GSX Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 I am thinking that maybe it is time to give CM Normandy its own forum and let the CMSF forum be about, er CMSF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 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? When the CMx1 games came out, they were subjected to months of user testing, scrutiny, and discussion, if that is any guide. But then, the time between game releases was measured in years back then. It might play differently this time around, especially given the narrower scope of each module. It could well be that as modules appear the discussion will shift to analysis of the WW II game system as a whole. Or maybe we'll just talk about what we had for breakfast. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Quick response... As we have stated since about 1997, we are not interested in making a game that simulates the landings on beaches of Normandy. That position has not changed. As others have rightly pointed out: 1. Technically EXTREMELY difficult to do from a simulation standpoint. Even half arsed. 2. A very hefty load of unique vehicles with unique properties that can never be used for anything but a beach landing. 3. Tactically about as exciting as watching paint dry. Landing craft land, unload troops, troops get hacked up by MG and mortar fire, stay pinned for hours on end, eventually overrun defenses through sheer volume of fire and perseverance. And that's from the "fun" side. From the Germans' side you simply wait until your guys run out of ammo and watch them get overrun. Yippie. Tactics? None worth mentioning. 4. If we don't think we will get compensated for our work, we don't do it. There's no way we'd get compensated for the work necessary to make beach landings. With the same effort we could get a much larger payback. 5. Honoring those who fought? What the heck does that have to do with anything? We're making a game, not a memorial. Next we'll be told that unless we simulate soldiers writing letter to home, or receiving John Doe letters, that we're not doing the veterans justice. Not to mention including de-lousing and portraying the long periods of extreme boredom that soldiers experience. Let's leave that sort of stuff to the thousands of books and hundreds of movies/TV shows out there where it belongs. 6. We'll likely create a CM: WW2 Forum fairly soon. We're in no rush. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 and portraying the long periods of extreme boredom Hey, you aren't referencing my scenarios, are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Not to mention there will most likely be beach landing scenarios/mods made shortly after release anyway. As for making an official beach landing module, why the hell bother, theres far more bigger fish to fry than this. Just go watch SPR again for your beach slaughter fix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flammenwerfer Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Cliffs, pillboxes and rocks are already in, and water is being added for CM:N.. All BFC would have to do is add a beach terrain tile, not for landing simulation, but for 'moving inland' battles. Minor effort for the added selling feature, imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitchen frizzy Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 All BFC would have to do is add a beach terrain tile, not for landing simulation, but for 'moving inland' battles. Wouldn't that just be "sand" terrain? It's likely already in, as a carryover from CM:SF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flammenwerfer Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Did Cmbo include sand? I don't recall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bitchen frizzy Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Did Cmbo include sand? I don't recall. No. Wasn't needed until CMAK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 3. Tactically about as exciting as watching paint dry. Landing craft land, unload troops, troops get hacked up by MG and mortar fire, stay pinned for hours on end, eventually overrun defenses through sheer volume of fire and perseverance. And that's from the "fun" side. From the Germans' side you simply wait until your guys run out of ammo and watch them get overrun. Yippie. Tactics? None worth mentioning. This isn't quite an accurate description of the event, at least according to Balkowski and a few others who I've read and tend to trust. Omaha was the only beach that had unexpectedly high casualties and delays. And the defenses there were overcome mostly by troops abandoning the original plan of attacking the draws head on and instead climbing the bluffs between the draws and then enveloping them from the rear. It also helped immeasurably when the destroyers came in close enough to deliver accurate fire directly on enemy positions. None of this changes anything in the decision BFC has made. I just want to point out that there was some room for tactical innovation. But I think that once you had played a game representing the true situation and tried not attacking the German strong points head on in the first place, that would just about exhaust the possibilities. Not a whole lot of replay value there. And near-infinite replay has always been one of CM's strongest selling points. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juno Beach Posted October 19, 2009 Author Share Posted October 19, 2009 Is BFC at least going to include: 1) Airborne with actual shoots dropping that I can see? :mad: 2) Planes with actual planes that I can see? :mad: I am not exactly asking for the moon here! :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Emrys, None of this changes anything in the decision BFC has made. I just want to point out that there was some room for tactical innovation. But I think that once you had played a game representing the true situation and tried not attacking the German strong points head on in the first place, that would just about exhaust the possibilities. Not a whole lot of replay value there. And near-infinite replay has always been one of CM's strongest selling points. That's more-or-less what I meant. And for the beaches that weren't heavily contested, it's really not much different than crossing an open field. So not much new/interesting to add to the game, but a heck of a lot of work for it. Fortunately most people seem to understand that. Juno Beach, 1) Airborne with actual shoots dropping that I can see? No. 2) Planes with actual planes that I can see? No. I am not exactly asking for the moon here! Yes, you are. The amount of work necessary to add either of these things is substantial. The payback for that work is minimal. Although #1 is more tactically relevant than beach landings, and #2 would be seen far more than either #1 or amphibious landings, they still flunk the practicality test as well as the need for having them. Airborne landings can be simulated perfectly fine already and seeing the planes doing their bomb runs is pure eye candy (often very unrealistic eye candy). Mind you, I'd like to see paras floating down and dive bombers screaming out of the sky... I just don't want to pay for it. Which is what I'd have to do. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzerfest Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 I am not exactly asking for the moon here! :eek: We actually HAVE the moon; its movement and phases as well as a star map are simulated in CMSF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 Are there going to be primates? According to my sources both sides used them and their presence is vital for that authentic Normandy experience. They even earned Iron Crosses! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yair Iny Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Airborne landings can be simulated perfectly fine already... Steve, Would it be possible to set a range of condition for reinforcements? What I mean is that currently we can simulate airborne landing by using reinforcements. Would it be possible to then say that this reinforcement group will arrive at a condition (i.e. casualty rate) of between, say, 15% casualties and 40%? This could simulate say airdrops during D-Day. In another scenario, a range of 3%-15% would simulate some of the uncontested Market Garden landings, etc. By allowing a range to be set, as opposed to a discrete value, it would allow for greater re-playability, especially if the designer used many small groups with the same range. That way the effect on balance will be, well, balanced out, and the arrival of stronger and weaker groups on different locations would add to the tactical challenge for both the attacker and defender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 ... simulate some of the uncontested Market Garden landings, ... Uh, what? What tactical problem would you be modelling here? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I think 3% jump casualties is too high for Market-Garden, at least the 82nd. I have a log showing the status of all jump and glider serials, and the actual number of injuries is pretty low. Losses among equipment, such as the 75mm pack howitzers, was probably a bit higher than wanted, but nothing crazy, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yair Iny Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Uh, what? What tactical problem would you be modelling here? :confused: Good point, my thinking only goes so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Is BFC at least going to include: 1) Airborne with actual shoots dropping that I can see? :mad: 2) Planes with actual planes that I can see? :mad: I am not exactly asking for the moon here! :eek: Hmmm, planes, parachutes, hey Juno, play much of Company of Heroes or Codename Panzers RTS games? Don't expect anything near the amount of eye candy you get in a typical RTS game. BF is a tiny dev team in comparison, just don't have the manpower and resources for all the bells and whistles. Their more about the core game and not the flare. Have you tried the CMSF demo yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Are there going to be primates? According to my sources both sides used them and their presence is vital for that authentic Normandy experience. And they proved a valuable food source in emergencies. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zukkov Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 and were experts at gorilla warfare... :-p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Their more about the core game and not the flare. No flares? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 No flares? Hehe, not that kind of flare but the kind in the movie Office Space by Mike Judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 I was just reminded by someone that I had made a beach landing scenario for the Marine module! Orders phase, Red: "We hear the sounds of engines offshore in the darkness!" Scenario opener Blue: AAV-7A1s at the extreme left edge of the map facing 100m of sloping beach sand up to the breakwater wall. Voi-la, you've got a beach landing! Much more than that is just eyecandy. Some are arguing that a Normandy beach landing scenario would not really be much fun. you could test it out with CMSF easily enough. Play red vs red (so no body armor) and put a LOT of infantry on a sloping exposed beach with the defnders overlooking their positions. Hit GO. I've got no opinion on how such a test would turn out, either an exercise is frustration or the most gameing fun you've had all year! But you don't have to debate the issue in theory only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 No flares? Lens flare! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts