Any Chance to implement Turn-Based Multiplayer?

[Taki]

Hello.

Today i took out CMSF again to play with a Friend per TCP/IP. Had in mind that there was finally a Turn-Based Gameplay again as it was meaningful in older Titles. Reason why? You cant really controll anything similar to the Realworld with more then 2 Squads! Its absolutly nobrainer and nontactical without ability to pause the Game. You never can take True Command over your Units.

So is there a way to implement this Keyfeature for Multiplayer for CMSF in the Future? What about Normandy? As it is right now to me: no TCP/IP Turnbased = no buy

[Wengart]

Normandy will have TCP/IP turn-based play. CM:SF I believe is out of luck, although we still have the NATO module to look forward to.

[Battlefront.com]

Taki,

You cant really controll anything similar to the Realworld with more then 2 Squads!

Speak for yourself There are a lot of people, and I mean a LOT of people, who disagree with such characterizations. I play only RealTime and I have no problems controlling at least two companies, sometimes as much as a battalion (depending on objectives). I rarely pause. RT and WeGo require different skill sets, that's all.

CM:SF is "done". Nothing major is on the horizon for it because after NATO we're moving onto CM:SF 2. Normandy *may* have a form of TCP/IP WeGO, but we're not going to hold up the release for it. The form it will take is what I call the compromise solution, which is basically WeGo without a replay. Replay for TCP/IP games is not an option we're planning on exploring for a little while yet.

Until then there is PBEM. It's not as efficient as TCP/IP WeGo, but it does work.

Steve

[Taki]

Taki,

Speak for yourself There are a lot of people, and I mean a LOT of people, who disagree with such characterizations. I play only RealTime and I have no problems controlling at least two companies, sometimes as much as a battalion (depending on objectives). I rarely pause. RT and WeGo require different skill sets, that's all.

Replay for TCP/IP games is not an option we're planning on exploring for a little while yet.

Until then there is PBEM. It's not as efficient as TCP/IP WeGo, but it does work.

Steve

Sorry Steve but i disagree. If you are good with the Shortcuts and are familar with the CM Series (thats what i am) you can do some sort of "Leading" but nothing compared to We-Go Mode.

Its nothing more then a Clickfest. Maybe some little Chinese Starcraft 733t have what it takes to make a Battalion.

Its right when you say that you have some sort of control. But its totally dissatisfying.

Hope i will find someone for the good old PBEM Multiplayer then. If someone read this and agrees. Write a PM.

[panzermartin]

Well maybe in single player RT its ok but it is inevitable in H2H TCP/IP to turn into a click fest. A thought demanding clickfest but still a clickfest. I feel like pushing the brain beyond the limits to rush moves and gain advantage over my opponent-just doesnt feel right for proper wargaming and doesnt do justice to the depth of the game. CMSF turns from a complex tactical chess into a shallow "move your tank around" thing, which isnt Combat Mission anymore.

That being said, I'm actually a fan of Real time and I dont play WeGo anymore. BUT, the addition of a well thought timed out pausing system, (even without replay) should be on the priorities list imo. That would be a sweet combination of tactical thinking, Real Time adrenaline and pressure for decisive action all in one package. Hope to see this in Normandy..Somehow I feel that multiplayer could be the future of the series.

[Battlefront.com]

Taki,

Sorry Steve but i disagree. If you are good with the Shortcuts and are familar with the CM Series (thats what i am) you can do some sort of "Leading" but nothing compared to We-Go Mode.

Sure, you can definitely micromanage (way, way, way more than would be possible in real life) more using WeGo than RealTime. Obviously But that's a different thing than saying you can't control anything significant in RealTime. That's factually false.

What I mean by false is that the Objectives, terrain, units, and everything else is set in a scenario without regard to how it is played (RealTime or WeGo). If your premise were true, and that RealTime can not be controlled as effectively as in WeGo, then one should expect dramatically different end results from someone playing the same scenario in RealTime vs. someone playing in WeGo. Correct? This is obviously not the case at all.

A significant number of CM:SF players, probably a majority, play CM:SF in RealTime at least some of the time. There appears to be no difference in range of results from RealTimers as WeGoers. Some people who play RealTime get their butt's kicked, as do some WeGoers. Other RealTimers can kick butt, as do other WeGoers. And you're going to see some people who play one style of play come out worse than someone who plays another style.

This is all fact and is not subject to opinion. Now, for an individual style of play there are definitely those who are more comfortable with one style of play over another. As there were for CMx1 too, I might remind you.

Remember in CMx1 TCP/IP we had a range of timer options for the Orders Phase and Replay. Right? Well, some people hated this feature and others absolutely loved it. Why? Different play styles. I suspect most of the people who liked CMx1 TCP/IP with strict timers are the ones who like playing CM:SF in RealTime. I know that summarizes me.

Again, we don't expect everybody to understand or like RealTime. That's why we've included WeGo in CMx2 There's absolutely no reason to trash RealTime just because you don't like it, nor is it right for RealTimers to trash WeGo. And believe me, that is very possible to do. Seen it happen here a lot, actually!

Or put another way... we all live in glass houses, so I suggest that throwing stones isn't a good idea. Stick to the facts, and the fact is the underlying CMx2 game is identical whether played WeGo or RealTime.

Steve

[kulik]

Something better than standard WEGO is on the way as i recall.

Steve mentioned that they are going for something like wego combined with realtime. You will have comfort to pause the game and issue orders then unpause and continue in realtime gameplay.

I don't remeber if they going to make it chess like etc. you have timer so you can't pause for too long and too frequent or you run out of "pause time" or if the pause will be somehow fixed in terms of classical turns.

Anyway this systems seems to me that it takes the best from realtime and wego. Looking forward to it!

[Taki]

Ali-Baba says just that what i wanted to say.

@Steve: I dont talk Real Time to Trash. I like to play in Singleplayer with a Pauseoption. But the Point still is that you dont have the Depth of a Sim that you have with WeGo or some Kind of Pause-Mode.

As you talk about Facts, that one stated above is also one albeit from the Liek/or Dislike of We-Go or RT.

[Battlefront.com]

Taki,

@Steve: I dont talk Real Time to Trash. I like to play in Singleplayer with a Pauseoption. But the Point still is that you dont have the Depth of a Sim that you have with WeGo or some Kind of Pause-Mode.

That's a more reasonable statement than you made earlier, but I still disagree "Depth" is relative. Many, and I count myself in this group, view "depth" as the richness of the game experience. For me that comes from the tactics and overall strategies used in the game and how closely it "feels" like real war. I don't care one bit about micromanaging the lower level details on a regular basis. In fact, I feel that reduces the "depth" of my game experience because it distracts me from higher level thinking. However, other players are the exact opposite. That's fine too.

Again, it is a fact that someone who is good at RealTime can control the flow of the battle as well as someone who is good at WeGo. It is also a fact that some people have more difficulty controlling one (or both!) type of battle vs. another. At least up to a certain type of battle, then it simply becomes impractical to play effectively in RealTime. You initially suggested it was about 2 Squads, I contend for most RealTime players it's at about 2 Companies. Big difference

Steve

[Apocal]

Coming from WeGo gave me a few bad habits in Real-Time. Like obsessively watching my moving units with the "Target" button depressed, waiting for anything to pop up. Constantly assigning targets in much the same manner to my infantry, lots of target arcs when defending, insanely detailed waypoint strings that had my vics braking more or less constantly, etc.

After about a week I realized the TacAI could handle that stuff fine on it's own 90% of the time. The primary exception is ATGMs in overwatch. They sometimes make... questionable decisions.