A worthy foe - The difference between CMSF and CMx1's

[[hirr]Leto]

"our" opinions? Who are "yous"?

Yous= myself and (I humbly assume from his rather prosaic testimony) Chad Harrington.

Or did you mean a Joe Pesci like "youth's", as in the "two yous" from "My Cousin Vinny"?

: )

Cheers!

Leto

[[hirr]Leto]

You know, the Brits are going to add an incredible amount of variety to blue on blue fights. In particular I think the brits vs the Marines would be an extremely even fight. And I will attempt to confirm this....... As soon as you release the *&%*&&*&*&* module.

"Tax our teas, wills yas! Well on guarde you limey bastahds!"

The epic battle is finally continued...

: )

Cheers!

Leto

[Pvt. Ryan]

It would be a continuation of the War of 1812 - Revenge of the Executive Mansion

[Redwolf]

Just to be sure:

The Brit thing is a module, that means it is running an executable that will have the ability to mix all vehicles, units, terrain and indirect fires that are/were coming with Brits, Marines and CM:SF, right?

(of course that requires you own 1 game and the 2 modules)

[Lethaface]

Leto, no straw in your face this time , but 'what' is wargaming vs a simulation?

Although I agree that the 'simulation' aspect in CMSF is surely there, for me it is also wargaming pur sang. At the same time CMx1 games didn't have enough appeal for me, partly because of the turn based action I couldn't appreciate (however I do now in pbem), but mostly because of the steep learning curve I couldn't bare at the time.

I couldn't really care less about the term 'wargaming' actually (for my part CMSF could just be called a 'game'), but I guess asymmetric warfare is no less 'warfare' then symmetric warfare. Hence, I can't fully agree with your statement that the simulation aspect is only applicable to CMSF, not cmx1. They are just different types of wargaming / warfare simulations.

Not that I don't understand "youth's guys" like symmetric ol' ww2 guns blazin' better

[Battlefront.com]

Leto,

IIRC it is "youts", not "yous"

Moon is correct that the ladders have had problems dealing with subtle scoring systems. It's a really new concept in wargaming and definitely seems to work better for non-club competition. Or put another way, the richness of the scoring makes the game more attractive (fun, challenging, varied) to competitive play (IMHO anyway), but not for organized "club" style competitive play.

Redwolf,

The Brit thing is a module, that means it is running an executable that will have the ability to mix all vehicles, units, terrain and indirect fires that are/were coming with Brits, Marines and CM:SF, right?

Correct. The core game engine is the same and everybody can upgrade to v1.20 no matter what. Players with the base game can still play against someone who has the base + British, though they can only play with the common base game stuff. Someone with all three releases can play with all stuff in the same battle if he wants.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Lethaface,

I couldn't really care less about the term 'wargaming' actually (for my part CMSF could just be called a 'game'), but I guess asymmetric warfare is no less 'warfare' then symmetric warfare. Hence, I can't fully agree with your statement that the simulation aspect is only applicable to CMSF, not cmx1. They are just different types of wargaming / warfare simulations.

Yes, and that's been said over and over again They are different because of the technology they use, if nothing else. CMx1 looks quite dated and that is a problem for some people, but not others. CMx1 couldn't do much of what CM:SF can do because the technology 10 years ago couldn't hack it. That may not count much for some, while being huge for others. CMx1 was a much more basic game system, which to some limits the depth and emotional appeal of the battles fought. And of course... those who have a predisposition to WW2 won't have the same bonding with CM:SF no matter what.

Both are great games, both have their places in wargaming. But, of course, one game system is arrested in its current form and the other one has a very, very long and diverse life ahead of it. Not only am I interested to see how the CMBO guys react to CM: Normandy, but I'll also be interested to see how CM: Normandy 2 (a few years from now) react to Normandy 1.

Steve

[dan/california]

So there is a long term plan to revisit all the major wars and or theaters every three to five years as the both the engine and available processing power improve?

[Field Marshal Blücher]

In particular I think the brits vs the Marines would be an extremely even fight.

Why this in particular?

[Battlefront.com]

Correct. The subject matter is "timeless" but the game engine is not. The idea is that by the time we're ready to do the same topic again the core engine will be very, very different from the last time around. Modern warfare actually has a second advantage in that we can keep doing unique content AND upgrade the game experience too. WW2 doesn't have that since the units, equipment, settings, etc. are all fixed.

Steve

[sfhand]

Lethaface,

... Not only am I interested to see how the CMBO guys react to CM: Normandy, but I'll also be interested to see how CM: Normandy 2 (a few years from now) react to Normandy 1.

Steve

Have I been asleep at the wheel here, or is this the first mention of CM: Normandy 2?

[dan/california]

Well, first of all I wasn't thinking about the IBCT when I said it. Secondly both of those formations have a smaller number of missiles that kill ANYTHING out the limits of a CMSF map, so a blue on blue game might last a little longer. A Warrior heavy British formation against an equivalent number of Marines, both sides with little or no tank support, intrigues me for some reason.

[Battlefront.com]

Sfhand,

Have I been asleep at the wheel here, or is this the first mention of CM: Normandy 2?

Nope, it's the first time Eventually everything will be recovered multiple times. Ideally every 2-3 years. That timeframe allows us to keep the engine updated to OS and hardware changes as well as the tons of gameplay improvements.

An example of a possible gameplay improvement for Normandy 2... oh, just guessing here... CoPlay might be one of them. A fundamental change for the game, no doubt. But it could be something more effects based, like tanks which show dynamic damage. As in a hit to the stowage bin of a PzIV's turret would be pealed back and blackened.

When you think about the thousands of things people have been asking for since CMBO was first announced, there's no shortage of significant improvements to put into the game engine.

Steve

[Sgt Joch]

.........CMSF2....

..........CM:NORMANDY2.......

...been there, done that...when are we going to get down to the real action, like CM:Vietnam........:cool:

[Paper Tiger]

And once again, the straw phantom menace is hoisted up by pitchfork, the fires lit, and rationality drowned out by the cultish chantings of "we know better and how dare you say otherwise."

Well, knock me over with a feather! I appear to have completely misinterpreted your earlier post and slighted you when you were posting here with the genuine intention to seek out opponents to play this game online, you poor sensitive soul. Well, my hearty and sincere apologies to you dear fellow. Now, off you go and sign up for a game or two then like a good chap. I am really looking forward to hearing how you get on.

cheers!

PT

[DavidFields]

"Crete 41, France 40", as mentioned in one Battlefront.com posting. Oh, yes...and can we talk about Poland?

As an old PanzerBlitz, PanzerLeader (Tactics II...was there a I?), person, I can't seem to "get into" CMSF. Playing Russian armor in 1941....love it.

I realize....I sympathize....that CMBB was utterly traumatic to produce.

But a long time from now, if it could still be played, as the Mona Lisa of simulations.

You may do something equal. And the technology may help with bells and whistles, but unless you do a simulation of 5 years of war, with huge tech changes, you are unlikely to do better.

And, as I think you have said, your families will, perhaps legitimately (as a physician, who hears this) will not allow you that path.

But...........aren't you the least bit tempted.....a CMBB on CM2 scale (let the throwing of things in the office begin)

An Historical accomplishment?

[Chad Harrison]

Sfhand,

Nope, it's the first time

You see, something good came out of my thread

Steve, I would be happy to fire up a beta version of CM:Normandy and let you know how I feel being a old time competitive CMx1 player

I traded Moon some cinnamon roles to get a CM:BO tourney going, I would be willing to offer the same again

[[hirr]Leto]

And once again, the straw phantom menace is hoisted up by pitchfork, the fires lit, and rationality drowned out by the cultish chantings of "we know better and how dare you say otherwise."

Well, knock me over with a feather! I appear to have completely misinterpreted your earlier post and slighted you when you were posting here with the genuine intention to seek out opponents to play this game online, you poor sensitive soul. Well, my hearty and sincere apologies to you dear fellow. Now, off you go and sign up for a game or two then like a good chap. I am really looking forward to hearing how you get on.

cheers!

PT

Apology accepted.

Cheers!

Leto

[Paper Tiger]

No problem at all. I'm absolutely delighted that you have finally seen the light and have openly declared yourself to be a fan of CM:SF. So much so in fact that you are sincerely seeking people to play online against. What a radical conversion!

Why, do you know, you could even post here in this forum to find one for starters.

welcome aboard mate

[silverstars]

"Crete 41, France 40", as mentioned in one Battlefront.com posting. Oh, yes...and can we talk about Poland?

As an old PanzerBlitz, PanzerLeader (Tactics II...was there a I?), person, I can't seem to "get into" CMSF. Playing Russian armor in 1941....love it.

I realize....I sympathize....that CMBB was utterly traumatic to produce.

But a long time from now, if it could still be played, as the Mona Lisa of simulations.

You may do something equal. And the technology may help with bells and whistles, but unless you do a simulation of 5 years of war, with huge tech changes, you are unlikely to do better.

And, as I think you have said, your families will, perhaps legitimately (as a physician, who hears this) will not allow you that path.

But...........aren't you the least bit tempted.....a CMBB on CM2 scale (let the throwing of things in the office begin)

An Historical accomplishment?

Well, with the whole CM:Russo-Afghan Conflict in the works, whose to say if that sells well Battlefront will just let 1C put out CM:Eastern Front? Or do you think Steve loves his Romanians too much to give them to another?

[Sequoia]

Well, with the whole CM:Russo-Afghan Conflict in the works, whose to say if that sells well Battlefront will just let 1C put out CM:Eastern Front? Or do you think Steve loves his Romanians too much to give them to another?

No, Steve has said the Eastern Front will laregly be done by a Russian team. The chances of seeing the Romanians again however are almost nil so you'll have a reason to keep that copy of CMBB around.

[Scipio]

... A fundamental change for the game, no doubt. But it could be something more effects based, like tanks which show dynamic damage. As in a hit to the stowage bin of a PzIV's turret would be pealed back and blackened....

Steve

Does this mean that we still won't see vehicel damged in CM:Normandy 1? Uggh! Now that's really a low blow!!!

[Elmar Bijlsma]

I loved the vehicle damage in TOW. Those penetration decals did so much to enhance enjoyment of hammering a tank with cannon fire. It really doesn't have to get more complicated then that for me. A decal where a round went in or out, and I'd be chuffed. Doesn't seem too much to ask.

Sometimes I wonder if BFC under appreciates effects like this. Things that don't add to the simulation but do add to the enjoyment don't seem to be getting much love. Kill stats, penetration decals, TXXXXX BXXXXX*, hand picked QB forces. You name it, it doesn't seem to get dev time if it doesn't add to the mechanics. Which is a mistake, I regard them as fun multipliers in games like this.

*I had to bring that up, even here where I couldn't bring it up.

[[hirr]Leto]

No problem at all. I'm absolutely delighted that you have finally seen the light and have openly declared yourself to be a fan of CM:SF. So much so in fact that you are sincerely seeking people to play online against. What a radical conversion!

Why, do you know, you could even post here in this forum to find one for starters.

welcome aboard mate

Uhm, thanks.

(does anyone know who this guy is and why he's acting a little strange?)

Cheers!

Leto

[[hirr]Leto]

Well, with the whole CM:Russo-Afghan Conflict in the works, whose to say if that sells well Battlefront will just let 1C put out CM:Eastern Front? Or do you think Steve loves his Romanians too much to give them to another?

Who didn't love the Rumanians? But you have to admit the Hungarian Toldi's are as cool as they are inefficacious in combat... but you gotta love it when you take down a few T-34's with those short 75's!!

What I want to know is, what happened to the Bulgarians (so you could wheel around in Italian CV-33's and crush all who oppose you), or for that matter, the (bleah) Transylvanians as an elite unit of Romanians used specifically for night actions?

; )

BFC missed the ball here, totally. And to think that we may never see the noble Axis minors again... I ache with sadness...

Steve: in all the plans for modules, do you foresee at all any chance of doing the 1940 invasion of Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg and France? Now who would not give their left testicle to lumber around in Char B's, Somua's and Belgian T-13's and Renault AMC 35's?? (damned cool AC's)

Cheers!

Leto