Bradley Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 I'm so stoked for what BFC will offer on the Eastern Front. Though not big on the Western Front I will certainly purchase. Just to finally see (play) 1to1 infantry warfare in WWII form. I know BFC will nail the armored end but having a more realistic infantry model just gets me so excited! Having infantry more of an equalizing force, depending on terrain/cover of course, can't be underestimated!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoMac Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Ummm, did you say 1 to 1 Infantry...thats just wonderful Was hoping to keep the Squad block of CMx1, but probably a different way of using firepower. Joe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 The Eastern Front Pwns the Western Front! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Ummm, did you say 1 to 1 Infantry...thats just wonderful Was hoping to keep the Squad block of CMx1, but probably a different way of using firepower. Joe How would that work? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benpark Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Although I'm pleased with the western front versions, the new eastern front is the one I am also waiting for more than any other. I'm trying to figure out how the add-on modules will work if the base game starts with Bagration. If the add-on system will add extra units, not large battles trying to imagine what form this particular one will take is interesting. There won't be any givens like "Brits in the add-on", as this instance has two national forces (no Axis minors in this area to speak of). Additional armored units? Specific formations like SS/Guards units? Additional terrain? Interesting possibilities. My main hope is that some urban terrain is included. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 I would assume that urban terrain would be included in the base game, given that it's already possible in CM:SF and Steve has said that everything from previous games will be available in later games. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 On the bright side, at least I'm not a total groggy fan of something like the War of 1812 or the Spanish American War. Talk about a dearth of gaming available for those subjects Steve LOL, heck, it's hard to even find books written on those two wars!! You might as well toss in the Mexican American War onto that list too. At least those long suffering WW1 fans get a crumb tossed at them every once in a while. Oh, and if you are in to Napoleonics then you better like refighting the battle of Waterloo over and over and over again. Leipzig? Wagram? Austerlitz? Borodino? Good luck on those ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smaragdadler Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Here is something I found about Jena-Auerstedt (not bad at all): http://www.dailymotion.com/Chretzel/video/x6fpu7_1806engl_videogames 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 stikkypixie, How would that work? Easy! Rip out about 3 years worth of code and testing, then spend another year rewriting the core of the game engine, with another year of testing and tweaking, so that it can do 1/10th as much as it does now. Which should explain why we're not going to do that benpark, I'm trying to figure out how the add-on modules will work if the base game starts with Bagration. If the add-on system will add extra units, not large battles trying to imagine what form this particular one will take is interesting. There won't be any givens like "Brits in the add-on", as this instance has two national forces (no Axis minors in this area to speak of). Additional armored units? Specific formations like SS/Guards units? Additional terrain? Interesting possibilities. My main hope is that some urban terrain is included. As a rule the Modules will not add terrain or weather. However, I am sure we'll have exceptions here and there along the way. So what will happen for Eastern Front is that within a given timeframe we'll be adding vehicles/units. Remember, both sides had tons of different types of formations and lots of equipment variants. We can also remain loose about the timeframe that the Family covers. For example, we anticipate Bagration to cover Summer 1944 through Spring 1945 when it is complete. As you know, the Germans and the Soviets put a lot of new stuff into the field during those last few months. One of the benefits of the progression of the CMx2 engine is that as time goes on we can offer MORE content for successive games because we'll be leveraging things we've already done before. For example, we won't have to do much coding or artwork to get the terrain and weather environment in place for Bagration through Spring 1945 since we'll have already done both the temperate climate and the winter stuff for Normandy and Bulge. Because of this we can offer more of something with the time we're saving on the terrain and weather aspects. Or put another way, each game we release will have X amount of work put into it. If we already have A, B, and C done from previous releases then we can focus most of X time on D, E, and F. Over time this means that each release we put out will be "bigger" than the one before it in some way. Our plan is that instead of increasing the breadth (i.e. adding 2 year's worth of Eastern Front units) we'll instead continue to increase the depth (i.e. adding game features to make the game experience better). Field Marshal Blücher, I would assume that urban terrain would be included in the base game, given that it's already possible in CM:SF and Steve has said that everything from previous games will be available in later games. Yes, exactly what I just detailed above. We will likely have to tweak the existing stuff to work best with a particular setting (Syrian houses in Normandy... no way! Norman houses outside Minsk? Nope!), but that is small potatoes compared to the underlying coding of that stuff. ASL Veteran LOL, heck, it's hard to even find books written on those two wars!! You might as well toss in the Mexican American War onto that list too. At least those long suffering WW1 fans get a crumb tossed at them every once in a while. Oh, and if you are in to Napoleonics then you better like refighting the battle of Waterloo over and over and over again. Leipzig? Wagram? Austerlitz? Borodino? Good luck on those ones. Exactly. If you had to invest a million or a couple of million Dollars into a wargame, what subject matter would you choose? The Boer Wars or perhaps the unrest in India during the 1940s? Nope... most likely you'd come to the conclusion that WW2 Western Front or present/near-future Modern are the way to go. The Eastern Front is lucky enough to be on the very short list of "not the most popular, but quite viable" subject matter. That list is extremely short. Extremely. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchy Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 Will the Pacific front during WWII be the subject a CMx2 module down the road? Is that on anyone's list? :-) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVulture Posted April 12, 2009 Share Posted April 12, 2009 The Eastern Front Pwns the Western Front! Abso-fragging-lutely. And I didn't give a fig for the east front a few short years ago. Heard about the CM games, bought CMBB as the latest release, and was converted to an eastern front fan by the end of my 2nd mission ('Gefechtsaufklaerung' and 'Cracking the Egg' if anyone is keeping score) I was hooked, and had pretty much no interest in CMBO or CMAK after that (despite having no Brits in CMBB to play with). (And for reasons that I won't go in to, I bought CMBB twice, and also a bundle of all three games, so I actually bought CMBB three times in total - do I get a free copy of the Bagration game for that <innocent look>) Why don't market forces work in my favour dammit! I'm one of those guys who, when I find a restaurant I like, has essentially cursed it in to going out of business within twelve months. I must have minority tastes or something. Still, I'm pretty sure I'll by every BFC game and module, so I'm part of the demographic that Steve et al are gleefully sucking all the blood out of (and perversely, thanking them for it). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Will the Pacific front during WWII be the subject a CMx2 module down the road? Is that on anyone's list? :-) It's on my list. Of course, that doesn't help you any since I don't make games. The Pacific front would probably consist of several game families if it was made. I can see Burma occupying several games by itself, and Guadalcanal 1942 would probably be very different from Iwo Jima '45. Of course, I believe all of this to be moot because I think Steve has said they won't be commercially viable. I would love to see them, but I don't think it's going to happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Steve, hi, This may already have been mentioned…. but with Bagration done the same set of terrain tiles would cover Kursk spot on. The time of year is identical… and the eastern ¾ of Bagration was fought over terrain with the same vegetation, architecture, climate and terrain features as Kursk. It is true that in Bagration more forest and marsh tiles would be used but in the undulating terrain of Kursk many a river and stream valley would use the same terrain tiles and marshy areas as Belarus. Very different equipment for both sides, in many cases anyway, but still purely a unit makeover is all that would be needed. It would be a blockbuster module, but with units the only difference is a Kursk module on the cards… really just summer ’43 module… Lots and lots to look forward to, All the best, Kip. PS. I am more fortunate than some in that I am also very interested in simulating contemporary warfare…. but I too am starting to crack under the strain of needing my WWII fix… so much so I may go off and build a Kursk CMBB clash using Google for my topography… 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 This may already have been mentioned…. but with Bagration done the same set of terrain tiles would cover Kursk spot on. [...] Very different equipment for both sides, in many cases anyway, but still purely a unit makeover is all that would be needed. Yeah, in Bagration the only vehicle you need for the Germans is a StuG 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 See post below... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Redwolf, hi, Yeah, in Bagration the only vehicle you need for the Germans is a StuG I agree…. but it does depend on the exact definition of Bagration… If you include the operations just to the south of Bagration, the Lvov Operation, then you are awash with the latest German AFVs of the period…. . In fact the Lvov Operation is to my mind the classic Soviet offensive with their power at its zenith. The Germans were very well prepared; the exact spot they had expected the major Soviet summer offensive, yet still the Soviets went through them like the proverbial knife through butter. It was a very good example of why defence in depth, very widely dispersed units back from a lightly held front line, can play into the hands of the attacker. You are committing your troops piecemeal to battle. In this case to the defence. A rant for another day when we move on to these subjects. All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George MC Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Ost Front! Ost Front! Ost Front! Put your hands in the air ooh oi! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 All this stuff almost makes me teary eyed, but promises, promises, Battlefront needs to deliver! When will we see the CMSF Brits?! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Yeah, in Bagration the only vehicle you need for the Germans is a StuG There was at least one Schwere Panzerabteilung in the area, the 501st, I believe. Could be the 503rd, also. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 George, hi, You should be banned from posting your http://www.blowtorchscenarios.com it really does nearly bring tears to my eyes….. I want a CMX2 Eastern Front game now…. but as all mothers say… you do not get what you want …. ! All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 There was at least one Schwere Panzerabteilung in the area, the 501st, I believe. Could be the 503rd, also. Both IIRC . I was kidding. But the history of Bagration games shows that Bagration games exhibit the proverbial "East Front game" buyer's hesitation tenfold. Those wargamers that consider the Eastern Front but aren't intimate with it (aka most wargamers) automatically treat it like the treat the Syrian theater in CM:SF now: an unbalanced fight that can't be fun. I'd be curious to know how many people here can name a particular engagement from Bagration with place and/or date, or at least have an image of one. The only reason I know anything about Bagration details is that Steven Zaloga wrong an Osprey title about it which is of course a must-consume (regardless of what it's about). Now, myself I like attack/defense scenarios with creative defenses with lots of surprises and new challenges. A 1944 German defender in that region, if you count in the Tigers and you probably have a couple minor Jagdpanzers next to the StuGs, with Panzerschreck and Panzerfaust and automatic infantry weapons will provide such a challenge (if FoW is properly implemented). I declined to post the reply to the "no, the CMBB demo wasn't a mistake" that I wrote a couple days ago, let's just say there is opportunity here to show the attraction of the setting, or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Remember that we're not limited to just a specific battle, or even a series of them, when we choose a timeframe. "Bagration" isn't the only thing the first CMx2 Eastern Front game will cover. As I said, it will probably cover from summer 1944 to spring 1945. With that you get the "best" toys the Eastern Front has to offer. On the German side you get all the sexy cats, on the Soviet side you get the ugliest, biggest mass produced brutes of the war. Lots of cool small arms fire, and the best of the best Soviet infantry of the war (both in terms of quality and organization). It is the best balanced tactical environment on the Eastern Front IMHO. So it's the best place to start. It's also the most logical place for us to start. We'll have many of the German models and TO&E done already, so that leaves us free to focus on the stuff that's missing. That includes some German stuff, obviously all the Soviet stuff, some terrain, and lots of misc. artwork, voices, sound effects, etc. to make it all come together. It also gives us the opportunity to implement game features that would otherwise have to be withheld due to a lack of time. For example, if we were to do Kursk or Stalingrad practically speaking EVERYTHING other than the base terrain would have to be done from scratch for both sides. Well, time is time no matter what it is spent on so if we're willing to put X time into a particular game and almost all of it is chewed up by game content, then obviously game features will have to take a back seat. Redwolf, I declined to post the reply to the "no, the CMBB demo wasn't a mistake" that I wrote a couple days ago, let's just say there is opportunity here to show the attraction of the setting, or not. Rarely is marketing that simple Almost always it is in the eye of the beholder and that, unfortunately, is a big problem for wargames. Our audience is fairly small and quite diverse. In fact, quite hostile towards the difference of opinions on things. So I go back to my argument that sure... we could have done the demo 100 different ways to Sunday, but I doubt it would have changed our sales figures in any noticeable way towards the positive. Cutting out the Minor Axis nations, on the other hand, would have decreased development time and increased profitability without cutting into sales in any significant way. Which is why I said if we could go back in time and change any one thing, doing a different demo wouldn't even be in the Top 10 things to change. Everything in the Top 10 would have been content reduction, which of course is not what CMBB fans want to hear Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Cutting out the Minor Axis nations, on the other hand, would have decreased development time and increased profitability without cutting into sales in any significant way. Which is why I said if we could go back in time and change any one thing, doing a different demo wouldn't even be in the Top 10 things to change. Everything in the Top 10 would have been content reduction, which of course is not what CMBB fans want to hear Steve Well, you could have allowed users to develop all that minor junk Not, as in entirely new vehicles. Of course you want to prevent people from making the whole game free enough to model other theaters. But you could have put in unit data for these vehicles that is incomplete but narrows down that this "slot" can only be used for a certain vehicle. Then allow loading of Maya (or whatever) 3D models and an XML file completing the unit data. With all the minor vehicles and formations, would it really have sped up a CMBB release, wouldn't Charles be a bottleneck and his work be mostly independent of these minor forces additions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietrich Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 The Eastern Front Pwns the Western Front! Ost Front! Ost Front! Ost Front! Put your hands in the air ooh oi! "Geladen und bereit! Wir schießen Dauerfeuer!" .................................................................... "Urrah!" "Noch warten.... läßt sie näher kommen...." ......................................................... "Urrah!!" "Warten... Ruhe, Männer!" ..................................................................... "Urrah!!!" "Feuer frei! Gibt Sperrfeuer, Männer!" ....................................... "Urrah!!!" "Ich kann doch nicht...weiter töten!" ....................... "Urrah!!!" "Handgranate -- Deckung!" "Nahkampf!" ... "Urrah!!!" (insert sound effects as appropriate) *clears his throat and looks sheepish* Uh, yeah, Ostfront, jawohl. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Might CMx2:Ostfront include (I would be tickled pink if it did) some sort of animation for MG42 barrel-changing, and maybe for the MG34 as well? (I wonder if the NATO module will include any sort of animation for changing the barrel of a Bundeswehr MG3...) I suppose this question would apply to CM:Normandy as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted April 13, 2009 Share Posted April 13, 2009 Redwolf, Well, you could have allowed users to develop all that minor junk Not, as in entirely new vehicles. Of course you want to prevent people from making the whole game free enough to model other theaters. But you could have put in unit data for these vehicles that is incomplete but narrows down that this "slot" can only be used for a certain vehicle. Then allow loading of Maya (or whatever) 3D models and an XML file completing the unit data. The models are actually the easiest and most straight forward things to put into the game. Offloading them to volunteers AFTER the game is out just makes no commercial sense to us at all. I've covered this topic a million and a half times before. Mods do not sell our games. Mods simply make a fairly small percentage of the people who bought the game happier while. It's not something we feel is worth spending development time supporting (someone has to write tools, documentation, etc. since neither exist). With all the minor vehicles and formations, would it really have sped up a CMBB release, wouldn't Charles be a bottleneck and his work be mostly independent of these minor forces additions? To some extent, true. But I'm not talking about elapsed time from the start of the project to the end. I'm talking about cumulative time of many people over many months. If we cut out the minor Axis nations we'd have saved a ton of development resources (i.e. money) and not sacrificed a single sale for it. We also could definitely have got the game out much sooner because back in CMx1 days Charles had to code all the TO&E from notes I provided to him. We also had tons of vehicle data we had to go after and much of it was done by him because the rest of us were busy doing a mountain of other work. In other words, Charles could have finished his non-unit related programming tasks months earlier if we had reduced the content load on him. Steve 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.