Holiday Bones, Norman Style

[Blackcat]

I think you should include some basic learning scenarios again with the release of CM:Normandy like you did with CMBO. In my opinion the general difficulty level of base game scenarios has increased with each of the new CM:SF modules, which is ok for veteran players but you'll probably get a lot of new players with CM:N that may be put off if they find it too frustrating to start with.

Just a thought.

May I echo Bodkin's point and say please, pretty please, make the leanining tutorials more interesting than the two you did for CMSF.

Although I was a long term CM player, I was quite put off CM:SF when I tried the first demo/tutorial scenario. It was only out of a sense of loyalty to the company (and the belief that the Chaps wouldn't let us down) that I played the second and I regret to have to say that only confirmed the view I had formed from the first scenario.

The contrast to the "Valley" demo scenario fo CMBO could not have been marked. That left me slavering for more.

[Gromit]

The bad thing about this is that I must install some kind of Windows again

--

Ha Det!

I've been using Win7 for a while now and must say that it actually works pretty well. Less obnoxiousness, and now I am set up with a 64-bit version for the future.

In the end, to each his own. Just sayin it's not as bad as some make it out to be.

[GSX]

heh... I knew SOMEONE would have to post something negative about the tester comment. I knew that before I even posted it. Thankfully, we have GSX here to be overtly negative and a right prat sometimes

Yep, I can be a right prat at times, youll get no arguments from me about that. However, everything cant be the rose tinted picture all the time. Not that I dont appreciate the time all of those testers put in, but at the same time surely someone noticed a lot of the things that were broken before release dates etc?

You really do try to get under people's skin for no other reason than to irritate, don't you? So what you're saying is that the people who have helped make CM:SF what is is today, including all the post release patches, have done a terrible job and it's through sheer luck that the game is in the state that it's in now?

No, trolling isnt something Im into. I base my statements purely on what I read on these forums.

The worst type of feedback we could possibly get is from the sort you deal with over at the other website. Complete utter negativity with zero objectivity, intellectually dishonest, lack perspective, and have no clue what the average gamer wants.

The other website being Gamesquad? I dunno there, I think the Game Squad site can be very positive towards CMSF at times and very negative at others. Its not owned by BFC after all. In fact there is a wide variety of posters there ranging from very onboard to absolute hate and I think some of the conversations are far better than they are or can be here for this very reason. So I happen to think that your statement above is plain wrong. I think anyone reading the threads at GS will judge for themselves on this.

There are limitations in terms of time. We've worked through some of the bottlenecks, but some of them will remain until after Afghanistan and NATO are complete because major code changes were made that are not backwards compatible.

Thanks for the info there. However, I didnt know that you had to stop work on the NATO module, maybe I missed your announcement there.

Egads... did you get some bad eggnog yesterday? Of course I know EXACTLY what is going on because I live this every day of my life. I can tell you the exact status of everything that is going on right now. That doesn't mean I have the magical ability to make everything happen exactly as we would like them to be. Reality is a fickle bitch, in case you weren't aware of it.

Yes Im fully aware of reality, but I still feel like some more honest information is better for me the customer. If NATO is on hold for a reason, why not just tell me. Any information is better than none.

There have been NO contradictory statements. Slipstreaming doesn't mean we're working on everything all at the same time every day of the week. NATO is quite far along already, it's just that the bottleneck that is holding it up took months to work around. All development going forward will avoid these bottlenecks. I've mentioned this many times already, so it shouldn't come as a shock.

Again, thanks for the info, it would have been nice to know beforehand though.

Of course you are entitled to your opinions, but if we had such a completely negative and dour outlook on life we'd have closed up shop years ago. Probably during CMBO development when people like you said we couldn't pull it off.

Let me stress, I never once said you couldnt do anything, although I will freeley admit that you seem to have tried to run before you could walk with the CM-2 system. Thats not to say I dont wish you success with it, because I do. I enjoy your games for the most part and am fairly confident and have said so many times that CMN will be another good game.

Modern and WW2 combat appeal to both common and specialized groups of players. There are some WW2 players that will never play modern, no matter what. There are some modern players that will not play WW2, no matter what. Game features have less to do with the appeal than the content itself. We've always understood this and our experiences thus far with CM:SF have completely reinforced that notion.

No arguments from me there, I completely agree.

Finally, for what its worth, I understand that the journey hasnt been easy for your company and CMSF today is nothing like the CMSF of 2.5 years ago. I also understand that you have to be positive at all times as this is your living. Perhaps I should restrict any negativity to that other site and only be positive here?

Anyway, have a good Hogmanay when it comes!

[Ron]

GSX, from your two posts you seem to be missing some perspective here. What if BFC misses deadlines for their games, puts some projects on the backburner, fails to put in some feature etc etc? Think about it. You seem to have some inflated sense of your own importance here.

I really don't think Steve is saying you need to be 'positive' on this forum, in fact he specifically said those type don't offer anything to them or the game. They want/need constructive criticism - not someone whinging about 'you promised this or that at this or that date'. Again some perspective and reality are badly in order, or perhaps less selective reading.

You hold up 'that other site' as some paradigm of 'true' opinions, yet reading there this morning all I see is the same lack of perspective and irrationality and outlandish behaviour(others can paint large also ). Any child can go on and on about what it wants or some perceived hurt feelings, an adult has maturity and understanding, not only about themselves but about others and the world around them as well.

[Battlefront.com]

Ron said it just fine. It's a finer point that GSX repeatedly fails to comprehend. There is a significant difference between stating disappointment at further delays vs. drawing the conclusion that we don't know what the feck we're doing.

I also think there is a pretty clear record of people objectively examining the sort of criticism of us that is on "the other forum" and comparing it with objective, rational, constructive criticism standards which have NOTHING to do with the specifics being discussed. Time and time again I've seen people wander over there and come to the same conclusion Ron has just stated:

You hold up 'that other site' as some paradigm of 'true' opinions, yet reading there this morning all I see is the same lack of perspective and irrationality and outlandish behaviour(others can paint large also ). Any child can go on and on about what it wants or some perceived hurt feelings, an adult has maturity and understanding, not only about themselves but about others and the world around them as well.

GSX, there is a reason why the über cranks are over there and not over here. Simply put, they aren't mature or rational enough. They took themselves out of the discussions here because, quite simply, they couldn't hack an environment where being dishonest, obtuse, clueless, and downright nasty aren't tolerated. Their presence here is not missed because they have nothing of value to add.

Are there some good posts and good posters over there amidst the wallowing ignorance and massive chips on shoulders? Sure, I don't doubt that. But having to suffer through the piles of stinking poo to get at that nugget isn't worth it. Especially because the same nugget is probably being discussed here in a productive way. It's sad, really, because it just shows how a few warped individuals can hijack things for their own purposes.

Yes Im fully aware of reality, but I still feel like some more honest information is better for me the customer. If NATO is on hold for a reason, why not just tell me. Any information is better than none.

You guys are spoiled rotten with insider information already The truth is we didn't officially put NATO on hold. It just happened that for the month of December we shifted our attention. Since we haven't announced a release date yet, the internal shifting of emphasis is not really relevant.

Let me stress, I never once said you couldnt do anything, although I will freeley admit that you seem to have tried to run before you could walk with the CM-2 system. Thats not to say I dont wish you success with it, because I do. I enjoy your games for the most part and am fairly confident and have said so many times that CMN will be another good game.

Thank you. This is the primary reason I don't write you off as complete nutter. You have a way of coming across as needlessly negative and, at times, insulting. Other people observe that as well as me, so I am confident I'm not overreacting. Perspective is a difficult thing for people to grasp sometimes, and honestly I think that's where the problem lies.

Steve

[MarkEzra]

I think you should include some basic learning scenarios again with the release of CM:Normandy like you did with CMBO. In my opinion the general difficulty level of base game scenarios has increased with each of the new CM:SF modules, which is ok for veteran players but you'll probably get a lot of new players with CM:N that may be put off if they find it too frustrating to start with.

Just a thought.

Just a very good thought..

[Battlefront.com]

Yeah, a couple of short familiarization campaign, like CM:SF, is a good idea. Especially for the Americans on how to deal with the bocage. Already it's pretty clear why they were such a problem in real life. They definitely suck when on the attack

Steve

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Already it's pretty clear why they were such a problem in real life. They definitely suck when on the attack

I'm going to be really controversial here and ask if the difficulties of the bocage aren't a wee bit overblown? The word bocage is almost mythical amongst warnerds. How much of that is really deserved?

Take the area around Caen.

You can't tell me the guys attacking through those wide open fields had it any easier then the guys slogging through the bocage.

[panzermartin]

I guess Bocage was the equivalent of hundreds of thermopylae. Too narrow to take advantage of numerical superiority. It is like house cleaning where every door hides a deadly trap.

Btw, will we see dense bocage vegetagion like this? :

Its almost like a tunnel, would be such a nice suprise to sneak troops under the nose of your enemy from hidden paths like that

[gibsonm]

I'm going to be really controversial here and ask if the difficulties of the bocage aren't a wee bit overblown? The word bocage is almost mythical amongst warnerds. How much of that is really deserved?

Take the area around Caen.

You can't tell me the guys attacking through those wide open fields had it any easier then the guys slogging through the bocage.

Disregard - I just read the snippet under the photo.

[Breakthrough]

Cool. Cant wait for it....

[Battlefront.com]

Elmar,

You can't tell me the guys attacking through those wide open fields had it any easier then the guys slogging through the bocage.

Easier? Casualty statistics and rates of advance would suggest that a deliberate attack over open terrain is easier than a deliberate attack in hedgerows (especially earlier on, less so later). However, even if we put that aside and said that they are dead even, that doesn't mean the tactical challenges are the same nor require the same level of skill.

Think of it this way. Is it easier to battle a dug in enemy Rifle Company in an open CM:SF map, or is it easier to battle a dug in enemy Rifle Company in a dense urban environment given the same exact attacking force (and the presumption that you don't have the firepower or authorization to raze the urban area to the ground)? I'd put it to you that the majority of players would wind up having better, and easier, success in the open map scenario than the closed in one. Regardless of what forces are Red and what are Blue.

It's the same thing in bocage terrain. Range weapons don't do buy you much. Armor is all at point blank death range pretty much all the time. Maneuvering is extremely restricted. Mutual fire support is determined by the map as much, if not more, than your objectives and available forces. So on and so forth. Having played with bocage, even in it's initial rough stages, I can say for sure that it's a real bitch to attack. I'd rather an open field, thanks very much

Again, use common sense. The US forces were completely bogged down in the hedgerows. The Germans were able to do that with forces which were, in general terms, at significant material disadvantage. As soon as the hedgerow problem was overcome through better tactics and equipment, the Germans lost their advantages. As soon as the Germans found themselves defending in the open they had to run back to the deep forests along the border with their home country, which offered significantly better terrain to defend from.

Steve

[JonS]

Think of it this way. Is it easier to battle a dug in enemy Rifle Company in an open CM:SF map, or is it easier to battle a dug in enemy Rifle Company in a dense urban environment given the same exact attacking force (and the presumption that you don't have the firepower or authorization to raze the urban area to the ground)? I'd put it to you that the majority of players would wind up having better, and easier, success in the open map scenario than the closed in one. Regardless of what forces are Red and what are Blue.

I disagree with that last part.

Red is going to do better in close, urban terrain, whether attacking OR defending.

The reason is obvious: the Blue forces have it all over them in terms of ranged fire and C2, meaning they - Blue - can respond to distant movements before they can become threats. In close terrain, Red can turn movements into threats faster than Blue can respond. Sometimes, anyway. And certainly more often than in open terrain.

Much the same pertained around Caen in 1944. The Germans had a distinct advantage in terms of long ranged A-Tk fire, made more acute since they were on the defensive. They also had a moderate advantage in protected mobility.

That they also had the advantage when defending in Bocage is also true.

[sfhand]

Many thanks for the Holiday bone... for the dedication of all involved in making the great games you make.

I've got a great money-making idea for you... sell raffle tickets for 3 or 4 CM:N beta-testing positions (if you're too busy, I could handle the details for a measely 15% cut of the take). And while you're mulling that over, why not call the new game Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord?

Really, good luck coming up with a good name. CM:BO was a great name and since you've narrowed the scope of the family it will be challenging to come up with something short and catchy. Something like Combat Mission: Fortress Europe...

[Mies]

That is a nice site to see for me turning on a computer again after Christmas. I'm eager to start refreshing some website again as a good refresh monkey to see if anything new is turning up !

[Sergei]

Btw, will we see dense bocage vegetagion like this? :

Its almost like a tunnel, would be such a nice suprise to sneak troops under the nose of your enemy from hidden paths like that

Looks like a trap. I bet a huge man flesh eating purple worm is waiting there for prey...

[Other Means]

Looks like a trap. I bet a huge man flesh eating purple worm is waiting there for prey...

Still having those dreams then?

[Jaws]

Bocage a problem for US?? I may hope they have Hedgerow Cutters in CM Normandy ;p

[GSX]

GSX, there is a reason why the über cranks are over there and not over here. Simply put, they aren't mature or rational enough. They took themselves out of the discussions here because, quite simply, they couldn't hack an environment where being dishonest, obtuse, clueless, and downright nasty aren't tolerated. Their presence here is not missed because they have nothing of value to add.

Steve, thats absolute bollocks and you know it! You are the one who does not alloow the kind of discussions that are had at GS. Namely, open criticism where its due. Questioning aspects of your game.

I can understand why they cant do that here as its not good advertising for you. But to call them all cranks etc is plain wrong, especially when a lot of them are posters here too, guy like Elvis and Sgt Joch, who I believe are even testers of the games.

Me, Im tired with your sillyness over this. I'll come back when CMN arrives sometime in mid to late 2010, hopefully it will be as fantastic as you say it will.

Happy holidays to all.

[Ron]

Steve, thats absolute bollocks and you know it! You are the one who does not alloow the kind of discussions that are had at GS. Namely, open criticism where its due. Questioning aspects of your game.

I can understand why they cant do that here as its not good advertising for you. But to call them all cranks etc is plain wrong, especially when a lot of them are posters here too, guy like Elvis and Sgt Joch, who I believe are even testers of the games.

Me, Im tired with your sillyness over this. I'll come back when CMN arrives sometime in mid to late 2010, hopefully it will be as fantastic as you say it will.

Happy holidays to all.

What kind of discussions are those GSX? Nutters saying CMSF will be 'abandoned' just like CMBO and CMBB and CMAK were 'abandoned'; 20+ patches worth of abandoned but oh no(!) now that is evidence BFC hoisted a lemon on the unsuspecting, loyal CMx1 fanbase. Nutters insisting CMBB/CMAK were unfinished. Nutters continuing to insist CMSF doesn't have a feature when it is patently shown otherwise, even with pictures for the contextually impaired. Nutters who find it offensive the side Steve parts his hair on...

Yeah it is the same handful of rotten apples, over and over grinding the same axe. I agree there have been some good discussions at times, but to wade through the vitriol...

[panzermartin]

Looks like a trap. I bet a huge man flesh eating purple worm is waiting there for prey...

I think BFC should have a look at games like Dune 2. Worms make a game so exciting.

[Melnibone]

I'll come back when CMN arrives sometime in mid to late 2010...

Will you ever stick to your periodic statements of leaving? :confused:

[Blackcat]

GSX said, "I'll come back when CMN arrives..."

I wonder why.

[sfhand]

Steve, thats absolute bollocks and you know it! You are the one who does not alloow the kind of discussions that are had at GS. Namely, open criticism where its due. Questioning aspects of your game.

I can understand why they cant do that here as its not good advertising for you. But to call them all cranks etc is plain wrong, especially when a lot of them are posters here too, guy like Elvis and Sgt Joch, who I believe are even testers of the games.

Me, Im tired with your sillyness over this. I'll come back when CMN arrives sometime in mid to late 2010, hopefully it will be as fantastic as you say it will.

Happy holidays to all.

Hi GSX,

You probably don't remember me, I stopped by "over there" about a year ago. I left in short order because I decided "over there" really had nothing to offer other than complaining. I entered with an open mind and left thinking most, if not all, of what you call bollocks. I'm not a beta-tester (I'll run a raffle for a 15% cut), nor does Steve tell me when to eat, breathe, sleep, or think, yet it took very little to see that complaining, in the form of singing to the choir mainly, was the topic du jour.

I do remember one particular topic, Bradleys not being able to reload TOWs within a scenario - I was told I was a know nothing newb when I conducted a 6 month search over here rather than a 2 year search. After I quit posting there I discovered that Bradleys do indeed reload TOWs within a scenario. Curious, I browsed over there in the appropriate thread and saw that Bradleys reloading TOWs during a scenario was finally acknowleged... but likely as the result of a bug rather than an intentional feature.

To sum up my experience of "over there", I was treated as a know-nothing (I never claimed to know much), was called clueless for suggesting that, as in most conflicts, it takes two to tango (did I mention I left there) by people who spend most of their time there complaining about the release state of the game or issues that have long since been fixed and making personal attacks on BF and beta-testers. You may find that stimulating conversation, but the only thing it stimulated in me was a desire to punch someone in the nose. It was a complete waste of my time.

I did find you to be one of the more rational well-mannered people there. So, good luck, and see you when the game is released.

[Battlefront.com]

GSX,

Steve, thats absolute bollocks and you know it!

hehe... right. I stopped reading GS last February because I found the small bits of interesting stuff not worth wading through the abusive behavior, name calling, outright lies, and generally speaking... psychologically disturbed rants. The few things that didn't fit into that category were adjunct discussions of ones already going on here, but with intellectual honesty and respectful debate.

You are the one who does not alloow the kind of discussions that are had at GS. Namely, open criticism where its due. Questioning aspects of your game.

An oft trotted out bunch of nothing that has never, and will never, be backed up by facts. There's not a single thing that can't be discussed here when it is done rationally, constructively, and politely. The proof of that is thousands and thousands of posts critical of game features, philosophical direction, or what could be done better. We need that feedback to improve the game, so of course it's encouraged by us.

We don't tolerate that here and they don't tolerate is the sort of vile, nasty, psychologically disturbed postings that make up the bulk of the crud on GS. Since you're the moderator over there, and find no problem with the personal attacks, name calling, and other unproductive behavior that proliferates over there under your watch, it's not surprising you don't share my viewpoint.

I can understand why they cant do that here as its not good advertising for you.

Having people calling fans of the games empty headed numbnuts, describing me in terms which generally have to do with biological waste, lying about what the game does/doesn't do, etc... yeah, that isn't good advertising for us.

But to call them all cranks etc is plain wrong, especially when a lot of them are posters here too, guy like Elvis and Sgt Joch, who I believe are even testers of the games.

Not all cranks, just the primary ones who put their tails between their legs and slinked out of here when it was clear they weren't going to get away with baseless rantings and other anti-intellectual behavior. Few have the stomach to for their abuse, which is why the dish it out so harshly. The easiest way for them to remain in their bubble world is to keep others out. If some have the stomach and time to challenge their nonsense, great. Me? It's not worth my time. Which is my point... what value is a Forum where you have to wade through such crap to find something that's of interest to someone other than a social scientist?

Me, Im tired with your sillyness over this. I'll come back when CMN arrives sometime in mid to late 2010, hopefully it will be as fantastic as you say it will.

Not surprising. You have a long established track record here of dropping a bomb and then not owning it. The exiles you have to deal with over there are the same. So in that sense, you're the perfect person to moderate them. You can't take the heat you deliberately generate any more than they can.

Steve