Beastttt Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 say WW1,WW2,modern granted the ranges would be a whole heck of a lot longer but the terrain would be simpler(islands here and there maybe a coast line I've been on the forums for battle stations midway and all I see is an arcade game that has so many things to make it gamey(crash your aircraft so you can launch more sooner instead of going back to rearm) ranges are way too short Fighting steel I love it and the guys at nws have done wonderfull mods to it but this is an 8 yr old game and could use a rebuild from the ground up Dangerous waters good but only has 1 surface ship and is more a sub sim(granted 1 of the best) want fleets Fleet command limited in aircraft load outs(scenario based) needs to be able to be a command that can be given in game like in harpoon(I have 97 and 3 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffsmith Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 check out this old thread from the General Forum the game isn't WWI or WWII but they are working on some new things General Forum thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 No, CMx2 can not do naval without massive amounts of new code. Which means you'll never see a CM naval game Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
37mm Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Could CM do 'The Sims' or Lemmings? ... then again CM:Lemmings is probably a good way to describe Sir Boo Radleys style of command 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastttt Posted February 10, 2007 Author Share Posted February 10, 2007 tried the demo did not like the interface Originally posted by jeffsmith: check out this old thread from the General Forum the game isn't WWI or WWII but they are working on some new things General Forum thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 I tried out the Distant Guns demo recently myself and although the game looks and plays impressively, the camera interface is about the most bassawkwards mess I have seen in a long time. I DON'T like how you have to select a ship to see it in its proper brightness and also don't understand why they keep the camera from being able to get down to wake level. More freedom in camera control is a hallmark in CMSF and the CMx2 engine. Its just another area that we have worked with Charles closely to get just right. I don't know why so many game designers can't appreciate how people really do want to be able zoom right up into stuff and see every bolt and rivet as well as pull back to near lunar orbit levels. This is important to get right in CMSF because we now only use "true" sizes of object. Things aren't scaled down like they were in CMx1 games, so allowing the user to better tailor the camera view so they can quickly see what and where they need to is critical. I think we got it pretty good right now though. Madmatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffsmith Posted February 10, 2007 Share Posted February 10, 2007 Once Again Madmatt is correct (is there ever any question?) the camera contols (and some other features) of Distant Guns do leave a bit to be desired and of course its no CM But if you can deal with some limitations and are looking for a Naval Simulation I think it can be an enjoyable game 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: No, CMx2 can not do naval without massive amounts of new code. Which means you'll never see a CM naval game Steve But does this mean we'll never see a amphibious landing game, say in the Pacific someday? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homo ferricus Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 I played the Enigma: Rising Tide demo and it seemed pretty interesting. You don't command fleets but its got it all in there-subs, planes, surface fleets (destroyers, cruisers, battle ships), even pt boat action. Not a bad game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastttt Posted February 11, 2007 Author Share Posted February 11, 2007 2 things abot enigma you should know 1 it has starforce protection that maleware wrecked my combo drive on my last computer(SH III) 2 the full game only only has pts and dd's also the game hs no support so no bigger ships no fleets Originally posted by Homo ferricus: I played the Enigma: Rising Tide demo and it seemed pretty interesting. You don't command fleets but its got it all in there-subs, planes, surface fleets (destroyers, cruisers, battle ships), even pt boat action. Not a bad game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: No, CMx2 can not do naval without massive amounts of new code. Which means you'll never see a CM naval game Steve I figured as much, and this certainly is understaindable. BFC has an aggressive enough schedule of ground-combat CMx2 games planned; it's hard to imagine where the considerable time and effort to do a Naval conversion would fit in for such a small company. With this said, it seems to me that at least the kernel of a very good naval combat simulator has to be present in the CMx2 code. All of the work on gun ballistics, missile flight, armor penetration etc., have analogs in 20th-21st century naval combat. So if BFC is rolling in cash after the release of CMx2 (and I hope they will be), and can hire Charles some lackeys, or if another design team approaches BFC, with a proposal to license the engine as the basis for a Naval combat, I think that would be a very cool thing. Probably not very likely, but there's no harm in daydreaming. . . Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kineas Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Originally posted by Madmatt: This is important to get right in CMSF because we now only use "true" sizes of object. Things aren't scaled down like they were in CMx1 games, so allowing the user to better tailor the camera view so they can quickly see what and where they need to is critical. erm...does this mean the Shift-C functionality no longer works? Or you just meant the 1:1 representation of units? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 At this time there is no Shift-C type unit scaling in the game. I dont know if thats on the list to add again at some point or not, probably not as it's not really needed anymore and actually causes more problems (with regards to visual abstractions) than it ever solved. Madmatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kineas Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Well, you made me realize such a feature is a must in a realistic, 3d wargame. Maybe you will make me realize it's not that inevitable in a 3d mesh world... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 I recall way back (pre-CMSF chat forum?) in response to amphib landing questions Moon had mentioned that according to Charles the new game engine could 'theoretically' handle water just fine (I think he said piloting a boat wouldn't be much different than steering a car), but not a line of coding had been done for it yet. Since Syria is not exactly known for its extnsive waterways it wasn't even under consideration. Still, BFC may someday be tempted to tackle Vietnam riverine operations or WWII pacific, or Civil War port blockades, or Space Lobsters attacking vacation cruise ships (I'd buy that one!). So please guys, don't totally discount someday tinkering with the code for amphib – yeh I know, we'll all be retirement age by the time you've fashioned games out of ALL the suggestions that we throw at you! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sedak Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 At this time there is no Shift-C type unit scaling in the game.Interesting. When I looked at the two "Stryker formation" screenshots from the second page, I thought the vehicles must be enlaged like in CM1, cause they look so large next to that trees (olive?). What's more, their formation is very tight and soldiers in the distance and on the horizon are very large too. It all looks like the models are upscaled. At least that was my first thought. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Actually, a caged Stryker isn't much smaller than a school bus! I did a size comparison awhile ago. Let me see if i can locate that old link. Oh, and I've lost weight and grown out my hair since this picture was taken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 [ February 14, 2007, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: Hans ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 Heh... funny pic, Mikey! There will be no SHIFT-C behavior in CMx2. The reason is that the model size and position is now directly tied into the game engine, unlike CMx1 where it was abstractly connected. Meaning, if you doubled the size of your forces in CMx2, they would be simulated at 2x the size. Fortunately, the greater detail of the terrain and the 3D floating icons mean the problems faced with CMx1 are largely gone. I personally never used realistic scale in CMx1 because I found it unplayable, but I have no such issues with CM:SF in 1:1. In terms of the engine simulating water and watercraft, it is true that in theory the engine supports it. It's just that the amount of coding needed to make a game focused on naval battles (as opposed to naval landings) is rather huge. Even naval landings is a significant amount of work. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Chapuis Posted February 14, 2007 Share Posted February 14, 2007 nice post hans 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Posted February 15, 2007 Share Posted February 15, 2007 Why thank you David! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pad152 Posted February 16, 2007 Share Posted February 16, 2007 I would love to see BattleFront do a Naval Game! Distant Guns - Uck! I want to play a game not watch a movie, you can't even order a torpedo only attack! The campaing can't hold a candle to WITP (War in the Pacific) or WPO (War Plan Orange). There hasn't been a good naval game sense Great Naval Battles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastttt Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 I really liked fighting steel and the NWS guys mods added a whole lotta play time to it but it could use a new engine to support the advancement in graphics Originally posted by pad152: I would love to see BattleFront do a Naval Game! Distant Guns - Uck! I want to play a game not watch a movie, you can't even order a torpedo only attack! The campaing can't hold a candle to WITP (War in the Pacific) or WPO (War Plan Orange). There hasn't been a good naval game sense Great Naval Battles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Originally posted by MikeyD: Actually, a caged Stryker isn't much smaller than a school bus! I did a size comparison awhile ago. Let me see if i can locate that old link. Oh, and I've lost weight and grown out my hair since this picture was taken Nice concept! Here are some size comparisons I did for our local vehicle collectors' club website. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pad152 Posted February 23, 2007 Share Posted February 23, 2007 I tried out the Distant Guns demo recently myself and although the game looks and plays impressively, the camera interface is about the most bassawkwards mess I have seen in a long time. I guess Jim Cobb didn't read Madmatt's review before giving it "War Game of the Year" Award! 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.