All the same fundamental flaws in all their glory.

[monkeezgob]

So...no plans to implement TCIP in WEGO anytime soon. I'm done with this then. I still "don't get it". While I recognize it has its fans, personally CM:SF has been massively underwhelming and a huge disappointment. Not at all impressed with the direction BF have taken CM.

[Huntarr]

"Now, that doesn't mean that we won't be releasing any patches after v1.04"

So what? does this "mean" you won't be releasing any patches after v1.04

[JohnO]

Ok, good bye

[Lurker765]

Originally posted by Huntarr:

"Now, that doesn't mean that we won't be releasing any patches after v1.04"

So what? does this "mean" you won't be releasing any patches after v1.04

I understand what you are saying. My question was focused on the near term. If the Marines module work is the primary focus and the v1.05 patch was scheduled for four months from now it would be a lot different than if they started work on v1.05 with it being the primary goal of coding for the next month.

[Huntarr]

I do not think BFC wants to put up their project work plan to public scrutiny. Can you possibly imagine the amount of complaints, if it did not live up to someone’s expectations? They obviously did not intend to get pinched by a contractual agreement for releasing CMSF. It would be insane of them to do that same thing in a public forum since they are not under that same contractual agreement. Just look at the scuttlebutt you started by misinterpreting what seems to be a clear statement. Please, don't take offense to that since you have already admitted that was your doing. IMHO it's just better to wait out any announcements from BFC about timelines, rather than force them to explain every step of their process. We are fortunate here to have such a interactive company, let’s not make them regret giving out info.

[Lurker765]

I mostly agree. But, after dealing with a lot of frustration trying to play v1.01 Steve mentioned in a thread that perhaps those of us who were not having fun with the current incarnation of the game should go away and come back in a bit when the game is patched up to the point where BFC are happy with it.

From what I could tell from his statement I quoted it seemed that v1.04 was going to be that release. At that point I would try the game again and see if I have fun playing. If v1.05 is the finished product then I would like to know that so I could try that one.

And while I don't mind waiting I would like to know if I should just forget about this game for 5-6 months and come back then and see if I like it.

As a total hypothetical example, if BFC were to start work on the Marines module and don't release another patch for CMSF until the Marines module is out eight months from now they would meet their promise of continuing to release patches. But the spirit of that promise would have been violated in my eyes since I have a game that I can't really play and have a modicum of fun with due to the still existing bugs.

[Huntarr]

Ok, I think you have the wrong idea about how the modules work. They are going to incorporate game "features" even to the core game. So, you can not keep saying 1.05 is the finished product. BFC has stated that they will release patches to improve game play. BFC did not say what the last patch is.

[Sixxkiller]

Come on guys, BFC has never stated that 1.05 is gonna be the last patch. They are already working on it and have been since 1.04 was released. If 1.05 doesnt fix most of it I would bet 1.06 will come along at some point also. Doing a module doesnt mean they will abandon the core game. Let the testers break it some first.

[Lurker765]

I guess I am not being very clear. Sorry.

I think I now understand how the modules work. It took a couple posts to get a clarification on this, but eventually BFC explained what their plan was.

Given this understanding, BFCs statement that they will continue to release patches to the game will always be true as long as they use this engine and make available the core engine code to earlier modules.

My point is when is CMSF a released, finished, polished game? v1.01 was not it. BFC have said that v1.04 might be it. If that is the case then for me the things like WEGO not tracking data correctly when reviewing a turn, no WEGO in TCP, LOS issues, getting shot through walls and berms, vehicles not reversing when facing a major threat they can't handle, no arty smoke, etc all make it so that I cannot enjoy the game without high levels of frustration watching my men do crazy things. I mostly play PBEM since I prefer playing against humans and don't have large blocks of time in a row.

If v1.05 fixes most of these issues I would be one happy camper. If v1.05 fixes these issues and only gets released as part of the Marines module in (hypothetically) eight months I would not be a happy camper.

My initial misunderstanding was that Steve was saying that v1.04 would do the trick and be the release they wanted and that they were likely to do another patch in the near future, but that was not a guarantee since BFC was going to be focused on the new Modules instead.

Anyway, I think I am probably done posting for a while about this. I think my only recourse is to wait and see what happens. It is a bit frustrating to have preordered this game back in July and to have had to shelve it through October until my computer could play it due to the frame and lag issues, much less the gameplay problems.

Thanks for being civil on this topic. It is a breath of fresh air in here.

[Huntarr]

Lurker no worries, I am with you on the frustration but I won't let it stop me from playing and testing. I hope you are back playing sooner rather than later.

[aka_tom_w]

Programers have a saying, a Creed if you will..

I think it goes something like this...

"The LAST bug will not be fixed until the LAST user is dead"

so for now CM:SF is a work in progress

the Marines Module willl improve CM:SF (probably with a new pay to play game release and a small patch to update CM:SF for free with new "marine module" fixes and updates, BUT NOT new Marine module centric units (you pay for those).

so if the core game engine is patched or upated the patch will be free, IF new units are added to the game you will pay to update the units you have available in both games (CM:SF and the Marines module)

I hope that helps

[ October 07, 2007, 04:17 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[C'Rogers]

If that is the case then for me the things like WEGO not tracking data correctly when reviewing a turn, no WEGO in TCP, LOS issues, getting shot through walls and berms, vehicles not reversing when facing a major threat they can't handle, no arty smoke, etc all make it so that I cannot enjoy the game without high levels of frustration watching my men do crazy things.

Well the men doing crazy things have been taken care of from what I have played, the other things you may have to wait a long time for.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Dirtweasle]

Still experiencing stuck units, odd vehicle and infantry plotting or auto-pathing off the user drawn path(s), and unusual spotting or rather non-spotting of enemy in very close quarters playing the "ambush at al Fubar" scenario.

[dalem]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I know... you think we should constantly suck up to the customer

No, no, no, and emphatically no. I have never said this and never implied it. the customer is not always right.

and never, ever disagree with them no matter how rude, off base, or counter productive their behavior is. I thought we agreed to disagree on this?

We agreed to disagree because you weren't understanding what I was trying to say. Or at least, that's why I agreed.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />You can't have it both ways.

I'm not trying to. If all customers were polite, constructive and otherwise pleasant when they posted you wouldn't have any issues with my handling of the people that aren't because they wouldn't be there. But they aren't, so I have to be realistic. You've heard of Realpolitik, yes? Well, this is a sort of Realcustomerservice that I employ It isn't perfect, but the alternative is to be like Nevil Chamberlain </font>

[Pandur]

Obviously many WeGo players disagree with that, so we'll see what can be done later on

i pop in here just for a moment. iam happy to see that BFC didnt ruled that out to the negative allready.

acually i dont care if i have to buy it "again" in another module but i still hope to see TCPip WEGO with replay to be implemented at some point.

PBEM just isnt the same, it doesnt feel like a continous game. it feely like sending turns by carrier pigeons

[Thomm]

Originally posted by thewood:

I don't understand the last one. It says no LOS through the wall. Isn't that correct?

It is a low wall. It should not block LOS from the window.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Dirtweasle]

DP

[Dirtweasle]

quote:

But when someone says that something works less well in CMx2 because a more flawed approach in CMx1 was somehow better, well... I get all over that argument and kick it to the curb.

This may be the heart of this matter.

Pride in ones work is usually admirable.

[Thomm]

Some of my T72s in "Baker_1" were spinning like the tanks in the good old CC days.

[thewood]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

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

I don't understand the last one. It says no LOS through the wall. Isn't that correct?

It is a low wall. It should not block LOS from the window.

Best regards,

Thomm </font>

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

Some of my T72s in "Baker_1" were spinning like the tanks in the good old CC days.

That's the one with the disabled tank, and the little band of infantry and Bradleys protecting it? Played that one last night, and had no such problem. The enemy actually attacked pretty well. In fact I have to say it's one of the better made scenarios that come with the game.

How come though if all the units (US at least AFAIK) are assumed to have night vision the player does not have that?

BTW in the Ambush at al Fubar I had a Stryker IFV actually drive into a building and get kind of lodged int here for a while. Eventually it came out, but the scenario has that column of reinforcements come in all a big clump and even while taking 3 turns to unscramble the traffic jam I had that weirdness.

As mentioned elsewhere I can confirm splitting off the AT team is still broke, in so far as getting the AT specialist to go with the Javelin launcher.

[Exel]

Originally posted by Pandur:

acually i dont care if i have to buy it "again" in another module but i still hope to see TCPip WEGO with replay to be implemented at some point.

I care, since it was promised with the original game. I for one am not going to pay for any modules before I get what I paid for in the original game.

If TCP/IP WeGo is added in a free patch, it's forgivable as a delayed feature. If it isn't added, or is only added in a commercial module, it's borderline fraud.

It would really help if BFC cleared what it's planning to fix and include in future patches and what the "Known Issues" are so that the same discussions wouldn't have to be had over and over again.

[Dirtweasle]

Could post a link to where I can find this promise?

[Lurker765]

I believe some people had issues with the text on the game box that says:

"Play the game as you want: Realtime, WEGO-Turnbased, against the Computer or against another human player via TCP/IP, PBEM (play-by-email) or hotseat"

Paradox's web site for CMSF says:

"Playable in both real-time and turn-based modes or head-to-head via TCP/IP, PBEM or hotseat"

http://www.paradoxplaza.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=178&Itemid=199

I'm not sure if this a promise of WEGO TCP/IP or not, but if you came from a CMx1 environment it might be easy to assume it. In any event, the text is a bit misleading in my opinion.