Where we're headed from here... a quick glance

[Huntarr]

@Mishga,

*wink* How yoou dooin?

Missed you around...

[ April 15, 2008, 11:12 AM: Message edited by: Huntarr ]

[Battlefront.com]

Hmm.... looks like Meach should have been banned before now since he's also operating the Mishga account as well. That's an even bigger violation than swearing one's head off. Well, I suppose it doesn't surprise me too much. Immaturity tends to manifest itself in more than one way. Don't know who he thinks he's impressing with his childishness, but each to his own.

Steve

[ChrisND]

Three in one day! How many before I can refer to this as the Purge?

[Battlefront.com]

I know... sheesh... maybe I should check to see what phase of the moon we're at right now.

Steve

[Other Means]

Meach - I always enjoyed your posts. I've seen people banned for the same language, usually with no warning, so I know it's not victimisation.

So please give it a couple of weeks and send the email fella. No-one is asking for more than that.

{edit}

Sorry, just read Steve's post re multiple accounts, not sure if this is still valid.

[ April 15, 2008, 01:06 PM: Message edited by: Other Means ]

[Huntarr]

Here ya go Normal...

I hope everyone just takes a breather and relaxes. We're all here to make this an enjoyable game and those that aren't here for that, well everyone knows where they belong.

[TOG]

Sorry for the mess I created with the scavenging question. I was busy for a few days and read the feedback just now.

I actually thought about scavenging small arms in world war two setting. I think it was more common back then. I remember how much fun it was in Close Combat series. Never thought about insurgents firing Javelins, but on the other hand M4 doesn't seem to be too complicated. In CM:SF scavenging weapons isn't that important becouse you usually have some Stryker or BMP around to get more ammo.

I know we will not see it in CMSF. Just wondered about the WWII title.

[psklenar]

Great news about a WWII variant of CMx2. I've just had to replace my dying 5+yo PC with a new Vista (yes, I am a masochist, thank you for asking ) based one and was devastated to discover that CMx1 games + Vista = hard crash & PC lock up.

Some additional MultiPlayer options...

hmmm ... sure hope PBEM is still supported!? <breath held & fingers crossed>

I can't wait for the chance to place my order.

[Battlefront.com]

TOG,

There have been some pretty detailed discussions about use of captured weapons in combat. The bottom line is that there are huge disincentives to doing this and it is usually only done in desperation. That means it really isn't all that important to simulate.

Psklenar,

No fears about PBEM support... it made it over the big hurdle so it will remain for a long time to come.

To answer a quick question made before, there is probably no chance of getting the file size smaller. There is just so much more data to save out for CMx2 compared to CMx1, so there isn't much we can do about it.

Steve

[Sivodsi]

Good to hear about PBEMs staying around, and with gmail and such like improving their service I don't think attachment size is such a big problem.

One thing that does concern me is ammo tracking as it currently stands in PBEMs in CMX2. It no longer decreases incrementally with every shot fired but shows the figure as it stands at the end of the 1 minute of play right from the start. Makes it hard to see which of your tanks have seen action, and what ammo they've fired, important information esp

because you want to know if your Syrian tanks have used one of their missiles as opposed to a normal round.

With the current game engine, I'm guessing it is impossible for us to ever be able to see ammo tracking within a PBEM move, is that right?

[TheVulture]

Originally posted by psklenar:

Great news about a WWII variant of CMx2. I've just had to replace my dying 5+yo PC with a new Vista (yes, I am a masochist, thank you for asking ) based one and was devastated to discover that CMx1 games + Vista = hard crash & PC lock up.

Random aside that might be interesting to Linux nutters: a friend of mine got sick of how badly World of Warcraft ran on his new Vista machine, so he tried it on the same machine under Wine - the windows emulator in Linux. It ran 10-15 frames per second faster...

(Wine has improved a lot in what runs on it in the last few years, but I have no idea whether CMx1 or CMx2 will run under it or not. If it does it might just give better performance than Vista though).

Somewhat amused me that a computer running Vista directly had far worse performance than the same computer running a completely different OS and emulating windows on top of it

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

looks like Meach should have been banned before now since he's also operating the Mishga account as well.

Aren't Mishga and Meach a couple? I vaguely remember something along those lines. That might explain the same IP, if that's the issue here.

[handihoc]

TheVulture, that's an interesting note on Linux. Has anyone tried running SF on it and noticed any difference in performance?

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

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

looks like Meach should have been banned before now since he's also operating the Mishga account as well.

Aren't Mishga and Meach a couple? I vaguely remember something along those lines. That might explain the same IP, if that's the issue here. </font>Actually, now that you mention it, I think I remember Mishga saying something along those lines.

[crazyman56]

I know this isn't the Theatre of War forum and Battlefront are only publishing not developing it (but you lot did a lot to get it up to your high standards of which i wish to thank you for) but is there any FIRM new on ToW because IMHO it is floundering at the moment wit the forums getting 4 posts a day at the max and only a few small hints i would liek firm news about ToW and i think lots of other people will to. i think Moon or Madmatt would be more suited to answer but any news would be gold.

Thanks,

crazy

[Moon]

crazy, what firm news are you waiting for? About the German patch by Kalypso? If we had news we would have posted them, but unfortunately we're waiting just like you guys for the translated files.

Martin

[crazyman56]

Ok. the firm news is if and an estimated time of the almighty patch that is suppossed to do what was supposed to happen when the game was released but i know all the details about needing the money etc....

And thanks for the quick reply.

But i am just a little aggravated at the moment so i am probably taking a lot of **** but i really think TWO patchs in nearly a year is not much for a game look at CM:SF's patchs!!!

And why cant they translate quick!!! They are such a big company and a team of translators would nt take long to translate all the documents etc.

well what a rant

[Battlefront.com]

Sirocco,

Aren't Mishga and Meach a couple? I vaguely remember something along those lines. That might explain the same IP, if that's the issue here.

Yes, that is something I found out after the fact. However, it's pretty clear by the language used that it was Meach posting using Mishga's account. So the effect is the same, even if the two accounts were indeed intended for two different people (which I have no problem with, BTW). It's a sad affair since I don't think anybody wants to see either gone, however it wasn't my choice to make.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Sivodsi,

Are you using v1.08 and did you start the game fresh with that version? I ask because this sounds like something that we already fixed.

Thanks,

Steve

[pad152]

CM1 games only lacked a good campaign system, but the Quick Battle system make up for it!

CM2 SF still suffers from, the same old crappy campaign system, a poor Quick Battle system that is several steps backwards and a limited order of battle. The expansion pack will address the expanded order of battle but, without a good campaign systems and/or a Quick Battle system that's a step up from the CM1 games, CM2 SF or WWII will never have the same replay value!

I still haven't heard anything on an improved campaign system for CM2! A good campaign needs to be part of the game, something more than just a bunch of linked missions and not an add-on.

Will Quick Battles ever be fixed (purchase of units, map size not related to force size) in Shock Force?

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by pad152:

CM2 SF still suffers from, the same old crappy campaign system, a poor Quick Battle system that is several steps backwards and a limited order of battle. The expansion pack will address expanded order of battle but, without a good campaign systems and/or a Quick Battle system that's a step up from the CM1 games, CM2 SF or WWII will never have the same replay value!

I still haven't heard anything on an improved campaign system for CM2! A good campaign needs to be part of the game, something more than just a bunch of liked missions and not an add-on.

Um, the quick battle bit I agree with, but what is fundamentally flawed with the campaign system? And exactly how is it "the same" again? Maybe the "crappy" part is your opinion, and not fact?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Also, look at some user-created campaigns if you don't like the main one. Webwing's Ghost Campaign is excellent, and I've heard great things about the TF Narwick Campaign (haven't played it yet though). They're available for free, so there's no point in not trying them . . .

-FMB

[pad152]

Originally posted by Normal Dude:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by pad152:

CM2 SF still suffers from, the same old crappy campaign system, a poor Quick Battle system that is several steps backwards and a limited order of battle. The expansion pack will address expanded order of battle but, without a good campaign systems and/or a Quick Battle system that's a step up from the CM1 games, CM2 SF or WWII will never have the same replay value!

I still haven't heard anything on an improved campaign system for CM2! A good campaign needs to be part of the game, something more than just a bunch of liked missions and not an add-on.

Um, the quick battle bit I agree with, but what is fundamentally flawed with the campaign system? And exactly how is it "the same" again? Maybe the "crappy" part is your opinion, and not fact? </font>

[Thomm]

For me, map damage that carries over from one battle to the other would be enough!

This is what makes a campaign (lasting days, not years) for me.

The other ideas (strategic layer) are, I am afraid, an order of magnitude more complex.

Regarding upgrades: note, that this is most fun when you can watch individual soldiers develop. In CM:SF, this information is not available, and there are, in most cases, too many units to remember anyway.

But map damage, that is really missing (for me)!

Best regards,

Thomm

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by pad152:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Normal Dude:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by pad152:

CM2 SF still suffers from, the same old crappy campaign system, a poor Quick Battle system that is several steps backwards and a limited order of battle. The expansion pack will address expanded order of battle but, without a good campaign systems and/or a Quick Battle system that's a step up from the CM1 games, CM2 SF or WWII will never have the same replay value!

I still haven't heard anything on an improved campaign system for CM2! A good campaign needs to be part of the game, something more than just a bunch of liked missions and not an add-on.

Um, the quick battle bit I agree with, but what is fundamentally flawed with the campaign system? And exactly how is it "the same" again? Maybe the "crappy" part is your opinion, and not fact? </font>I would like too see a campaign that's more than just a few linked missions, a Close Combat style where the campaign is part of the game and not an after thought or add-on. A campaign where units upgrade over time, Band of Brothers, a fighting unit that fought in almost every major battle in WWII the type of campaign Battlefront has been telling us is unrealistic. </font>So how does that make the campaigns "same old" and "crappy"? Is everything not made how you want it to be "same old" and "crappy"?

ETA: I have to agree with Rollstoy and map damage.