzed by it being Canadians who arrived here first would you? Got to confess that at the time (according to my father) they were either hoping for Poles (who didn't have much in the way of artillery) or the Russians to arrive first (the last would have been bad in terms of artillery, but place he was living then was rather communist, he even told he secretly learned some Russian in the war, to welcome the liberators).

Bertram

[MikeyD]

A new CM:SF module after the game's release implies that BFC has taken 3-5 months out of its schedule to build and release that module. Would the folks here instead prefer to see game releases in this order?

1: Modern war game (CM:SF)

- significant space between releases -

2: WWII game

3: Modern War update module

4: WWII update module

5: Space Lobsters game

[Battlefront.com]

To be clear, one of the advantages of the Module system is that we don't have to delay the next Title release in order to give the previous Title a lot of fleshing out. By keeping the focus of a Module tight and within the bounds of a Title's content, this allows Charles (in particular) to focus on making the next Title. In theory we could outsource the vast bulk of the work for each Module to people outside of the Battlefront team. We don't think that will be necessary, but it will likely be desirable for the later Modules (i.e. as we get closer to a Title release).

Steve