Peter Cairns Posted January 21, 2006 Share Posted January 21, 2006 One of the things that BF mentioned early on was that CMx2 would be scalable, so for instance you could have a game that had 1 to 12 representation for an American civil war game that would allow large actions. However you could also have a WW2 variant where a single unit was a Sherman Platoon that acted as one but was represented by four tanks, in the same way that a CM:SF team of 4 will act as one unit, but you'll see all four guys. Now heres my idea, if you had both games , a 1:12 WW2 and a 1:1 WW2, then you could while playing the large scale, have the option to click on a part of the terrain and have it saved as a QB for the smaller game. This saved game, would use a 2km by 2km map based around the terrain from the big game, with all the units within it represented. I don't think it would be possible to stop the game ,play the small game and go back in real time, but if two players wanted to quit and play the QB, they might be able to feed the final result in some way. Even if interaction wasn't possible, just being able to recreate key parts of a large battle as small a scale CMQB, would be fun. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted January 23, 2006 Author Share Posted January 23, 2006 I refuse to let this topic drift off the radar without one comment, evn if is is, and I am tempting fate here..... "RUBBISH". Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Isn't that like CM:C? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted January 23, 2006 Author Share Posted January 23, 2006 In a way yes, but as far as I know it doesn't create maps based on exactly where you are, I thought it was more adstract than that. What I am talking about is closer in that both games will use the same basic engine, rather than the CM;C which are two seperate games. It would also be more flexible than the 1km2 tile system operating in CM:C. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Dropping the scale to 1:1 controllable wil probably involve some significant code tweaks. i can't imagine having the ability bounce back and forth between scales inside of one game. I do believe BFC had said (correct me if I'm wrong) that the player might have the option of playing the game from the 'perspective' of an individual unit (soldier, armor, etc.) .Something a bit more sophisticated than the current CMx1 'lock to unit' command, though you won't be switching to 1:1 controllable. I don't see1:1 controllable for awhile. Depending on what Space Lobsters looks like I can well imagine us controling individual rampaging lobster units in realtime. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'Rogers Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 If I understand what Peter is getting at here is that if you were to play a 300 point battle (or whatever the equivalent is in Shock Force) you would control every indiviual guy (one unit = one guy). However if you played a 1000 point battle the game would scale so that the smallest unit you could select would be a squad (one unit equals approximatly 10 guys). And around a 3000 point battle the smallest you could select would be a platoon (one unit = 30 guys). I suppose depending on how detailed the control was it would also increase the detail of unit actions (in a small game you might be able to order your guys to blow down a certain wall to move from building to building, in a larger game that would probably be abstracted). Personally I think it would be amazing to have a game like that but don't really expect to see it. One it seems like BFC would be packing too much into a game, it would be like asking them to put in WWII, the Korean War, and modern warfare. It would be a huge project that could be split across multiple games. Secondly even if they were so inclined to do so, from the way I have read their posts they haven't done the work for a 1 to 1 game, or anything with greater then squad level control. Just that it is in the engine and they can do so at a later time. The way it stands, I think, is that the engine is scalable, but games will not be. Maybe when they get around to the fourth or fifth game in the series they will have done enough with different scales that we can see soemething along these lines. I imagine it would make the game more sellable on the campaign aspect if they could say you went from controling a platoon to a full batalion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Yeah, Mikey is right. It would be an either or thing. Coding a game to work both ways would involve twice the amount of work. So if we should do a game where the scale is significantly higher, we won't allow people to bounce back and forth between scales. It will be fixed for that title. C'Rogers is also correct. The capability is there only in theory. It will still take a lot of coding to get it to actually do anything but 1:1, battalion sized engagements. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Steve The capability is there only in theory. It will still take a lot of coding to get it to actually do anything but 1:1, battalion sized engagements. Again references to battalion sized engagements after (if memory still serves me)posts and posts about how a company sized game does not require things like battalion HQ. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 I figured someone would pick on that Remember that I was speaking of more than just CM:SF. Currently the game is capable of handling many battalions on a single side. It's just you'd need a computer that doesn't exist to play it on, and more patience than any sane person has. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 You just reminded me of your upcoming title Grognards, where entire armies are capable of being marched across the screen! Of course nobody's suggesting we're going to get anything like 1:1 controllability for THOSE guys! :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 Steve, No sane person would play it, hell on this forum that is all but a challenge... Peter, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixxkiller Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 A sane person wouldnt come here for years waiting for a game, but my guess is you are doing your part to make us insane.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 since when are old Board Game, wargamers that used to play ASL and spend more time argueing about the rules than playing the game... "sane persons" ?? :confused: -tom w Originally posted by Battlefront.com: I figured someone would pick on that Remember that I was speaking of more than just CM:SF. Currently the game is capable of handling many battalions on a single side. It's just you'd need a computer that doesn't exist to play it on, and more patience than any sane person has. Steve 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.