CMX2 and editing “saved” games…

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Nothing changes… I lobbied hard for this with CMX1 and it remains my hope that one day the editing of saved games will be possible with CMX2.

Why is it so important?

Many of you, Steve/Moon for sure, will remember the CMMC operational games that used CM to resolve the contact battles within a larger operational game. Done well, nothing, but nothing one can do with wargames or computers comes close to both the challenges and the fun of such games. In my very prejudiced view .

However… there is one huge problem in running such games. The truly massive, indeed overwhelming hours required from the umpires/game masters. The time required is so great that it often kills the game. Given real world commitments they are near undoable.

The one feature that Battlefront could include in their games that would make such operational games doable, where now they are undoable, is to enable the editing of saved games. I will not bore people too much about the detail of why this matters so much, but suffice to say that the ability to edit all features within a saved game, maps, forces and such… would be the “tipping point” in terms of saving the umpires enough time to make such operational games as CMMC a doable reality.

To make such games doable much else has to be got right too, but the ability to edit saved games is the really big one. It is not a sufficient condition to make CMMC style games possible but it is a necessary condition. It is also the one factor in the control of Battlefront.

Hoping the powers that be will take mercy on fans of setting CM within a greater operational context and include the editing of saved games in CMX2 .

Greatly looking forward to the first outing of CMX2,

All the best,

Kip.

[ January 13, 2007, 06:27 AM: Message edited by: kipanderson ]

[KNac]

Something tells me that this won't be possible, due to the nature of CMX1 (and probably CMX2) code being heavy encrypted and closed. But well, let's hope for a possitive answers by devs

[kipanderson]

KNac,

“Something tells me that this won't be possible, due to the nature of CMX1 (and probably CMX2)” I agree…sadly .

Commonsense, always a bad measure of these things , tells me that one would need a separate map, forces and scenario files…. not the way CM has been done in the past.

However, lobbying is what forums such as these are all about so I never give up. It would make a huge difference. It has always seemed a shame to me that it is so difficult to use CM to its full potential. Steve certainly, and probably Charles and Martin and the others too… tend to underestimate what their own game is capable of. Over the years I have many times discussed the uses that CMX1 can be put to with Steve and he greatly under values his won game.

Steve holds the view that CMX1 is only fit for short, 10-30 minutes shoot outs… it can do way more than that. Imperfectly, but life is not prefect. CMX1 was/still is so far ahead of the competition in its modeling of platoon/company and even battalion and regiment level engagements that it is the tool of choice for all wishing to resolve operational games through playing out the contact battles. CMX2 will be even better.

One day it will happen, but I hope it is soon…

All the best,

Kip.

[KNac]

Is a current discussion in the gaming industry: moddable vs not moddable; or rigid vs open.

Froma commercial point of view, with the new BFC strategy, opening more the game goes against this strategy, as they are going to produce main game followed by various expansions. If a game is moddable and open, the value of expansions decrease a lot, and their potential for the public too. So the new commercial strategy, does the possibility of a more opened game system more remote, even.

I'm not sure if they underestimate their game (they are the oens who know it better), but I'm sure they are well aware of the degree a game is moddable, and how this can or can't be profitable from a commercial point of view.

But if I could sign up for the game to be more open to allow this kind of modifications or make easier meta campaings, well, I'll sign up!

Anyway, there may be other methods to allow this degree of modification which could be added if not in the first CMX2 game, in following titles, which do not compromise the current code structure.

[kipanderson]

Knac,

I am not sure it is modding that I am after. Modding would be good, but the need is to be able to edit a saved game in the normal editor in the same way one could any other game that has not yet been played with.

I am happy to use whatever setting the game or module shipped with. But for operational games one needs to be able to change the forces, move the map east or west…. that sort of thing, half way through games. One of the players saves the game, sends it to the umpire who then edits it to take into account orders issued from above, actions of the opponent and so on… then sends it back to the players.

All the best,

Kip.

[Michael Dorosh]

The only reason to edit saved/ended games would be to create manual campaigns. A good idea, without having seen CM:C, for the community. Though, CMX2 is already supposed to have a campaign feature "under the hood", details of which are available in the FAQ. Apparently it follows a single sub-unit through a campaign.

As far as a formation-sized campaign (ie many sub-units are tracked) such as CM:C promises, if CMX2 is going to have its own CM:C module, that means making editable game files will simply make BFC compete with itself. Not an enviable position, especially if self-imposed.

Or even worse, if someone's paper and pencil system outperforms the developer's own add-on module!

I would naturally be in favour of this, but suspect perhaps we ought not hold our breath.

[JonS]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Or even worse, if someone's paper and pencil system outperforms the developer's own add-on module!

Yeah, but you'd still need CMx2:SLOD to play the campaign, so I fail to see how BFC lose in that scenario.

Open is good. More open is better. If I come up with a way of using an open version CMx2:SLOD that is completely unexpected to BFC, but have still purchased, and get more people to buy it because of that unexpected use - who loses?

At a simple level, compare wargames that allow user-designed scens with those that don't. Imagine if CMBO hadn't had a scenario editor.

I appreciate that openness and the ability to make money are often seen as being in conflict, but there are plenty of examples that prove the opposite, especially in the realms of software.

[Michael Dorosh]

True enough, JonS, but I was thinking of the very specific supposition that CMX2 would be followed by a CM:C add-on to allow formation sized campaigns in addition to the sub-unit campaigns that will ship with CMX2.

There has been no indication any such thing has ever been considered, I am merely postulating. If that were the case, then obviously any such sales hit on a CM:C addon would be detrimental to the game.

Though - it would be equally possible that your pen-and-pad campaign might draw more people to CMX2 and offset any losses CM:C might reasonably suffer.

All wildly theoretical, of course, but anything is possible...

Then again, a combination of both would be optimal - ie a CM:C type product that one could tweak by editable save game files - perhaps even a way to allow modification by password protection only by a referee/umpire...

Lots of possibilities, but of course, as many possibilities as there are opinions and as many opinions as there posters here.

I'm gonna wait for the game to come out, mostly, I think. Maybe the sub-unit campaign will readily lend itself to a pen-and-pad type grand campaign without fiddling, who knows.