CM:Normandy Questions

[Juno Beach]

Hello,

Just heard about the WW2 game, so I would like to ask a few questions:

1) Approximate date of release? :confused: I know, it will be released when ready, I mean an approximate date 2009? 2nd quarter 2010? I will check back then

2) Will you add Canadian troops? :confused: What do you mean "NO" :mad: did you ever hear of Juno Beach

3) I haven't played CM:Shock due to the bad reviews and bugs, can some of you advise of the playability of CM:Shock now? If it is now beta-tested I will presume that CM:Normandy will play without hick-ups and I will buy the game.

4) Can someone provide me with a list of CM ladders available?

5) What is the minimum and recommended strength of computer to play CM:Normandy? If not known what is it for CM:Shock?

This is all of the questions I can think of for now.

Many thanks and see you soon on the battlefield.

JB

[Sergei]

1) Somewhere between 2009-2015. More likely early 2010.

2) Yes, out of pity...

3) Just try the 1.20 demo for yourself. It's come a long way.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

1) Early 2010.

2) I'm not sure. There will be a Commonwealth module but I can't recall if we get specific nations with that or more generic Commonwealth units.

3) Try the updated demo, it's the best way to be sure.

4) Please hold...

5) No hardware requirements have been given yet. Best to try the demo for that too, it's the only way to be sure these days.

[Juno Beach]

Did they mention if they have actual landing invasions with combined arms, ships, landing craft, airplanes, etc. ?? If so, that would be a great thing!

I played a quick demo and it seems to work okay!

[TheVulture]

Did they mention if they have actual landing invasions with combined arms, ships, landing craft, airplanes, etc. ?? If so, that would be a great thing!

I played a quick demo and it seems to work okay!

The actual amphibious assault is out of the scope of the game - too much specialised code and equipment.

[Wengart]

World at War http://worldatwar.eu/ has a fairly strong CM:SF community with a ladder. And if this is any indication, will be supporting all further CMx2 games.

[Piecekeeper]

3) I can only speak for myself....this is my favourite game of all time...the most annoying bugs are gone...but thats me....maybe you love it ore hate it...I cant tell. I never read reviews because i mostly disagree.

[Juno Beach]

The actual amphibious assault is out of the scope of the game - too much specialised code and equipment.

I don't think so!:mad:

[Elmar Bijlsma]

How much fighting do you think was done on the beaches? A few hours worth, little of it of tactical interest to a gamer. The beaches are more suited to being modelled in a shooting gallery then a tactical wargame.

So I fully support BFC forgoing such fluff and instead focussing on more important stuff.

[Juno Beach]

How much fighting do you think was done on the beaches? A few hours worth, little of it of tactical interest to a gamer. The beaches are more suited to being modelled in a shooting gallery then a tactical wargame.

So I fully support BFC forgoing such fluff and instead focussing on more important stuff.

Fluff? Some how I doubt the soldiers and marines that hit the beaches on DDay consider it fluff! A few hours simulated at 60secs/per turn is 180 turns, plenty of action for a CM game. Beach landings are of 'key' importance, you can still have inland battles later. All BFC has to model is the landing craft. The off board artillery is already in the game and can be used to simulate ships firing. In a previous CM they did have rafts/boats and such, so they have the ability to do it.

Your sucking up to BFC leaves a bad taste on the board !:mad:

[Childress]

Seems like a lot of work to yield one and a half scenarios.

[flamingknives]

D-Day was one day where a number of casualties were suffered. The campaign then went on for a hundred more days when many more casualties were suffered. Is it not disrespectful to those who fell inland to spend so much resources on a small proportion of the campaign?

The boats in CMX1 (a very different engine, so even reproducing those would need coding from scratch or near to it) were a really nasty workaround. The AI couldn't use them, even having them in a scenario on the AI side would make it fall over.

[Yair Iny]

Fluff? Some how I doubt the soldiers and marines that hit the beaches on DDay consider it fluff! A few hours simulated at 60secs/per turn is 180 turns, plenty of action for a CM game. Beach landings are of 'key' importance, you can still have inland battles later. All BFC has to model is the landing craft. The off board artillery is already in the game and can be used to simulate ships firing. In a previous CM they did have rafts/boats and such, so they have the ability to do it.

Your sucking up to BFC leaves a bad taste on the board !:mad:

Nice way to introduce yourself, on what, your 4th post?

You realise, of course, that the meaning of the battle to the troops and to the course of the war has nothing to do with it being interesting or not to simulate.

Now I agree that the sight of landing craft and hundreds of troops pouring out of them would be really cool, but I also think that the landing part itself, up to the beach at least is not interesting tactically at all. The landing craft just sail up to the shore and dump the troops. Are you as a commander going to steer them differently? Or maybe find a covered approach route through the waves on the left as opposed to those on the right?

From the beach onwards, you could simulate it by having the troops start the mission on the beach, either on foot, or in a tank (think DD tank). The current marine campaign has a mission like this where you start inside the Amtrak (a USMC amphibious APC), with the premise that those are the ones that made it to shore. Off shore artillery will either be modelled directly by BFC as a module with the right calibre, or can be simulated by choosing a module with a similar or close to similar calibre.

So really, this has nothing to do with sucking up to BFC, only a bit of common sense. I surely hope that when you walk into a new social group in real life you don't start out by insulting one of the members of the group. The internet is no different.

All the best...

[Elmar Bijlsma]

*drops Steve's cock and removes head from Charles' rectum*

Yes, it would be fluff in the game. What servicemen think of this item being excluded won't make the game any better. That's not meant to be disrespectful to them, I'm pretty sure I've spend more time with Normandy veterans then you, even if both your grandfathers were veterans of Normandy. And believe me, they have my respect. But again, that's not the issue. The upcoming Normandy title is meant to be a game, not some kudo for everyone who steered a landing craft on to a hostile shore.

There is only so many work on models that's going to be done. How wise do you think it is to spend that time on something that saw a few hours worth of action? In a game that's aiming to stretch from June to September that's a bit short.

Would you really want to give up having the Churchill Crocodile in the game so you can have the LCA? Heck, even the DUKW would see marginal use. It's not that I wouldn't like to have it, I just would like other things more.

And then there is the manner in which they were involved in the actions of D-Day. Landing craft would serve as little more then target practice for the German player. Then they dump their cargo on the beach and that's it. Done! Any real fighting would start when a landing craft ceased being of any use. So why have it in a combat game?

Yes, assault rafts were in before. And how often did you see them, hmmm?

[JonS]

It's "fluff" in terms of a tactical wargame modelling land-fighting. And remember, this is a wargame, not a digital memorial to The Heroic Dead, or sumfink.

Also, getting beach landings to work even marginally acceptable is far from trivial. The landing craft - in about 12 different flavours and capabilities - alone is tough enough, then there are the interactions of the LC with water and with land; the interactions of men with the LC, water, land, and the land/water interface; same for vehicles; then there are the beach defences - again in about 12 different flavours - and all the various interactions they generate; then there's teaching the AI how to use LC, beach defences, and how to usefully move units from the LC to the shore.

Really, it's a tough problem. I have little doubt that BFC could resolve them if they chose, but personally I'd far rather BFC looked at other tough problems, ones that were applicable to the whole campaign, rather than just to the first hour or two of the first day.

Regards

Jon

[Michael Emrys]

I would offer the opinion—and I don't claim more for it than that—that to include assault landings and do them really right, you would have to decide to do a game that is entirely and exclusively devoted to that and nothing else. That is, that's the decision you would have to make if you don't have an army of researchers, artists, and programmers working on it and you want it completed before the end of the next decade.

In other words, I don't believe that it is a real world option for BFC. I would of course be delighted if they suddenly pulled a rabbit out of the hat and presented us with such a game. But you can believe that I am not holding my breath until that happens.

Michael

[Sergei]

Steve has revealed to us that BFC uses a simple three-point list to see if the inclusion of some weapon, system or feature is required. I call it Steve's Razor:

1) Is it something that was used or happened often enough to merit inclusion?

2) Is it something that can be included with left hand because it doesn't require additional coding?

3) Is it something that BFC themselves weally, weally want?

If a feature only scores one point, it's out of the question. So even if Steve and Charles really wanted to have the Normandy beach landings in, points 1 and 2 would tell that it'd be a big waste of time. Now, if BFC decided to make a game about Pacific Theater of WW2, that would certainly change #1 to positive.

Of course, it's possible to make do. For example, for CMAK there is a fine Juno Beach operation. Troops and tanks just start at beach and promptly fight their way inland.

[Sergei]

By the way, if you want to play the Normandy landings the way they happened, I suggest you turn your attention to this Finnish freeware game: Maschinengewehr 42

Trying to compete with realism like that would be pointless.

[Juno Beach]

I believe BFC will release the DDay landings as a separate module, which is fine. Those stating that adding landing craft is to difficult are wrong. In addition, it would be nice to actually see the planes flying too.

Thank you.

JB

[Michael Emrys]

Now, if BFC decided to make a game about Pacific Theater of WW2, that would certainly change #1 to positive.

Well yeah. But don't forget that on the other side of the world in addition to D-Day there were Torch, Husky, Baytown, Avalanche, Shingle, and Dragoon (and the operations to clear the Scheldt estuary, some of which were amphibious). As well as some major river crossings. So plenty of opposed assault landings in the MTO and ETO. But that still doesn't change the problem for BFC, since all of those are still a minor proportion of the fighting they wish to model.

Michael

[Sergei]

Doing river crossings is incredibly simple compared to Normandy landings. Just imagine the amount of specialized vessels and vehicles that you'd need to do any justice. Duplex drives, LCT's, LST's, LCVP's, LCA's, LSD's, DUKW's, Landing Crafts fitted with guns, rockets or Hedgerows for direct fire support or obstacle clearance (and Priests firing from their landing ships on the approach), then all the static defences laid by Germans and the means to clear them by engineers. For most river crossings you really need just a motorized or motorless boat, depending on time frame there might also be amphibious vehicles present.

And how about parachute and glider troops? Can't have D-Day without those.

[Juno Beach]

Doing river crossings is incredibly simple compared to Normandy landings. Just imagine the amount of specialized vessels and vehicles that you'd need to do any justice. Duplex drives, LCT's, LST's, LCVP's, LCA's, LSD's, DUKW's, Landing Crafts fitted with guns, rockets or Hedgerows for direct fire support or obstacle clearance (and Priests firing from their landing ships on the approach), then all the static defences laid by Germans and the means to clear them by engineers. For most river crossings you really need just a motorized or motorless boat, depending on time frame there might also be amphibious vehicles present.

And how about parachute and glider troops? Can't have D-Day without those.

Yes, you make a good argument for a separate module, call it, Combat Mission D-Day

[Clavicula_Nox]

They aren't going to do it and have repeatedly said they aren't, so what's the problem?

You want to simulate an airborne operation? Make your troops as reinforcements and BAM, they're on the map. As much of a hardon as I get whenever anything Airborne floats into my life, if they spent time creating an animation where some dudes did a PLF, I think it's "Cool the first time; lame every other time".

If the terrain is there, you can make the beach assault just like we did with CM:BO. Make your map, put your troops on the map, create reinforcements, etc. What's the problem? Would the boats help, I guess so, but are they necessary? No.

WW2 didn't start 6 June 1944 and it didn't end 7 June 1944, either.

[Dietrich]

*raises hand* I have a CM:Normandy-related question!

Will discussion about CM:Normandy (the base game) continue only until the game actually comes out, at which point 90% of the discussing in the CMx2 forum will switch to the Commonwealth module?

Oh wait, it's a rhetorical question. :cool:

Truthfully, I get a kick out of how everyone was like "when is CM:BF gonna be out?!!?!?!1!?", and then as soon as the module was actually out, everyone switched to arguing about CM:N. (The notable exceptions to that being the rightfully earned "thank you BFC!" thread and the handful of threads expressing bafflement about how the Brits aren't as über-powerful as the US Army or the USMC).

[Gen. J-sun]

I don't think a lot of those vehicles would be useful for more than maybe a handful of battles (not enough for a full game). DUKW and DD Shermans probably faded into obscurity or were damaged/replaced and would be little more than a novelty.