For Me, If WEGO Goes, I Go

[Xipe66]

Originally posted by Tinjaw:

... I keep trying to have intelligent discussion on game related forums ...

No you weren't, you were unconstrucively slagging in order to bandwagon your wishes through.

[Cheeba]

Originally posted by Becket:

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

Sorry, CMx2 has issues, but this list sounds like whining.

Exactly. An ounce of tact goes a long, long way. (and yes...my responses lacked tact, and I regret losing my temper...lately I do a lot more drafting of posts, then hitting refresh rather than post, but this one slipped by my filters.) </font>

[Becket]

Originally posted by Tinjaw:

I've had enough of this ****. I'll take my concerns off the forums and directly to Steve.

Out.

Five bucks says you will write your private message a whole lot more carefully than your public one.

(But in case you think that's not necessary, do check out the thread about why TCP/IP We-Go implementation is not possible.) Edit-edit - I see that you're posting in that thread, and that your point is "I have fast Internet, everyone else who doesn't should just pound sand."

[ July 29, 2007, 03:27 PM: Message edited by: Becket ]

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Tinjaw:

But, excuse me, that is PBEM, not multiplayer.

Doh! I see the problem now. You have to send the file to someone else!

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Becket:

Exactly. An ounce of tact goes a long, long way. (and yes...my responses lacked tact, and I regret losing my temper...lately I do a lot more drafting of posts, then hitting refresh rather than post, but this one slipped by my filters.)

Yeah, I could have tried tact... but I gave that up years ago.

There are some legitimate concerns out there, but seeing a post that read like a 4-year old that didn't want to eat his spinach for dinner got my blood up.

[Becket]

Originally posted by Berlichtingen:

...seeing a post that read like a 4-year old that didn't want to eat his spinach for dinner got my blood up.

A sunday evening is a great time for catharsis.

[SgtMuhammed]

Berli gave up on tact about two seconds after he was born, but we still love him.

[InvaderCanuck]

You absolutely can execute a facing at the end of a string of waypoints.

Each waypoint is individually selectable.

You can issue all sorts of commands, facing is one of them.

Simply left click on the waypoint. Then click the face hotkey. Draw the line in the direction you wish to face, viola.

[Tauschitz]

Tinjaw,

As much as I want Steve and Charles to implement TCP/IP WEGO, the way you are going about it in this thread (i.e., cursing and throwing a fit) is *far* more likely to prevent that from ever coming to pass than helping bring about TCP/IP WEGO.

Let the arguements speak for themselves.

[JonS]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

Personally I am afraid to try RT mode. I can barely remember the commands in WEGO so I don't know where they made it more RT friendly.

I'm with you, bro, but it's not all that bad. Start with something small (one pn + attachments) against the AI, and forget about trying to control - or even understand - everything that's going on. If you lose a few seconds - or men - trying to find the right command, oh well.

Oh, and don't try to rush things. Slow and steady is a good mantra for however you chose to play CMSF, but it especially applies to RT.

A good scen to practice in would be the third demo scen, the training one. Not "Going to Town", not "Smashing Metal", the other one.

I prefer WEGO, but RT does have its attractions

Regards

Jon

[SgtMuhammed]

So far waypoints seem to work the same. The only problem I have is the new keys to get to them. Just takes some getting used to is all.

[Mace]

Originally posted by Cheeba:

CMx2 is a strategy game that takes place in real time, hence it's an RTS.

No it's not.

Von Clausewitz defined Military Strategy as:

"the employment of battles to gain the end of war."

CMx2 is a TACTICAL game.

[rlg85]

Originally posted by Becket:

(Sorry, it's just getting to be annoying listening to non-gamers suggest that CMSF is an RTS. Broaden your horizons, wargamers, and maybe you won't make such mind-numbingly stupid statements.)

Just looking through this thread and saw this. That is why many of the "wargamers" here are going down kicking and screaming, we're suddenly labeled "non-gamers" at a place that 7 years ago was the epitome of wargaming when they released a revolutionary product.

They've released a new product that is probably just as revolutionary, but one that makes an evolution that leaves us turn based wargamers behind.

I just think that many here are still in disbelief of the obvious path of CM as a series becoming a high brow RTS instead of the "old fashioned and game of the past turn-based"

Heck, I like the game, beside the the camera control bugs and the fact I cant hit shift without a freeze. lol

But im sure that will work that out and this will be come the superb game that was promised. This will definately fill that occasional urge to play a good thinking RTS without all the resource gathering crap you see elsewhere.

But I will have to look elsewhere for the type of wargame Im looking for, that allows the time to think via turns, but has a believeable representation of the action, which is the dream game many of us wargamers found with CMBO.

Many of you will say "but this game has WEGO, what the heck are you talking about?"

Open your eyes a bit, this game was designed for RT, WEGO is just an unwelcomed guest that was thrown in to placate the WEGO nuts and get them to buy the game. What Tinjaw said about the UI and interface of the game in general was correct, this is made for RT. Steve Grammont has said as much about the game being designed to play in RT, and is no doubt why he enjoys playing it that way.

(Just thought id add, Hunt was NOT move to contact... Fire up CMAK or CMBB and you'll see. Your tank will start moving again after engaging.)

When it comes down to it, the devs have the vision for the game that they want to have. Us wargamers are just unhappy at the moment, but dont worry i'm sure it will die down and many of us will join in and enjoy this game with the rest of you. Just we will be looking elsewhere and hoping a spiritual successor to CMx1 comes some day.

What you dont have to do is instantly label those who have a problem with turn-based starting to leave their favorite game as infantile, non-gamers, and all the other crap ive seen thrown around here lately. I only have to look as far as the TOW forums to see that RTS (or RTT or whatever you semantics nazis want to call it) fans can be much worse than the recent little wargamer outburst when unhappy. Id love to see a little discussion on RT vs Turn based, if it could possibly stay civil..

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Mace:

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

CMx2 is a strategy game that takes place in real time, hence it's an RTS.

No it's not.

Von Clausewitz defined Military Strategy as:

"the employment of battles to gain the end of war."

CMx2 is a TACTICAL game. </font>

[Berlichtingen]

rlg85,

I haven't any problem with wanting the turn based (WEGO) portion improved. I prefer WEGO... in fact, I hate RT including CMx2's implementation of it. My issue was with the way one individual chose to voice his opinion.

As for WEGO being tacked on, I'm not sure that is true. My initial reaction was very negative, but as I get the hang of the new controls, I'm finding it becoming just as easy to use as CMx1. I am also seeing noticeable improvements (I mentioned the pause command earlier).

I'm going to give the game a little time. Both for BFC to patch and for me to get the hang of all the new bits and bobbles in it before I start complaining about the new stuff

[whaco]

QUOTE]Originally posted by Tinjaw:

And, since I am just throwing my opinions around, if CMx2 goes for the RTS crowd, IMNSHO it is going to die fast. As an realtime game, CMSF is just a kludge. Even though I dislike RTS games, I have played many, and Combat Mission Shock Force falls below well below the bar as a realtime game..

[Chelco]

Ey Tinjaw!

You have been around wargaming for more than I can remember and I'm a bit surprised to read about your reservations with CMSF.

Do you mean this game CMSF has been toned down in realism to cater the RTS crowd? Or you miss some commands from the old CMx1 engine?

I don't want to sound like a fanboy, but I'm having a great time with real time and I'm just interested in your feedback. Regretably (understandably too), you are not willing to push forward in this thread. So PM or e-mail me if you feel like.

FWIW, the first pages of the manual have a section entitled "Unlearning Combat Mission".

[rlg85]

Originally posted by Chelco:

FWIW, the first pages of the manual have a section entitled "Unlearning Combat Mission".

Yeah I think thats what some of us have a problem with, that this isn't a successor to CM but a new game (as they have said, but we didn't want to believe and bought this anyway.)

That said, after being a bit frustrated initially with the (IMHO) poor implementation of WEGO, ill enjoy this game for what it is, if something changes later.. great. If not, it isnt a big deal.

I personally won't be surprised if there is eventually an announcement that CMx2 WWII will be RT only, as part of the "evolution" of the game. After all, it would probably save them some programming time, and the WEGO nuts would just leave instead of complaining.

I honestly wasnt aware that there was such a market inbetween your gathering RTS and a turn based game. Perhaps we need to come up for a new term for this type of game as it does'nt really fit the mold of anything else.

[whaco]

Originally posted by The Louch:

Well, one could argue that CM is a game of *tactics*, hence it can not be an RTS by the very definition of it. An "RTT", perhaps, but never an RTS

Good point Louch. I should have called SF an RTT which is IMHO a more accurate definition.

[SgtMuhammed]

You know, I can't wait for people to get used to the game so that we can argue about important things like the brand of Camelbak the guys are using.

[rlg85]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

You know, I can't wait for people to get used to the game so that we can argue about important things like the brand of Camelbak the guys are using.

It's not an issue of ever getting used to it.

But obviously its an argument that cant ever get through.

I like the RT for being.. RT, but this game is not the same genre as CMx1. But I see this argument is simply revolving and isn't every going anywhere.

[Rastakyle]

Originally posted by Becket:

(Sorry, it's just getting to be annoying listening to non-gamers suggest that CMSF is an RTS.

Ummm, why in god's name would a non-gamer be posting in game forum?

[Becket]

Originally posted by rlg85:

What you dont have to do is instantly label those who have a problem with turn-based starting to leave their favorite game as infantile, non-gamers, and all the other crap ive seen thrown around here lately.

I didn't do that. Reread it. I labeled those who suggest that CMSF is an RTS game as - at best - non-gamers. At worst they are being deliberately disingenous. Sort of like suggesting that I was applying any label of any sort to people who don't like turn-based. But you weren't being disingenous, were you?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

You know, I can't wait for people to get used to the game so that we can argue about important things like the brand of Camelbak the guys are using.

Bless you.

It's too bad that so many of the conversations out here are being reduced to ad hominem and actually start out with an attack on the developers. And then get followed up with 5 or 6 nearly identical threads on the same subject started by people of various degrees of disgruntlement. It really drowns out the message.

I don't mean to proselytze, but the developers really have sunk a lot of time and thought into the design decisions here. Some of the stuff has been done with a view to future development in mind; even the testers don't know what the grand plan is. The developers have also shown for the last 48 hours, and the 7 or so years before that, their willingness to accept suggestions from the crowd. It takes a bit of patience and finesse and constructiveness, but I think everyone is posting here for the same basic reasons - we'd like to see a product that fits our own individual concept of perfection, personal biases included. There is no earthly way to reconcile all those, but there are a few developers willing to at least consider it. We're posting in the "home" of one.

I don't recall Steve posting that the game is perfect or telling anyone not to post their opinion here; but then, I'd not have expected people to demand instant action on things they have no control over, either. A free exchange of ideas is great, but let's try and stay constructive. Sure, we all know that the camelbak models are a complete joke and that the straws as currently modelled are an abomination before God and the world at large, but if BF.C says they're going to fix that, then I can hold off for a couple of days before posting to the entire planet about what a corporate sellout Steve is.

Attacking each other over who is a gamer or what the definition of "S" is also seems a little beside the point.

[JonS]

Originally posted by rlg85:

I like the RT for being ... RT, but this game is not the same genre as CMx1.

FWIW, I don't get that at all. CMSF very definately is the same genre as CMx1. I'm playing CMSF pretty much the same way(s) I always played CMx1, with the addition that I now sometimes play RT as well.

Regards

Jon