The road ahead... a recap

[Paper Tiger]

daviduk

I remember the first screenshots of Marines equipment appeared on BFCs webste about 5 months before the final release of the module.

Similarly, in the month before the Marines module arrived (Septemeber) , BFC were showing off a short video of British equipment on their own site at Youtube. Steve has said that the Brit module probably won't be ready until around the end of January, again, about 5 months after the first promo pics appeared.

Since we have yet to see a single screenshot of the WW2 module it's probably safe to say that it's at LEAST 6 months away.

[Charlie901]

The Plan Sounds Great!!!

I'll probably pass on the first WWII Title (as tempting as it sounds) unless the Normandy Beach Invasions are modelled (I'm a sucker for amphibious assaults).

I'm more interested in the WWII late war, winter and western front units and weapons....

I guess you could say I've had my fill of the summertime "Hedgerow" battles.

[daviduk109]

thanks, I had suspected the ww2 game might be 6-12 months away, though I'm sure it will be well worth waiting for. Plenty of things to be getting on with in the meantime! (just started playing civ4 which might last me for a while).

I had suspected the pbem games of cmbo were a lot of fun, unfortunately though it wasn't something I was sufficiently motivated to take up.

[Solicitor]

I think it's very much in Battlefront's commercial interest to press ahead with Normandy- the market for WWII is much, much larger than that for modern warfare, and CMx1, great as it has been, is too graphically limited for the general market, and its AI weaknesses leave us grognards wanting better. I for one have no interest in contemporary wargames and have no particular desire to buy CMSF and its modules. CMx2 Normandy, though, would get a preorder the day it's annouced!

BF appears to be updating the original CM trilogy across its tactical product line: CMAK in TOW2 Africa, CMBB with Campaigns- and CMBO awaiting its replacement......

(BTW, there would be a pretty good market for a tactical Pacific title. I can't imagine BFC's Russian TOW partners would be very interested, so that means CM: Banzai!)

[Field Marshal Blücher]

(BTW, there would be a pretty good market for a tactical Pacific title. I can't imagine BFC's Russian TOW partners would be very interested, so that means CM: Banzai!)

Hell yes. Please!

[SlapHappy]

I'm still concerned about what will happen to large scenario playability in regards to WWII France environment depiction and frame rates.

Steve has already mentioned in one thread they are unsure still exactly how this change will impact the game engine in actual game situations.

Hopefully there will be some headway regarding making the game "multi-thread" friendly because CPU's continue to spread out horizontally rather than increase vertically in processing power. At least one CPU-intensive game, Supreme Commander from 2007 was found to be almost unplayable without utilizing the capabilities of Dual and Quad core technologies.

[Solicitor]

This I suppose really is sort of a CMx1 comment, but it's too late for that <g>, and Normandy is presumably in the oven somewhere.

CMx1 crews universally are pistol-armed. Buth this doesn't square with reality: Anglo/American vehicle crews were issued Thompsons/Stens/Grease Guns; and the M1 Carbine was pretty much invented to give artillerymen more personal firepower than a mere sidearm. I believe Panzers had one or more MP38/40s on board as well.

I realize that BFC was concerned about the gamey tactic of using crews as miniature infantry squads. But surely gaminess ought to be countered by more, not less, realism. One could for example assign a higher VP cost to crew casualties; or give crews a significant morale penalty (for example, any bailed-out crew is automatically deemed "rattled")- or, appropriately consider a crew green/conscript, since they aren't trained infantry (assuming the engine allows a differentiation- it *appears* to me that from the game's point of view, a Crew is a brand-new unit automatically spawned whenever a vehicle/gun is KO'd.)

[Combatintman]

I think it's very much in Battlefront's commercial interest to press ahead with Normandy- the market for WWII is much, much larger than that for modern warfare, and CMx1, great as it has been, is too graphically limited for the general market, and its AI weaknesses leave us grognards wanting better. I for one have no interest in contemporary wargames and have no particular desire to buy CMSF and its modules. CMx2 Normandy, though, would get a preorder the day it's annouced!

BF appears to be updating the original CM trilogy across its tactical product line: CMAK in TOW2 Africa, CMBB with Campaigns- and CMBO awaiting its replacement......

(BTW, there would be a pretty good market for a tactical Pacific title. I can't imagine BFC's Russian TOW partners would be very interested, so that means CM: Banzai!)

No interest in contemporary warfare ... have you tried it? I cut my teeth on WW2 but have diversified since then and enjoyed the experience. Give it a go - you might surprise yourself rather than going over well-trodden ground.

[Battlefront.com]

Solicitor,

The main argument against the SMGs coming with crews is that they are stowed strapped to the inside of the turret. The last thing a crew commander is going to do on his way out of a burning tank is futz around with the latches and pick up the ammo. SMGs inside vehicles are supposed to be for routine defense of the vehicle, such as night time security when not in action.

I realize that BFC was concerned about the gamey tactic of using crews as miniature infantry squads. But surely gaminess ought to be countered by more, not less, realism. One could for example assign a higher VP cost to crew casualties; or give crews a significant morale penalty (for example, any bailed-out crew is automatically deemed "rattled")- or, appropriately consider a crew green/conscript, since they aren't trained infantry (assuming the engine allows a differentiation- it *appears* to me that from the game's point of view, a Crew is a brand-new unit automatically spawned whenever a vehicle/gun is KO'd.)

Nope We did all of that and more, like starting them out with bad Morale and some other things. That still didn't stop the gamey use of crews. In CMx2 it's a little better because of Relative Spotting, but it's still an issue because players tend towards risking the short term benefits of using the crews incorrectly vs. the final accounting at the end of the scenario.

The best way to avoid crew abuse is to have them disappear when the vehicle gets knocked out. Not realistic, but on average it probably is a better solution. However, we don't think we need to go to that drastic a solution.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

As stated before, as usual we aren't making any release announcements until we're pretty close to being done. All I can say about the Normandy release is that most of the models are already done, much of the recent programming was on our Normandy priority list, and we've largely outsourced the creation of the last two CM:SF Modules. In short, as the Plan I outlined describes, we are finally able to work on more than one thing at a time. Therefore, expect the Normandy game sooner rather than later. How soon? Well, definitely not within a couple of months and certainly well before the end of 2009.

Steve

[kipanderson]

Steve,

“Therefore, expect the Normandy game sooner rather than later.”

Sounds very good… of course all such titles are really just R&D for the Eastern Front titles to come sometime in the future…. .

Lots and lots to look forward too..

All the best,

Kip.

[CogNative]

"Normandy game sooner rather than later.... certainly well before the end of 2009." And 2 more CMSF Modules!

I am impressed! BFC is on target for a good business year. Good strategy for sustained cash flow from good products and service. Business wise this has got to put CMx1 in the rear views.

Are you sure you don't want consider that governance gig Steve;) Illinois is not alone in the filed of barter for executive considerations:rolleyes:

If BFC can roll up some OSX versions I will even plan your fundraiser:D

Happy Hoildays

[dan/california]

Can we have an Iranian-Indian-Afghani-Pakistani module, Please. Pretty please.

[Dietrich]

...we've largely outsourced the creation of the last two CM:SF Modules...

"Last two CM:SF modules"? Would that be British Forces and [insert name of post-British Forces module here]?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

"Last two CM:SF modules"? Would that be British Forces and NATO (i.e. Germans and some others)?

There you go.

[Mikkey]

"Last two CM:SF modules"? Would that be British Forces and [insert name of post-British Forces module here]?

NATO module (Germany, Dutch, maybe France)

[Clevinger]

NATO module (Germany, Dutch, maybe France)

I hear you

[Hawk66]

why are the people so WWII-centric ...

Hope, the next title (after Normandy) deals with a cold war scenario...

BTW: Is the new QB engine already specified?

[Henniak-Khazad]

NATO module (Germany, Dutch, maybe France)

French ? really ?

BTW: Is the new QB engine already specified?

Yes ! Tell us more about the next QB system

More than : that will be a mix between the old and new system , ect ect

please

[Battlefront.com]

The NATO Module will not have the French in it. We found that the vehicle and weapons lists for the forces we've chosen were large enough on their own. Adding a uniquely armed force, such as the French or the Italians, was too much additional work.

Steve

[Clevinger]

The NATO Module will not have the French in it. We found that the vehicle and weapons lists for the forces we've chosen were large enough on their own. Adding a uniquely armed force, such as the French or the Italians, was too much additional work.

Steve

Aouch!

Well, I guess we can wait the release of CMSF II to see our Leclercs and VCI in action

[Bopnc]

The NATO Module will not have the French in it. We found that the vehicle and weapons lists for the forces we've chosen were large enough on their own. Adding a uniquely armed force, such as the French or the Italians, was too much additional work.

Steve

What a bad news.

Can we expect a NATO-2 module with the missing forces if NATO is a success ? Or will the NATO module be the last for CMSF anyway ?

[Battlefront.com]

We probably won't make a 5th Module for CM:SF simply because we will be busy making Modules for Normandy *and* working on the next WW2 game *and* working on CM:SF 2 at the same time.

Believe me, I would love to get the full range of European hardware into CM:SF, including French, Italian, and Swedish gear. There is so much that goes into a single vehicle that there are practical limitations on what we can do, even though the game engine is far more friendly than CMx1 in so many ways.

This is the tradeoff of having "depth vs. breadth". Everything in CMx2 is so much more detailed than the equivalent in CMx1. The result is that CMx2 is a far richer, deeper, and more realistic simulation of what we choose to simulate, but it is more difficult to have quantity. Still, with Modules we get as much, if not more, stuff in a particular game than we did in CMx1. There's just some limits on how far we can go.

Now, if the French government wants a specialized version for training purposes, that's a different story If they pay we can hire people to add all the French stuff into the game, test, and create scenarios. But we've had no offers from them so it's not likely to happen.

Steve

[vincere]

...because we will be busy making Modules for Normandy *and* working on the next WW2 game *and* working on CM:SF 2 at the same time.

Steve

Nice bone for CMSF, is it true that you've pencilled in a Eastern Europe US/Russia clash?

For those speculating on which Nato forces, I think Steve previously hinted at Germany and Canada.

[Sergei]

Believe me, I would love to get the full range of European hardware into CM:SF, including French, Italian, and Swedish gear.

Steve, you should know well enough that "flame-baiting" is a bannable practise. Nice try, though!