Small Bone

[Battlefront.com]

PSY,

I assume real-time is pausable?

Yes.

Can we give orders while paused when playing single player?

No. You can move around, check out units, etc. but not change what any unit is doing. This blurs the line between RealTime and WeGo and we think that's not in the best interests of the game. It is, however, something that can be revisited later.

Also can we switch between real-time and turn-based.

No. This is not something that can be done easily from a code perspective. All sorts of things have to be set up one way or the other depending on which mode you select. Therefore, it is one or the other only.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

Q: Can we give orders while paused when playing single player?

A: No. You can move around, check out units, etc. but not change what any unit is doing. This blurs the line between RealTime and WeGo and we think that's not in the best interests of the game. It is, however, something that can be revisited later.

GOOD!

Q: Also can we switch between real-time and turn-based.

A: No. This is not something that can be done easily from a code perspective. All sorts of things have to be set up one way or the other depending on which mode you select. Therefore, it is one or the other only.

Steve

GOOD!

All is right and well in the World of CM:SF at BFC Central !

-tom w

[Scipio]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Just thought I'd let you know that as of last night CM:SF is now both RealTime and WeGo ...

Steve

[MikeyD]

Forgive my confusion - by no maps at all do you mean no generation of 'landscapes' to put our buildings on? Or do you mean no setting-up of game maps, no placing of buildings, etc.? Your previous bone about building construction - was that a feature for in-house scenario designers to build the maps or was that something the players could tinker with?

The nearest equivalent to 3rd party map design that I can think of comes from the Drop Team 'mods' forum. You guys might be getting tired of me always trying to compare Drop Team to CMSF, but would map design for CMSF follow a similar course? :confused:

[Sgt Joch]

Originally posted by Scipio:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Just thought I'd let you know that as of last night CM:SF is now both RealTime and WeGo ...

Steve

</font>

[Sergei]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Forgive my confusion - by no maps at all do you mean no generation of 'landscapes' to put our buildings on?

He said 'no random maps'. There's going to be a map editor.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Q: Can we give orders while paused when playing single player?

A: No. You can move around, check out units, etc. but not change what any unit is doing. This blurs the line between RealTime and WeGo and we think that's not in the best interests of the game. It is, however, something that can be revisited later.

GOOD!

Good?! Did you read that statement properly?!

I trust BFC on their good judgement and I certainly believe there are good reasons for not allowing orders when paused, but for me the real-time option has just lost some of its inherent appeal ...

Maybe the game is slow enough per default due to order delays and some-such, but I can imagine that pausing with orders (implemented to the high CM standards) would convince a lot of turn-based players to switch sides.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Battlefront.com]

Correct. No ranodm map generator only. The Editor in fact is quite powerful.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

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

Q: Can we give orders while paused when playing single player?

A: No. You can move around, check out units, etc. but not change what any unit is doing. This blurs the line between RealTime and WeGo and we think that's not in the best interests of the game. It is, however, something that can be revisited later.

GOOD!

Good?! Did you read that statement properly?!

I trust BFC on their good judgement and I certainly believe there are good reasons for not allowing orders when paused, but for me the real-time option has just lost some of its inherent appeal ...

Maybe the game is slow enough per default due to order delays and some-such, but I can imagine that pausing with orders (implemented to the high CM standards) would convince a lot of turn-based players to switch sides.

Best regards,

Thomm </font>

[c3k]

Steve,

Thanks; both for the bone and for including wego.

Regards,

Ken

[dalem]

Wow, no more random maps means that we can lose the "Quick" from the "Quick Battle". This is extremely disappointing for me.

-dale

[aka_tom_w]

Hi dalem

Would a random map (not on the fly generated) help you?

I think that Steve said if there were LOTS of random maps available for the game to select from, the "Pick Random (premade) Map" option might put the "Quick" back in Quick Battle?

No?

I can see why there are clearly technical reasons why "quick maps" can no longer be auto generated. That factor does not really bother me because I have always preferred premade scenarios and maps with that "human touch".

-tom w

[MikeyD]

I won't miss random maps.

These days in CMAK when I've called up a random QB map I've stared at it, sighed and quit out, then restarted the QB with a properly designed map in the QB maps folder.

For some unfathomable reason I still don't mind random CMBB maps, though the differences between them and CMAK are negligable.

[Dirtweasle]

Given a decent pool of pre-made maps Dale, I think QBs ought to still be fine. ...possibly a lot better.

[Noiseman]

Originally posted by dalem:

Wow, no more random maps means that we can lose the "Quick" from the "Quick Battle". This is extremely disappointing for me.

-dale

The map generator was what gave CMx1 its' longevity and replayability for me. I never cared much for scenarios and played almost exclusively QB's on random terrain. I made some of my own maps, but this quickly becomes 'work' and that was with using the map generator to make the 'base' map.

Even if the new editor is far easier to use, it's a bit of a wash at best because every map will have to be made from scratch. Not to mention that there will always be the lingering doubt that a multiplayer opponent 'just knows the map better' for now on.

I always felt that the random map generator was CM's strongest feature, and it's disappearance in CMx2 is a big disappointment.

[Battlefront.com]

Some people find making maps "work", others find it "fun". If you look at the number of maps that have been made for any one CMx1 game you'll find that they number in the many thousands. Any one of those scenarios could have the units stripped out and be played as a QuickBattle. So I have no fear that QBs will still be "quick" and varried.

Steve

[flammenwerfer]

The main reason I never played quick battles was because of the poor quality of the random-generated maps.

[Noiseman]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Some people find making maps "work", others find it "fun". If you look at the number of maps that have been made for any one CMx1 game you'll find that they number in the many thousands. Any one of those scenarios could have the units stripped out and be played as a QuickBattle. So I have no fear that QBs will still be "quick" and varried.

Steve

I've downloaded many maps over the years, but I've actually only bothered to play a handful. They always ended up being too big or too small, and that's if I could remember what type of terrain they were of (the file names tend to be cryptic, a nice feature for CMx2 might be a map previewer).

I liked making maps for a while, but I certainly wouldn't want to have to create one for every single battle. And while there will certainly be many excellent stock and user made maps, it just doesn't have the same longterm appeal. Inevitably there will be popular and unpopular maps as often occurs in FPS's... I'm sure the new editor will be much easier to use than the one now, but no way do I want to be putting in every fold in the ground, on this small a scale, for every battle.

The old random map generator certainly wasn't perfect, and I wouldn't expect the new one to be perfect either, but I don't think it's value should be underestimated. That element of randomness fires the imagination. Once the scope of a game becomes more limited, so does its appeal.

Of course the new campaign system may make this all a moot point, but does a campaign have the same sales appeal as being able to open-endedly make your own battles? The fact that one could easily generate a map and type of battle was what got me to buy CM in the first place...

[Battlefront.com]

Noiseman,

t I don't think it's value should be underestimated.

Check back a few posts and you'll see that I certainly am not underestimating the appeal. Look for where I said I played CMx1 games nearly exclusively using QBs and Random Generated maps. However, being in the driver's seat here I also can not underestimate the development realities of making such a feature for CM:SF. It's just too much to take on, so as nice as it would be to have it simply isn't practical.

Of course the new campaign system may make this all a moot point, but does a campaign have the same sales appeal as being able to open-endedly make your own battles?

It was never a choice between the two systems, but if we were put in a position of having to choose between Campaigns and Random Maps based on sales projections alone, we'd have chosen Campaigns even though it is the tougher of the two to do. A well done Campaign has a lot more sales potential than randomly generated maps for Quick Battles. The latter adds to longevity for some, but it isn't a requirement. If it was then practically no game would be on any of your harddrives

Steve

[Lars]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

A well done Campaign has a lot more sales potential than randomly generated maps for Quick Battles. The latter adds to longevity for some, but it isn't a requirement. If it was then practically no game would be on any of your harddrives

Steve

Er, I only have three games on my harddrive. Two of them are yours.

Go with the random map, campaigns are only really fun once.

Now, if you could do a randomly generated campaign...

[Bruce70]

I don't understand the 'no orders when paused' decision. AIUI BFC have always been about realism, even when this was to their detriment IMO (I am refering to the 'no campaigns' argument - which thankfully has been dropped, at least partially).

So why make the decision to not allow orders while paused?! If you were only issuing the orders that would be given by one officer then this would obviously be realistic. But do you really think it is realistic to give the orders of every officer in real time??!!!

I was planning to play in RT even if there was a WeGo option, now I fell very relieved that RT isn't going to be the only way to play the game.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Lars:

Go with the random map, campaigns are only really fun once.

I'd have to agree with that. I never really played scenarios or operations with CM. I couldn't never really get into them. QB's were just much more fun.

[Battlefront.com]

Lars,

Go with the random map, campaigns are only really fun once.

As I said, we never made a choice between the two. Random map generation was cut for reasons entirely on their own. But, if I had to make a choice now, it would be to go with Campaigns. Sorry, it really is a no brainer decision for us. And this is coming from someone who has already twice said that this is the primary way I used to play CMx1. So obviously no amount of "I really like random maps, keep it" arguing is going to get anywhere because I obviously understand why people like the feature.

Bruce 70,

So why make the decision to not allow orders while paused?

As I said, that's the way it is now. It might change, it might not. We'll see.

But do you really think it is realistic to give the orders of every officer in real time??!!!

Who said anything about it being more realistic? I certainly never did because it has nothing to do with it. I'll quote myself here from the top post in this page:

This blurs the line between RealTime and WeGo and we think that's not in the best interests of the game. It is, however, something that can be revisited later.

Steve

[Bruce70]

Steve, I certainly wasn't implying that you said it was more realistic - I am sure you can see that it plainly isn't. What I wanted to know is why this decision has been made (since it clearly wasn't for realism). I agree that it blurs the line between RT and WeGo, but I don't see that as a bad thing - can you elaborate?

If you intend the game to be played as WeGo for those wanting a realistic amount of time to issue orders, and RT for those wanting a click-fest (order-fest might be more appropriate), I can live with that... I just don't understand it.

[dalem]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Hi dalem

Would a random map (not on the fly generated) help you?

I think that Steve said if there were LOTS of random maps available for the game to select from, the "Pick Random (premade) Map" option might put the "Quick" back in Quick Battle?

No?

I can see why there are clearly technical reasons why "quick maps" can no longer be auto generated. That factor does not really bother me because I have always preferred premade scenarios and maps with that "human touch".

-tom w

As I understand the concept so far, my answer is "no". The CMx1 map generator, while not perfect, actually does a better job than all but the very best folks making maps for CM.

Also, nowadays I can set up a QB and in 1 minute be looking at my starting forces to see if they're interesting to me. Adding in time for a "map search" or whatever displeases me.

-dale