The road ahead... a recap

[Battlefront.com]

Thanks guys!

To answer the main question about the splitting up of the Western Front. There are several reasons for this:

1. TO&E. Around the Fall and early Winter all forces in Europe underwent significant tweaking, especially the Germans. These changes varied from rather small stuff to rather large things, such as the German's late war formations which had major compromises due to shortages.

2. Equipment. Most vehicles that were still in use by the late war period in the exact same form as they were in Normandy, others were completely new. Some were fairly minor variants, such as adding armor to a Sherman or Panther, others were brand new, like M36 Jackson or M24 Chaffee. To a lesser extent this is also true for some non-vehicular weapons, such as the Panzerfaust 100 and of course the more exotic stuff towards the end of the war (like the Pak44).

3. Weather. Winter weather effects and graphics are, of course, a completely different thing from Summer and Fall. Spring is similar to Fall for the most part, though there are some differences. Textures for vehicles also need to be different, so even when we reuse the same models we have to at least change the textures.

4. Architecture. Buildings encountered along the border of Germany, and on either side, are very different than the ones found in Normandy. These things involve not only new textures, but new models AND likely new coding (though probably not much).

5. New game features. New Titles mean we have to put in new game features. If we don't make any new Titles, then you don't get any new game features. Simple equation So it makes sense to us that by the time 12 months post Normandy rolls around you guys will want some new game features to play with. The logical place to do that is with this Title.

6. New "in the box" battles and Campaign. These would go into a Module, of course, but will also go into a Title.

In the end it is no one single thing, rather it is a combination of everything. What you basically get is more content than you would with a Module, by far, plus new game features. So you can think of it as a $25 Module with $20 worth of new features and graphics that we wouldn't put into a Module.

Hope that helps!

Steve

[dan/california]

Could coplay and/or WEGO TCP/IP make the end of war title. Either one would be worth the 45 bucks all by itself.

Game is great, can't wait for more!

[MeatEtr]

Hi all,

In another thread someone asked about our plans now that CM:SF Marines is out. This question came up in second thread, and I think even a third one, this week. So I guess I should post my response here and sticky this thread for a while.

Steve

Yeah I was thinking the other day a sticky recap would be great from those threads. Then I just noticed you did make a sticky recap, thanks.

I'm glad to hear the Marines module has done well for you guys. Actually, the module is the first BF product I didn't buy. I'm admittedly in the "prefer WWII setting over modern" camp. But I'm just now getting back into CMSF with the 1.10 patch(last I played was on 1.03).

For the release of the Brits module, will there possibly be some kind of a combo deal for buying the Marines+Brits packs? I know it's still a ways from release, but I still see myself eventually wanting both, just have no need for the Marines module now.

[SlapHappy]

Steve

In the first WWII Western Theater game is there any consideration of some level of representation of Axis recycled French or Polish (or other) vehicles and AFV's that were used to some extent or is it more likely to be a straight up representation of typical German Kit from that period? Or perhaps some smaller arms like MG-26?

[leakyD]

Also-

A late WWII EU module *could* allow for various "what if" TOE, scenarios and vehicles.

That would *really* make having a Late War Title worth it.

[JonS]

4. Architecture. Buildings encountered along the border of Germany, and on either side, are very different than the ones found in Normandy.

I'm prepared to take a hit for the team and do the in-the-field research on the architectural differences between Normandy - Northern-France and Germany - Ardennes. Especially the architectural finer points of the bars and cafes in all likely locations. I know it'll be a nasty, unpleasant, and exhausting task, but I'll grit my teeth and man up to the challenge.

No need to thank me - just send an Amex Gold.

Sincerely

Jon

[purpheart23]

way to step up to the plate JonS..........good man.

[Sequoia]

Also-

A late WWII EU module *could* allow for various "what if" TOE, scenarios and vehicles.

That would *really* make having a Late War Title worth it.

Steve already said we may eventually even see a Maus.

Maybe they could do a Centurion as well.

Now I'm also thinking what if they did both East and West front modules for the Late war game.

Think of the Blue vs Blue matchups you could have. Patton's fantasy.

[Battlefront.com]

One of the best things about our strategy is that it is not dependent upon every customer buying every single Module. In fact, we definitely expect people to be choosy. That would suck for everybody if we didn't offer many things to choose from, hence why we're determined to not let that happen If Modern isn't your cup of tea, or the thought of British tanks in Normandy bores you to tears, no problemo. Just sit back and wait for something that gets you excited.

I should have added that we will release a Demo for each Title and each Module. We're a little behind on doing that for Marines, but we will get to it very soon. This is still a learning process for us in terms of how to juggle the various needs of a Module.

Over time we will take the Modules and bundle them in with the base game or with each other. We've already done this with CM:SF and Marines. Over time the pricing will drop somewhat, though not the way the cutthroat retailers do it. As many of you might remember, there was one British retailer that was selling CM:SF at the wholesale price before we had even released the game! We still don't know how they can make out on doing that, but that's their standard MO. It is so much fun being involved with retail where you're product is like a new car... worth less than you paid for it before the ink is even dry on the contract. Grr!!

On that point, retail is not something we've completely written off. We had great success with it in the past, including a simultaneous release of CMAK. But things are changing for the worse in retail. Publishers are paying less for product and yet demanding more from them. That is in part because retail is even less interested in keeping full price point than they were before, which is really hard for us to believe. Today only a few products manage to stay away from the bargain bin for even a small amount of time by wargame standards. Our games are strong for years, but retail measures strength in weeks. Not good.

Back to the specific question about what vehicles we might throw into WW2 Modules... too early to get specific, however I will say that YES... the Module system was very much designed so that we can afford to offer wacky stuff. We've always heard from people "damn, I'd pay all kinds of money to play around with a Maus or an E-100!". Well, although we have made no specific selections for any WW2 release outside of the initial Normandy game, I can say that you guys will get your wish in at least a general way (i.e. wacky stuff).

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Oh, and remember this. It's so important that I should have put it in the initial comments, so I'm going to edit it in:

The CMx2 game engine is not a monolithic product with a set of features that basically remain unchanged over the life of the engine itself. That was the way we did things with CMx1 and it was, largely, out of necessity because the code was difficult to work with. Instead, CMx2 is designed to evolve over time. Features we don't have time for today might show up tomorrow. Stuff that people aren't as thrilled about now will possibly be changed later. Things that people see as having great potential will be expanded upon, while features that don't seem to get people's hearts beating will stay as they are. So on and so forth.

The point is the game engine is an ever evolving platform for our wargaming hobby. It will never, ever have everything you guys want to see in it, but it will continue to have more than any other game company is willing (or even capable of) providing. Some will be unhappy with specific decisions we make, others will be overjoyed about the very same ones. The first rule of wargaming design work is to realize that you can't make everybody happy, therefore someone is always going to be upset. Focus on the wrong group and that will be the last game you make. Fortunately, we get to make that decision since it's our butts on the line

Steve

[pcpilot]

I think you guys are on the right track for what its worth. Maybe, from what youve said about this game engines' flexability and growth potential, a module one of these days might include amphibious units eh?

[MeatEtr]

[Lethaface]

Now thats express delivery!

[c3k]

Steve,

Good to hear! I am glad you're not going to try to please EVERYONE. You should just focus on ME!

Thanks,

Ken

[dieseltaylor]

Realism vs gameplay I think will be the crunch for WW2. And of course scale - which I assume is set irrevocably to a lower level than CM1.

Best of luck anyway

[kipanderson]

JonS,

“I'm prepared to take a hit for the team and do the in-the-field research on the architectural differences between Normandy - Northern-France and Germany - Ardennes.”

I don’t want to make you too jealous … but I have been to the Ardennes four times over the last ten years all on the 15th/16th/17th December… I have rolled out of a bar in Bastogne to find the snow falling, Christmas carols wafting through the cold winter night and a Sherman tank rumbling down the high street…. .

You can still see Easy Company’s foxholes overlooking the village they fought over for two weeks… little has changed…

All very good fun,

All the best,

Kip.

[Der Alte Fritz]

So. When does BFG plan to turn East? After Normandy and Ardennes?

[salwon]

I think they've said Bagration will be the third WWII game, though where CMSF2 falls is probably TBD.

What about modelling artillery duds? That would be a great bit of realism, seeing unexploded rounds surrounding your foxholes. Though it'd probably be a lot less fun from the German side!

[Other Means]

I want an Achilles and I want it NOW.

[Mord]

Realism vs gameplay I think will be the crunch for WW2. And of course scale - which I assume is set irrevocably to a lower level than CM1.

Best of luck anyway

Why would the scale change....we can fight battalion + on battalion + battles right now...Actually one could argue that you could fight bigger engagements than CMX1 if you wanted. Personally I probably wouldn't play battles that big, and I doubt RT players could handle it, but it can be done.

I think one of the overlooked bonuses of CMX2 is that smaller engagements are much more interesting than they were in CMX1. The 1:1 representation gives even tiny scenarios a very intimate feeling, something CMBO, CMBB and Cmak could never do because of the visual scale (at least when troops were used).

Mord.

[sfhand]

Dropping a quick note to express my support for Battlefront. Hopefully the global economy will allow us to purchase your games when they're done...

[Battlefront.com]

The scale of the CMx2 is no different than CMx1. For both games the smallest unit is a Team or individual vehicle, the largest formation size is a Battalion. Now, if you want to play RealTime I don't think you want to be playing with a battalion + force that is on a widely spread out, dense terrain map. No more than anybody would have wanted to do that in CMx1

Steve

[Wrath of Dagon]

After the Normandy game comes out, how about a campaign map before any more modules? If CMC ever comes out, that would alleviate the situation, but otherwise I'd much rather have a real campaign instead of more equipment.

[Smaragdadler]

To answer the main question about the splitting up of the Western Front. There are several reasons for this:

1. TO&E.

2. Equipment.

3. Weather.

4. Architecture.

5. New game features.

6. New "in the box" battles and Campaign.

Hope that helps!

Steve

Good to hear that. That late Westfront title is the one I wait for the most. Normandy is ok and I will buy it too of course. Just want to take the oportunity to state my questions/wishes:

Will we see early night vision equipment like Uhu-Panters and Stg44-Vampires? ('wacky bonus Maus-style')

Will there be game-engine improvments/optimization for Hürtgen style heavy forest fighting? (tree-burst arty fuses + appropriate TacAI reaction(s) + graphic representation; booby-trapped concertina wire/adhoc roadblock from interlocked trees; landscaped bunkers, "tanks vs trees" etc)

How good will the weather be simulated? I would like to see sleet, fog, rain, snow, mud and ice in all possible combinations and transitions.

Snow should come in main variations like heavy, normal, light, new and melting. There should be the possibility to have more than one ground type on a map.

In CMx1 light snow was always more heavy on hills and lighter in valleys. That may be the case in high mountains like the Alps but in low mountain range the snow on top of hill can melt over the day, while the valleys stay white, because the sunrays cant get there so well. It's all a question of date, temperature and high.

Carefull attention should also be made to fine tune enviroment variables in correlation with vehicle statistics.

(how muddy can a slope be at which decline to get a Sherman up there or not and when the weather is so and so on this date - where on the map - on this hour of the day - could be the ground still frozen enough to give my Sherman a second try (if he manages to keep running after his mud slide)?

[cabal23]

Ok that's all great but when do I get my bathroom reading, Battlefront? When will the hardcopies ship?