News from the Brits Module & Patch 1.2?

[Scipio]

When can we expect the Brits module and the next patch? Since it's likely that the v1.12 PBEM files won't be compatible with v1.2, I won't like to start new PBEMs, but all my old PBEMs are finished right now!

RED ALERT!!! :mad:

[Panzerfest]

Is that true about the PBEM files? If it is I picked the wrong time to start my first CMSF PBEM...

[zwobot]

How many "when are the Brits coming" threads do there have to be? Why isn't it enough to know that the module will come in 2009? Just start another PBEM; if the Brits module or the patch will be released before your PBEM is finished - who cares? Suck it up man.

[Other Means]

If the PBEM isn't compatible, just make a copy of your directory and patch that, then run the PBEM from your current one and new games from your 1.2 version.

You can have as many concurrent versions as you want.

[Scipio]

How many "when are the Brits coming" threads do there have to be? Why isn't it enough to know that the module will come in 2009?

The same question will be asked as long as BF:C keeps on posting that they make great progresses, followed by the statement that the release will be a little bit more delayed.

Just start another PBEM; if the Brits module or the patch will be released before your PBEM is finished - who cares? Suck it up man.

I do. It's not to much fun to spent a couple of weeks with a scenario, just to find out the last few turns are not compatible anymore with new patch.

If you think this threads sucks - don't read them and/or waste your time with a senseless answer. Thank you .

You can have as many concurrent versions as you want.

Indeed I want no cocurrent versions on my HD. Since it's possible to patch the program in a way that makes it possible to continue with old Campaign-saves, why ain't it possible to do the same for PBEM files?

[Other Means]

I think out of all the times I've done this I've only ever had 1 PBEM game not work in a later version. So it may be a storm in a teacup anyway.

But there you go - there's a solution if you want to use it.

The campaign saves, AIUI, are transferable only between games. A PBEM file has a lot more information in. So which would you like. An ongoing format change to produce efficiency in new PBEM games or sticking to the current format that may result in no improvements to gameplay being allowed.

I'd rather have concurrent versions while I finish a game with the flexibility to have the game improve over time.

[Scipio]

Other Means, you are generally right, it might be a storm in a teacup, and if necessary, there are solutions available, even if not fully satisfactory for me....and I won't turn the topic of this thread so soon!

[Battlefront.com]

It's funny... if we give a date and we miss it, people complain. If we don't give a date because we think we might miss it, people complain. If we stick to a hard date and release something that isn't ready, people complain. So the only solution is to not give dates and to release it when it's finished

As I've said earlier, the coding, artwork, voices, etc. are all done. We're working on the Campaign and stand alone battles only. We learned our lesson with the Marines Campaign's glitches, so we're taking our time getting the campaign ready. We also learned our lesson about how long the TO&E takes compared to everything else, so as I've said before we've recoding the entire TO&E structures and tools to address that issue. Unfortunately, since nobody's done anything like this before (complexity is a major component) there's a lot of "learn on the job" stuff going on here. That despite the fact that we've been in this business for what seems an eternity some days

The great thing about how files are organized it's REALLY easy to have "multiple versions" on your harddrive. All you need to do is backup the primary EXE somewhere, rename it, install a patch, then put the older EXE back in the CM folder. To run the old version just use the older EXE. That's because the resources used by an EXE are sequential and separated instead of mushed together. If CM needs a newer version of x resource, then it's put into a later BRZ file and it simply overrides what was in any of the earlier BRZs.

The only complicating factor is with the Modules EXEs. That's because the primary EXE calls up specifically named Module EXEs. So what you do is make a duplicate of your MODULES folder and keep that aside with the primary EXE. When you want to run the older version you simply move the current MODULE folder outside of your CM install and put your old one back in its place.

Steve

[zwobot]

It's funny... if we give a date and we miss it, people complain. If we don't give a date because we think we might miss it, people complain. If we stick to a hard date and release something that isn't ready, people complain. So the only solution is to not give dates and to release it when it's finished

Heary, heary

[JP76er]

It's funny... if we give a date and we miss it, people complain. If we don't give a date because we think we might miss it, people complain. If we stick to a hard date and release something that isn't ready, people complain. So the only solution is to not give dates and to release it when it's finished

As I've said earlier, the coding, artwork, voices, etc. are all done. We're working on the Campaign and stand alone battles only. We learned our lesson with the Marines Campaign's glitches, so we're taking our time getting the campaign ready. We also learned our lesson about how long the TO&E takes compared to everything else, so as I've said before we've recoding the entire TO&E structures and tools to address that issue. Unfortunately, since nobody's done anything like this before (complexity is a major component) there's a lot of "learn on the job" stuff going on here. That despite the fact that we've been in this business for what seems an eternity some days

The great thing about how files are organized it's REALLY easy to have "multiple versions" on your harddrive. All you need to do is backup the primary EXE somewhere, rename it, install a patch, then put the older EXE back in the CM folder. To run the old version just use the older EXE. That's because the resources used by an EXE are sequential and separated instead of mushed together. If CM needs a newer version of x resource, then it's put into a later BRZ file and it simply overrides what was in any of the earlier BRZs.

The only complicating factor is with the Modules EXEs. That's because the primary EXE calls up specifically named Module EXEs. So what you do is make a duplicate of your MODULES folder and keep that aside with the primary EXE. When you want to run the older version you simply move the current MODULE folder outside of your CM install and put your old one back in its place.

Steve

You mean like the time I was moving all my files to a new hard drive & I contacted Customer Service for my email addys & password from games I bought from Battlefront over the past several years? I got a nasty reply complaining & reaming me that I should only use one email address for the user I.D. to get to my files. Used the slang "Duh" referring to me. Notwithstanding that I bought a couple under one email address then I bought one or two more under a new address because my internet provider was sold & email addys changed for everyone. Then we moved to Comcast for cable modem speed & once again my email address changed. I bought Shock Force under that email address. I have bought a total of 6 Battlefront games & I'm a loyal customer. We had to exchange several not so nice email messages before all of my information was finally given to me. A procedure that I'm sure only took seconds.

You mean that kind of complaining coming from Battlefront's Customer Service?

I am a loyal customer & will be buying all the Shock Force modules & getting ready to purchase the new TOW module. Respect is a two way street.

[Scipio]

Steve, when we are talking about TO&E already...will be possible to edit the ammo load of a unit directly in the scenario editor? I mean, type and number of ammo a tank/gun/ATGM launcher carrys, or how many Javelins a Stryker has on board for example. We had this at least for tanks in CMx1, I wonder why this feature was dropped.

[Piecekeeper]

Maybe some more pics or videos are planned?..

[MarkEzra]

Point of Information: The feature was not dropped. The feature was changed

[Scipio]

Point of Information: The feature was not dropped. The feature was changed

Yes, thank you, I'm aware of this. But to stay with the Javelin example - you can set the level to as low as you want to, you'll always have at least one Javelin available. Tank ammo can not be directly controlled, too.

[Kodiakwdj]

>>It's funny... if we give a date and we miss it, people complain. If we don't give a date because we think we might miss it, people complain. If we stick to a hard date and release something that isn't ready, people complain. So the only solution is to not give dates and to release it when it's finished<<

So how about a hint, this week, this month, this quarter? That wouldnt be giving a date. And I promise not to complain one way or the other <VBG>

[Meach]

I think we can go back to counting hairs on our belly buttons, guys. Nothing to see here, move along.

[Battlefront.com]

Scipio,

Steve, when we are talking about TO&E already...will be possible to edit the ammo load of a unit directly in the scenario editor? I mean, type and number of ammo a tank/gun/ATGM launcher carrys, or how many Javelins a Stryker has on board for example. We had this at least for tanks in CMx1, I wonder why this feature was dropped.

Well, as has been pointed out it wasn't dropped. Nor was it really changed either. In CMx1 there was very limited control over what specific ammo a unit carried for the most part, especially for infantry units. This was mostly due to there being a lot fewer choices, combinations, and accountability.

In CMx2, for example, individual ammo is allocated to specific soldiers with a total weight limitation. If you decide to give a Rifle Squad 6x M136 rockets then various guys are going to have to drop something they already have allocated since there's no Squad in the game which has that amount of spare capacity by default. This then gets into a rather complicated process of inventory management. The only direct way to solve that is to allow you editing capabilities of each individual soldier, which is generally speaking impractical to the extreme. Which is why we have a far more generic approach to ammo management.

We are looking at ways to have a bit more control over ammo loads. It would still be quite generic, but there would be more control over the categories of ammo your units have. For example, it might be possible to up the small arms ammo at the expense of some AT capability, or up the AT capability of one type while losing another type. That sort of thing. Still pretty complex from a data management standpoint, but it's definitely doable.

Steve

[Scipio]

I see. So how can I preset that for example some Bradleys have already spend all there heavy AT capabilities and most of it's small ammo? If I set the supply level to full, the Bradley is equipted with 5 TOW, 2 Javelins and 3 84mm HEAT. If the supply level is set to 'server', he has 5 TOW, 1 Javelin and 3 84mm HEAT. Only ammo for 25mm cannon and small arms is notably reduced.

I understand the problems of direct editing, and a general switch is fine for me. But it seems to me that the switches do not work in the way they should.

[Battlefront.com]

JP76er,

Normally I wouldn't do something like this publicly, but since you just slammed us I felt obligated to research the matter and now feel obligated to set the record as straight as I can under the limitations of customer confidentiality.

You mean that kind of complaining coming from Battlefront's Customer Service?

I checked with the two people that do customer support and they provided me with a 90k sized transcript of all the emails back and forth. Since you've decided to slam us for that interaction perhaps you wouldn't mind if I posted the entire and unedited emails and let people judge for themselves what really happened? I'm confident that if people read the entire interaction they will have a completely different opinion of our customer service than how you characterized it.

I am a loyal customer & will be buying all the Shock Force modules & getting ready to purchase the new TOW module. Respect is a two way street.

Exactly. Please keep that in mind the next time you ask for help and people are promptly, and diligently, trying to provide it to you.

Steve

[MarkEzra]

As a simple matter of accuracy: Here is the actual "Severe" Ammo Load

[Scipio]

Mark, I checked again, we are both right with our numbers. It's just that I've checked the Scout Platoon, while you have checked the other platoons.

I have calculated the share for the different supply setting ('green numbers'):

Full = 100%

Adequate = ? (there's only a reduction of 7.62mm ammo)

Limited = 80%

Scarce = 60%

Severe = 40%

Seems to be a bit different & inconsistent for the 'white numbers'. It's also not fully clear how the programm rounds fractions. So the answer to my 'how to do' question is that this preset is not possible.

[Pandur]

i hope we get the CMx1 systems back where we could set for example "tank X" got a maximum capacity of XX rounds, and we can set how many of these sort, how many of that sort, up to the maximum...like it was in CMx1 for most vehicles. the limited/adequat/... setting is ok as "basic" but that doesnt let us edit the ammo loadout for vehicles in a way one would like. you can puzzle around wich setting gives you the closest result to the one you are looking for but you will never get the result wich you want exactly, so i dont see why the old feature was dropped or changed to resemble something totaly else.

[Battlefront.com]

We are not going to go back to a specific round tweaking UI. It's not necessary nor is it worth our time to code. What I do hope to do is get the equipment that is affected by the settings to be broken up into categories. For example, for vehicles having AP, HE, and "Special" setting. For foot units there would be a category for Small Arms, Grenades, AT Weapons. The values, if this happens, will be Fuzzy values like in the game now. This makes coding a lot easier for us and automatically portable from one setting to the next. It also gives players what they occasionally need, such as downgrading or upgrading specific types of ammo to fit in with a scenario concept.

Steve

[Clavicula_Nox]

Steve, this is a little off-topic; but is there any way to get it so we can see what our Air Assets intend to use, or are capable of using? Or if there is a way, can someone help a semi-noob?

[Canada Guy]

Steve,

When you say that the player can tweak the values for Small Arms, Grenades, AT Weapons etc. Is this scenario wide or will this be squad specific.

E.g. In one CMx1 scenario I designed, the USSR gets a KV-1 but the AP ammo is very low while the HE is normal. While we will not be able to specify that it has 20HE and 5 AP will we be able to say that HE is normal and AP is scarce per unit? or even per platoon?