Posted elsewhere but important enough to deserve it's own thread here

[sandy]

From pg. 8 of the CMBB manual:

“The difference is that action in CMBB is paused to allow for player input. We choose this arrangement because we feel it is conductive to players’ development of thoughtful and realistic strategies, rather than the “click fest” that some fully “real time” games can become. It is our opinion that “continuous time” works (very well) only at a very small scale, where there are just perhaps a few soldiers under a player’s command. It does not work well at the scale of a full company or battalion, which is the level simulated by Combat Mission.”

ie written by the guys who brought you CMSF with full company and larger scenarios...it says it all better than I can.

[birdstrike]

Yes indeed. It's nice that you can use the pause key to issue orders in RT when you have a lot of units. Thanks BF for that.

[Melnibone]

[Stirling]

Those without an argument resort to personal attacks.

[sandy]

Thanks for the ad hominem attack M - it makes me feel I must be saying something you cannot argue against.

Was my first post not clear enough for you?

Let me spell it out:

There was only one CM. It was (still is) my favourite game.

There are 20+ (maybe 50, how would I know?)realtime games out there, many with beautiful WW2 graphics. I have no interest in any of them.

My design philosophy and that of BF's were apparently the same, as summarised in that paragraph above from the CMBB manual. There was nothing else out there ( except, Panzer Command which is much worse than CMBB, despite appearing years later, and I never played after a couple of tries).

I spent years waiting for an improved CM, to find the design focus (?) was on realtime and getting rid of QBs. Should I be grateful?

I'm trying to point out to these guys the error of their ways, using their own words in this thread. It's a tough job, but somebody has to do it if we are ever to see a truly improved CM, and you are not helping. Please help or play in another thread asking for more blood, or less time to think, or something else we don't need.

[Melnibone]

If you think that was an attack you've had a very easy life.

[sandy]

Ok - give me your best shot (attacking the quote I started this thread with) as that's why I posted it.

To me it is self-evidently true - but that's "only my opinion"

[Melnibone]

What is constructive about what you are doing and the way you are doing it?

[Mishga]

Sandy,

You have expressed your disgust and your opinion in countless threads now.

It's nothing new. I for one am sorry you did not get your perfect game but that's life.

Now please let the rest of us get on with it and enjoy it without having to read your drivel on every forum for CMSF.

Your coming across as a sulky kid, maybe you are, maybe your not....but it looks that way and people are going to respond in kind.

[sandy]

What is constructive about taking a truly great game and making it worse by design errors?

How can CM get better if the designers do not see the error of their ways and appreciate that the original CM was something very special, that did not require realtime play (of which there are countless other examples going back to Red Alert and Dune). Add realtime by all means, but remember your core customers first.

They wrote the words above from the CMBB manual - first.

Then they decided that the big bucks were in marketing new games with "New Improved Realtime" on the box. That's why we are where we are now.

I think that the reviews and many, many people's opinion of CMSF have shown them that this view is not so clearcut...

If they get the message loud enough that WEGO is a real market they can feed their kids on, by people like me and others posting that they will buy "CM1 Gold" or "CM2WW2 that resembles CM1 in scope, realism, AI, and thinking, or whatever for $100 or more, and forget playing to the twitch crowd. Then maybe, just maybe, CM might continue to be the best wargame in the world, despite CMSF.

That's what I am trying to build = it's constructive...

[sandy]

Mishga

Thanks for the ad hominem attack.

I understand that you think that the paragraph at the top of this thread is "drivel". I think it's very prescient actually. CMSF does work in real time if you only have 1-3 squads a side. Otherwise it's a click fest and not fun for me.

Is that your best argument against those words?

[dalem]

Originally posted by sandy:

...and not fun for me.

"..for me."

Sandy-

I am on your side, really I am, and I share many of your opinions on the whole matter. My overall view might be even more pessimistic than yours.

BUT.

You (and I, etc.) have to remember that our opinions are just that - opinions. And they are subjective, as you honestly point out in your post above. You know as well as I that BFC reads this forum and registers the opinions here. I think what you're doing with this thread is more badgering than anything else.

Anyway, that's my unsolicited opinion.

-dale

[Huntarr]

"Then one day, a message was sent and the sleepers awoke and

made their way to targets of their own personal choosing within

cities not directly chosen by their leaders. Within a few hours

dozens of pounds of waste uranium were detonated by conventional

explosives, polluting major cities of the West for

hundreds of years with toxic radiation. The leaders of the plot

came out of hiding to celebrate, claim credit, taunt, and promise

more such attacks. Then they melted back into the

population.

At the United Nations the countries suffering from the attacks

demanded they be given the mandates necessary to go after

those responsible for the attacks. Of course, it was given with

hardly any opposition amongst its members. Although the

target had not yet been fully identified, the pieces of intelligence

accumulated before and after the attacks pointed to one

and only one country as the point of origin; Syria. With its

long history of state sponsored terrorism, it wasn’t difficult to

imagine.

While further evidence was being sought the military forces of the

West began to deploy to bases within striking range of Syria.

The Syrian government denied involvement, but they also denied

granting any meaningful assistance to investigators.

Instead, they put their military on high alert and mobilized

large numbers of reservists. Obviously such actions did not

make their denials more credible.

The smoking gun came in April when video of the terrorist group’s

only known leader was seen celebrating the success of “our

mission”. Details were given that were not known publicly,

therefore it was without a doubt a confession from the man

responsible, not someone claiming credit for the deeds of others.

Communications surveillance, eye witnesses, and covert

operatives all agreed on one thing... the man and his organization

were in the heart of Syria, no place else. The case for

war was therefore complete.

On June 15th sortie after sortie of Coalition aircraft launched attacks

to soften up the Syrian defenses. The air attacks

continued for three days as various nation’s special forces"

pg. 8 of the Combat Mission Shockforce Manual Deluxe Edition.

Jimmey Crickets, we must be playing a different game, cause I didn't see where what you read was in this manual. Oh wait I know it's the year 2007 and time has moved on. I almost thought I was back in 2001. Thanks for the flash back, I can't get enough of those as is. Move on

[ September 12, 2007, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: Huntarr ]

[Statisoris]

Sandy is reffering to the CMBB manual Huntarr, however, I do disagree with Sandy's point of view and opinion of the game.

[Tarquelne]

It is our opinion that “continuous time” works (very well) only at a very small scale, where there are just perhaps a few soldiers under a player’s command. It does not work well at the scale of a full company or battalion, which is the level simulated by Combat Mission.”

ie written by the guys who brought you CMSF with full company and larger scenarios...it says it all better than I can.

I think they could - and should - make a distinction between pause-less "continuous time" and what CMSF now offers: Pause-able (with orders) real-time.

I have to admit, though, I might have interpreted the passage you quoted as you did. But only if I were reading the manual with the operating assumption that they're idiots, or have been taken over by evil aliens since CMBB.

If they were wrong, I'd say they were wrong in the CMBB manual for not considering the possible role of the pause. (OTOH, "pause" seems verboten in just about every RT online game. (HOI is an exception?) Something about feral 14 year olds, I'd guess.)

And, anyway, IIRC BFC has also said that CMSF is designed with smaller battles in mind than were often available with CMBB. The plan is that the big stuff for CMSF will be do-able when "co-play" comes online.

If CMSF offered only pausless RT for human vs. human I think you'd have a good point. Since they still offer WEGO and PBEM, even with some problems, I think you're just desperate to fling mud.

[ September 12, 2007, 02:28 PM: Message edited by: Tarquelne ]

[Chelco]

@ sandy: CM will not go other course than the one it's already taken. End of story. Everybody knows that. It has been said a thousand times.

Maybe it is time you move into something else? It is just a game anyway.

I feel bad for your loss, but I disagree 100% with your opinion on this matter.

[Statisoris]

If you really think about it, all CM:SF pausable real-time play is, is WEGO with user defined WEGO time intervals that allow for RT interaction. I dont understand your argument about not being able to watch the battlefield b/c you have too many troops on the field. If you played with a large amount of troops in WEGO, you would have the same or less overall control over your forces vs RT. I usually only allow the game to run maybe 1 minute max in RT, before I pause and check out the world and issue new, corrected orders. Same feel as WEGO if you ask me, except you have more control.

[KNac]

They don't owe you (or me) nothing you paid for something they have produced, either in the past or now with CMSF, you had the option to determine if this game was for you, if you bought the game based on spectatives, bad done and I'm sorry to say but is your fault, if you haven't bought the game, what's the deal. When can people understand this?

What is constructive about taking a truly great game and making it worse by design errors?

How can CM get better if the designers do not see the error of their ways and appreciate that the original CM was something very special, that did not require realtime play (of which there are countless other examples going back to Red Alert and Dune). Add realtime by all means, but remember your core customers first.

They wrote the words above from the CMBB manual - first.

Then they decided that the big bucks were in marketing new games with "New Improved Realtime" on the box. That's why we are where we are now.

I think that the reviews and many, many people's opinion of CMSF have shown them that this view is not so clearcut...

If they get the message loud enough that WEGO is a real market they can feed their kids on, by people like me and others posting that they will buy "CM1 Gold" or "CM2WW2 that resembles CM1 in scope, realism, AI, and thinking, or whatever for $100 or more, and forget playing to the twitch crowd. Then maybe, just maybe, CM might continue to be the best wargame in the world, despite CMSF.

That's what I am trying to build = it's constructive...

You don't own the game, neither me. Is their view, good or not, if you don't like = you don't buy. So hard to understand this basics? No oen obligues you to play/buy the game.

There is nothing constructive about this post:

1) Allready has been said a bathillion times.

2) Allready hs been answered by BF.C a bazillion times.

3) Does not add nothing in terms of fixing bugs or improving current game.

And at last, I may add a famous Steve quote "In your opinion"

[RMC]

Originally posted by sandy:

What is constructive about taking a truly great game and making it worse by design errors?

CMBB is still CMBB. They didn't make it worse. They made a NEW game. You don't like the direction they went. Others do. I don't think your posts about your unhappiness are going to change the situation.

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by Statisoris:

[QB] If you really think about it, all CM:SF pausable real-time play is, is WEGO with user defined WEGO time intervals that allow for RT interaction.

Yes. That +and+ a slap in the face of every loyal customer, serious wargamer, and true-blooded American.

It's like you're talking about fluoridation while leaving out the commie plot.

People like you make me sick.

[Melnibone]

Originally posted by sandy:

I'm trying to point out to these guys the error of their ways, using their own words in this thread. It's a tough job, but somebody has to do it if we are ever to see a truly improved CM, and you are not helping.

Why should I help you? I'm a core customer and I quite like the new game - present flaws and all. To undertake your crusade you need followers. It appears even some of those who agree with your sentiment do not agree with your approach.

If you are trying to influence the developers I do not understand your approach. Kwazydog for one has stated that he "usually skips over your posts" - because of the way you state your feelings.

So where do you think your mission of showing the developers "the error of their ways" is going to get you with your current methodology? Can you understand that many might like the new game? They may also like the old ones. They may be "core" customers. They may play CMSF WEGO and like it. They may play CMSF Real Time and like it without it being a "Clickfest". Are they wrong just because you don't like it? Are you more important than them?

[Statisoris]

@ Tarquelne Whoa boy, calm down, if you cant participate in a civilized discussion without personally insulting someone, get the heck off the board. I'm sure many would agree, we need less of posts like yours.

[Huntarr]

Originally posted by Statisoris:

Sandy is reffering to the CMBB manual Huntarr, however, I do disagree with Sandy's point of view and opinion of the game.

I apparently did not have my sarcasm knob turned up enough. (turns to 11)

[Melnibone]

Originally posted by Statisoris:

@ Tarquelne Whoa boy, calm down, if you cant participate in a civilized discussion without personally insulting someone, get the heck off the board. I'm sure many would agree, we need less of posts like yours.

It was a joke

[Chelco]

Originally posted by Tarquelne:

Yes. That +and+ a slap in the face of every loyal customer, serious wargamer, and true-blooded American.

It's like you're talking about fluoridation while leaving out the commie plot.

People like you make me sick.

Get help.