Dammit I want CMN now!

[panzermartin]

Yeah, why not a release a "Paint is not included" base game? CMBO wasnt far from that

[Redwolf]

Yeah, why not a release a "Paint is not included" base game? CMBO wasnt far from that

Thanks for making sure that this forum will continue to get its usual deserved bashing elsewhere.

CMBO was very successful if I recall, with TCP play left out. Although it did ship with a straightforward editor and forces-to-buy quickbattles.

[panzermartin]

Hmm, no sense of humour? I was joking about the basic graphics of BO that required extensive modding. I loved that game and everything CM..

[Sixxkiller]

Joch also forgot to mention, most of the people working on the scenarios and campaigns are doing so in their spare time, but you would be amazed how quickly things happen with them.

And we wish that these were out the door already too. While its sometimes fun to play when these modules get closer to finished candidates, its also a lot of work and sometimes NOT FUN to play at all. I literally have thrown my mouse across the room when crashes take out hours of work on scenarios, not just once either. So whether you know it or not, the more time this takes, the better for YOU, not us. I rarely touch Normandy to be honest at this point as CMA and NATO have my full attention!

Now back to working on a non official Dutch vs Canadian campaign (with Germans thrown in a long the way.

[Sixxkiller]

Hmm, no sense of humour? I was joking about the basic graphics of BO that required extensive modding. I loved that game and everything CM..

No game will ever touch the wow factor when the demo for CMBO came out.

[panzermartin]

No game will ever touch the wow factor when the demo for CMBO came out.

Definetely..a personality change moment for me heh

[Sgt Joch]

I see the campagin argument for the home players, but it would be much better to make the editor a little more straightforward and powerful (for large scale changes) so that you have more players building scenarios that those guys can download. You won't be able to provide a big scenario base from a campaign that you build with so limited manpower.

I am not sure what you are referring to. The CMSF scenario editor is more powerful and flexible than the one which shipped with CMx1.

Community members have created hundreds of scenarios for CMSF. I don't see why it would be different with CMN.

And the beta testers have failed before in making the campaign actually work at release time. I don't see how it'll be different now.

you are of course entitled to your opinion, which I disagree with, but which campaign did you play and why did you not like it?

If you don't like the official campaigns, there are many community created campaigns which have been released.

[Redwolf]

I think you have just crossed into being delusional, or suffer from post-traumatic memory loss. Isn't it that the Army campaign was broken for 2 years, or is it still broken? I forgot.

And how does the tiny amount of CMSF scenarios proove that the editor is as adequate as the one that made orders of magnitude more scenarios? Remember we are at the 3 year mark of CMSF.

[Sgt Joch]

I think you have just crossed into being delusional, or suffer from post-traumatic memory loss.

Did you just come here to insult people Redwolf?

Isn't it that the Army campaign was broken for 2 years, or is it still broken? I forgot.

The Army campaign was the first effort. How is it broken, I thought many players had played it through?

I have not heard players complain about the USMC or British campaign or the many user created campaigns.

And how does the tiny amount of CMSF scenarios proove that the editor is as adequate as the one that made orders of magnitude more scenarios? Remember we are at the 3 year mark of CMSF.

you call 200 plus tiny? How many have you played? you don't think there will be more user scenarios for WW2?

what exactly do you think is missing from the CMx2 scenario editor that was in the CMx1 editor?

you want to have a real debate on this, now is your chance.

[BFCElvis]

Did you just come here to insult people Redwolf?

I have not heard players complain about the USMC or British campaign or the many user created campaigns.

There was a problem with the Marine campaign when it was released. I am pretty sure Redwolf does not have the Brit module so I can't answer to his comment of "and the beta testers have failed before in making the campaign actually work at release time". That I'll leave him to explain himself.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Actually, quite a few people, including me, never got past "Nightstalkers" in the original TF Lightning/Thunder.

[BFCElvis]

Actually, quite a few people, including me, never got past "Nightstalkers" in the original TF Lightning/Thunder.

If Redwolf were one of them then he would have been 0 for 2 and just assumed that the same thing happened with the Brits.

[Michael Emrys]

No game will ever touch the wow factor when the demo for CMBO came out.

That was largely because at that time it was unprecedented. And it worked, mostly. Those two things were pretty impressive. We've now had over a decade of seeing what CM can do and there is not likely to be another amazed first impression of such magnitude again soon. Or to put it another way, we are all nicely jaded now. Which if you think of it, is not such a bad place to be.

Michael

[ASL Veteran]

The CMx2 scenario editor is way better than the CMx1 scenario editor. It's not even close. Granted, the CMx2 editor is a little more difficult to use in some instances (and it took me a while to figure out the elevations), but you can do so much more with the new editor that the extra time spent with it will pay off when your scenario is completed. The main thing is that you can get your pixeltruppen to do things that you couldn't do with the old editor. With the old editor there were many scenarios that I absolutely couldn't make because the pixeltruppen wouldn't cooperate. At least now you can influence them to some degree. All the different building facades and the doodads that you can place all give you a lot more control of the visual appearance that you want to portray. The smaller grid size is a huge help too. Just making a creek bed or something like that was a very unsatisfying exercise with CMx1 since all you could make was a huge trench.

As far as scenarios go - the old saying that Quantity has a Quality all it's own does not apply to scenarios. I divide scenarios into two categories a) good ones that I enjoy playing and can play over and over again bad ones that were a waste of time. Lots of scenarios doesn't mean that you get lots of good ones. It just means that you have lots of crap to sift through before you find the golden nugget that you want to play. I wish that BFC could afford to hire a full time scenario maker as I firmly believe that he or she could really tighten things up both from a game shipping standpoint and a quality standpoint, but as far as we know that individual hasn't been hired yet. It's possible that BFC has gone to a semi bounty type of system as I read on these boards that they actually did pay for some of the scenario work. I have noticed that the (part time) scenario designers for the CD scenarios have been stepping up their game between CMSF and the Brits module so I'm hoping that they will continue to improve as the modules and games come out. I think that if the CD comes with several top shelf scenarios that keep you glued to your seat the whole scenario quantity debate will fall by the wayside.

I think good scenario design could have stopped many forum debates before they started. For instance, the whole window usage debate. That probably wouldn't have even come up if the scenarios in the original CMSF were better designed. I'm confident that the quality of the upcoming releases will be improved over the previous releases.

Have a little faith baby. They're beautiful people. Woof woof - that's my other dog imitation.

[Dietrich]

Pardon me, but I'm puzzled.

I can understand why many (even most) of those who played and loved CMx1 would decline/refuse to play CM:SF and would even look down on those who do play and love CM:SF. I can understand why those same "no CM:SF for me, thank you" people would be practically foaming at the mouth with anticipation for CM:N. What I can't understand is why there are some (among them those who think CMx2 is a sham and a travesty as well as those who wish BFC had simply skipped CM:SF and gone straight to CM:N) who seem to be expecting CM:N to be "broken"/"fundamentally flawed" and also seem to almost be looking forward to that potential eventuality.

how does the tiny amount of CMSF scenarios prove that the editor is as adequate as the one that made orders of magnitude more scenarios? Remember we are at the 3 year mark of CMSF.

Many more people (especially wargamers) prefer WW2 to modern warfare; and CM:BO was released 10 years ago. I surmise that it's those two factors -- rather than any inherent superiority of the CMx1 editor -- that account for the "orders of magnitude" greater number of scenarios. How many scenarios had been made for CM:BO by the time it had been out for three years? How many scenarios had been made for CM:BB by that time? I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the rate at which scenarios were being cranked out had increased at least somewhat by the time CM:BB was a year old; by that time, people were more familiar with the editor, and the number of said people was greater.

Plenty of times while playing CM:SF (no disrespect to the modders who have contributed so much to the CM:SF experience!), I've mused: "Man, if this were a WW2 game, there would be a dozen mods to choose from just for that particular model of tank...." That's one of the secondary reasons why I'm so looking forward to CM:N.

[flamingknives]

I would hazard that some of the reason that CM:BO scenarios are more prevalent are:

Auto-generated maps that can then be tweaked

Coarser grid meaning less work to cover the map

Fewer options for the terrain and buildings

[undercovergeek]

and is it not true that its easier to create scenarios for a real war, calling on experience,education, and learning and maybe the odd hollywood film for inspiration?

I dont know the sales numbers but surely the more it sells means the more people are in the community and this community spawns its designers - and i assume CMBO has a bigger community, and therefore more designers.

BUT...... youre right, everytime my guys round a corner, take out a tank, pull off a great firefight, i always wish they were wearing WW2 gear, firing M1s and it was a Panzer that just went up and not a T72!!

[Sgt Joch]

Actually, quite a few people, including me, never got past "Nightstalkers" in the original TF Lightning/Thunder.

It could be. I did not work on the TF campaign and never played past a couple missions.

I did work on the USMC and British campaign and helped to playtest many of the missions. The missions I did look at were well crafted and entertaining. Most of the maps were modeled on real world locations. We had a couple of serving marines and British army vets who provided useful tips.

Elvis, as I recall, I thought the only issue with the USMC campaign was in the victory point calculations for a few scenarios, which was easily fixed.

After 3 years, we now have very talented campaign designers in the community, such as Paper Tiger who whipped up a brand new USMC campaign in a few weeks.

The current Beta team includes talented scenario and campaign designers, many of which worked on the CMSF modules, as well WW2 grogs. I have no doubt that they can turn out as good a campaign as any other group.

[Wodin]

Scenario design is the key to this game...the better the design the greater the experience...I played a dud one the other day and if thats all CMSF had to offer it wouldn't be my classic game....luckly thats not the case....I've played a fair few scenarios now that have given me the best PC wargaming experiences full stop.

[Barkhorn1x]

I can understand why those same "no CM:SF for me, thank you" people would be practically foaming at the mouth with anticipation for CM:N.

That description pretty much describes me. I really have no interest in hypothetical modern warfare as I game as much for the history as for the kicks. But having played the CMSF demos I just love the engine and believe a WWII interation will be awesome.

I will buy it immediatly that is for sure.

[MarkEzra]

...But having played the CMSF demos I just love the engine and believe a WWII iteration will be awesome.

I will buy it immediately that is for sure.

I don't believe I'm breaking NDA when I say:

BFC is working hard to deliver for you, and it's a very exciting time for CM Beta testers.

Now back to work

[MeatEtr]

I don't believe I'm breaking NDA when I say:

BFC is working hard to deliver for you, and it's a very exciting time for CM Beta testers.

Now back to work

Proof there's nothing that hot chicks can't cure, well at least temporarily.

[Sgt Joch]

well it's not quite that much fun, but CMN is shaping up very nicely...

[Redwolf]

You mean those aren't the actual beta testers?

[Michael Emrys]

You mean those aren't the actual beta testers?

They're just there to comfort the Beta Testers when they are weary from testing. Troop morale is important, you know.

Michael