Battlefront the game

[Col Boaz]

As a gamer who stated with panzergruppe guderian back in '70's

Thats paper games. Before PC existed.. yes the stone age.

Battlefront is a conundrum.. The GUI is,,,, well///not the best,

i can scroll 2000 thousand troops in mediveal2 at 3 times the frame rate as bf

Yet the game is brilliant. Far exceeding idiot ai of say medieveal or just about any other tactical game aside from hps milsims.

Give me BF with Co of heroes engine set to platoons and not squads.

No scripting...

And taking Iran with 3 divisions Thats a challenge, Syrian army is what a farce or a joke... take your pick

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Hi and welcome to the forum.

Yeah, performance is, on the surface, a bit disappointing. But that's mainly because there's so much more going on. For instance, Medieval Total War isn't checking for LOS for any of those soldiers. That's rather tough on the CPU.

No doubt some further optimization could be done (and some has been done already for Normandy, so we are told) but there is just one programmer so he has a lot of other things to do. Like getting CM:Normandy ready.

You could ask for CM:N to be delayed to get CMSF running better. But if BFC actually listened to you then my above greeting is the last friendly greeting you'll ever get around here.

As for the scripting: You'll need it to make it appear smart. Any AI is stupid, the trick is to prod it in the smart direction as well as you can. And like it or not scripting is rather good at that.

Compared to Total War this AI is rather stupid. It's got the sense to seek cover when shot at, but that's about it. However, where this AI design does things better then the Total War AI design is that the AI isn't really in charge of anything important. In Total War, the much "smarter" AI gets to do dumb things at all levels. It's simply not up to the tasks it's been given. With the scenario designers fingers at the controls of the CMSF AI much smarter plans can be made.

Especially in the modules scenario designers got quite a bit of mileage out of the OPFOR. *hint* *hint*

[Sequoia]

Give me BF with Co of heroes engine set to platoons and not squads.

Why is bigger better? I find myself with my hands full running a re-enforced company even in wego.

[MeatEtr]

Give me BF with Co of heroes engine set to platoons and not squads.

Ugh, LOS doesn't even really exist in CoH. Ahh heck why bother even trying to compare, it's nowhere near approaching a realistic simulation of a battlefield. Great eye candy though. :eek:

[ChrisND]

Give me BF with Co of heroes engine set to platoons and not squads.

No offense, but that's like saying "Give me Civilization with a World of Warcraft engine". The only thing the two titles (Combat Mission and COH) have in common is the setting. And I like COH, a lot. They are just completely different games. They aren't even in the same genre.

[theFightingSeabee]

I think he just means the eye candy. I'm always up for better graphics. CoH does have graphics limitations that CMSF has no problem with, like not being able to zoom way out and way in. I'd love for CMSF to have the same eye candy.

As far as gameplay goes, CoH doesn't even compare to CMSF in realism, not even close.

[Jonny(FGM)]

And taking Iran with 3 divisions Thats a challenge, Syrian army is what a farce or a joke... take your pick

You really think the Iranians are that much stronger than Syria?

You obviously haven't played some of the extremely challenging scenario's out of there. If the iraqi's had put up this much resistance could you imagine what the death toll would have been just in the initial invasion?

[ChrisND]

As far as gameplay goes, CoH doesn't even compare to CMSF in realism, not even close.

As well it shouldn't. It's goal is not realism. It's an RTS game which just happens to have WW2 as a setting.

[Scipio]

... but there is just one programmer ...

That's something I never really understood. Why don't they hire a second programmer? Surly easier said than done, but it looks like the logical step. Charles' physical limitations are the bottleneck in the CM development, and that's already from the beginning the time. May I quote my signature? Face the facts. Then act on them...

[Jonny(FGM)]

Surly easier said than done

i think it's easier said than paid for

[MikeyD]

Syrian army is what a farce or a joke... take your pick

That's usually the opinion of a player after starting his scenario the 3rd time over, and memorizing the position of that pesky Kornets ATGM launcher so he can deal with it.

I've noticed the constant obsession with 'balanced' gameplay tends to downplay Syria's tactical advantages. Where's the Syrian artillery rocket bombardments? Where's the belts of minefields? Where's the cross-map ATGM shots? Where's the terrian impassable to tanks, the blocked roads and flooded fields? Its the rare scenario that puts Blue at deliberate tactical disadvantage. Because the player wants a stand-up fight with all of his forces available for the engagement.

[MeatEtr]

i think it's easier said than paid for

Yeah but it's really an investment that would not start paying off until years later. Since besides the monetary reason for not bringing on another programmer is that it will take time for him to become accustomed to the CMx2 engine. But it would mean quicker releases with better quality or at the least more features. Which in theory could or would bring in more sales.

[Paper Tiger]

As a gamer who stated with panzergruppe guderian back in '70's

I missed that one but I had a friend who played it a few times. Avalon Hill title, yes? Those were the days...

Regarding the Syrian army, I'd have to say that I think it's a very formidable foe. Their equipment is almost as good as you could expect any RED equipped force to be circa 2008. The T-90 and the BMP-3 are both in the game although you don't see them very often. The main problem the Syrian army looks so weedy is that a lot of early scenarios allowed BLUE to win while taking huge casualties in doing so, allowing BLUE to roll over a numerically superior Syrian force. Tweak the VP conditions so that those casualties hurt BLUE, as they should, and you gain a whole new respect for the Syrian army's capabilities.

Oh, and welcome to the boards.

[Michael Emrys]

Avalon Hill title, yes?

Originally it was an S&T subscription game (which I enjoyed several times). It may have been picked up later by AH when SPI started to fold.

Those were the days...

Indeed.

Michael

[Jonny(FGM)]

I Where's the belts of minefields?

I think most scenario designers avoid these as the only way of discovering them is to lose some men/equipment, although if you simply used them to block off a route of advance and didn't require the player to slog through the minefield itself then i could see that being useful.

But if the scen designer tells you the minefield is there then surely Blue side must be aware of the minefield and surely they could just bring up some of that fancy hardware up to breach it.

the rest are all really good ideas for making tactical challenges which i shall try and use, cheers

[zmoney]

Where's the belts of minefields?QUOTE]

Honestly I don’t think conventional mines should even be in the game as there is no way to remove them. And your comment about starting it over three times is spot on. Anything is easy to defeat if you know exactly where it is.

[Scipio]

Yeah but it's really an investment that would not start paying off until years later. Since besides the monetary reason for not bringing on another programmer is that it will take time for him to become accustomed to the CMx2 engine. But it would mean quicker releases with better quality or at the least more features. Which in theory could or would bring in more sales.

I fully agree. Seriously, BFC didn't even manage to get CMSF completed and iron out all this small errors, like the PM that is still modeled as AK-74, just to name one...

[tdogg]

I've been thinking about this everytime I fire up CMSF. As good as the engine is, there are so many improvments to be made. Every time I drop a hint of something that would be great to add, the reply is " we don't have time for that "...."It will hold up getting other moduals out." To me the awnser is obvious, more programers or open up CM to unrestricted modding. Its taking so long for the CM games to release that they are obsolete code as soon as they release. Just look at the constant issues of nvidia and ATI breaking CM with new driver updates. I fear that by the time we finally get to the main event of a CMx2 east front game, the code will be so old that BF will cancel it to start over.

If they get more programmers to speed up production to meet the demmand, everyones happy.

They could allow unrestricted modding, let the modders add the improvements that they don't have time for. This way BF doesn't have to invest any time and the customers get what they want.

I get the vibe that BF fears full scale modding for some reason. CMx1 is way over the hill now, and there is still no chance for full modding support.

Here's a personal example how beneficial modding is to a company.....I recently bought men of war for use with a user created dynamic campaign generator. Now I hate men of war, but I love dynamic campaigns so I bought it on gamers gate for $5.00. Thats $5.00 1C just got that they never would have if they didn't support modding.

[Jonny(FGM)]

Just look at the constant issues of nvidia and ATI breaking CM with new driver updates.

As far as I understand it this is not BFs fault, they're using the standard openGL specifications and it's the new drivers that don't properly support openGL and not that BF havn't written their programs with sufficient future proofing.

And it's all too easy to call from the sidelines for BF to get more staff when you can't see the books so to speak.

[tdogg]

Hence option 2, go for full modding support.

[Scipio]

IIRC Steve once said about full modding support that they don't want that the people make everything out of the game. One reason is that the community would split up for compatibility reasons if people start to alter the core engine. As H2H-player I think this is a very good reason.

The other reason I read out of this is 'we do not people want to mod the complete game, because we can't sell what they have created on their own for free', for example a CMx2 set in WWII Pacific. While I understand the worries, I think that they are overdone. The CMx2 core engine is already three years old now. Three years in software technology is a long time. I doubt that BFC will have released only the today announced games (including Bulge, Eastfront and CMSF2) before the engine is so ridiculous obsolete as CMx1 is today. Even if they would now hold the old promise "one major release and 2-3 modules per year". By then even a replacement for Windows Seven will be released...

[Paper Tiger]

This is so old...

The other reason I read out of this is 'we do not people want to mod the complete game, because we can't sell what they have created on their own for free', for example a CMx2 set in WWII Pacific. While I understand the worries, I think that they are overdone.

(My bold) I don't. I think they are absolutely correct in making that assumption. It's BFC's intellectual property and they want to make as much money out of their herculean efforts as they possibly can. Only a fool would deny them the right to do so.

The CMx2 core engine is already three years old now. Three years in software technology is a long time. I doubt that BFC will have released only the today announced games (including Bulge, Eastfront and CMSF2) before the engine is so ridiculous obsolete as CMx1 is today. Even if they would now hold the old promise "one major release and 2-3 modules per year". By then even a replacement for Windows Seven will be released...

Nobody can argue with that but frankly, it's BFC's pooch to screw. If they can't keep producing enough games to stay in business, that's their own fault. But they're not going to get a penny from any user created mods either so opening the code only helps them to go out of business faster.

[Scipio]

I don't. I think they are absolutely correct in making that assumption. It's BFC's intellectual property and they want to make as much money out of their herculean efforts as they possibly can. Only a fool would deny them the right to do so.

Nobody can argue with that but frankly, it's BFC's pooch to screw. If they can't keep producing enough games to stay in business, that's their own fault. But they're not going to get a penny from any user created mods either so opening the code only helps them to go out of business faster.

Sorry, I guess you missunderstood. My point is that the worry is overdone, because it's IMO unlikely that BFC will release more then 3 or 4 major games before the game is obsolete (or even incompatible to future OS) that it wouldn't matter anyway if somebody would create for example a full Pacific war mod. That BFC doesn't even have in the far shedul, BTW.

Anyway, the bottleneck of BFC is the lack of human resources. From my god-like overview position as enduser it's easy to say that they should work on this in one way or another...

[LongLeftFlank]

I'm not saying anything that hasn't been said here before many times, but unfortunately the community of gamers who want to stand in the boots of a "real world" tactical commander (give or take a few elements), as opposed to behind the sights of a specific weapon* (shooter), appears to be fairly small and thus unappealing to the major gaming houses.

In addition, getting all the moving parts even approximately right in this kind of unique and highly realistic game is a lot more challenging than cranking out yet another flashy but utterly unrealistic they-all-look-and-act-alike FPS licensing the latest software available for that.

BFC is the only concern interested and dedicated enough to serve our market (there is PanzerCommand, which I haven't tried, but I gather it's similar to CMx1). If they go out of business, we have nothing. So, it's fine to suggest changes or have pipe dreams, but keep the home fires burning.

* i.e. being some kind of steroid monkey with nine lives lugging around 300kg of chainguns, chainsaws and biker chains. When you think about it, this "wander through the maze killing stuff" technology hasn't advanced much at all in its essentials since Doom.... or PacMan. Just more pixels and snappier backgrounds.

[Paper Tiger]

Scipio

I don't think I have misunderstood anything at all.:confused: It's been nearly three years since CMSF was released, right? Now, nobody is going to accuse BFC of being lazy or lacking the will to create new content for their existing title or new titles are they? Surely nobody is THAT stupid. So let's consider what might have happened had CMSF been made open for modification, say one year after it was released, just after they had finished the Marines module.

I think we'd have seen a WW2 mod very quickly afterwards, wouldn't we? North African Theatre first because of CMSF's existing terrain, but once folks had modded the terrain, we'd have seen both Western and Eastern Fronts in short order. This is hardly an incredible scenario. There are a lot of very knowledgeable folks who would have preferred BFC to go straight to a new WW2 game with the new engine. Had BFC opened their code, at least some of them would have got to work a.s.a.p. to create a WW2 Mod.

And I don't think the Modern Era would have been neglected either. There are quite a few of us (obviously) that enjoy it and so perhaps, staying with the scenario I've outlined above, we'd have seen Brits, Germans, Dutch and Canadians by now as well. And of course, the Modern Era Russians would definitely have been done a LONG time ago, and somebody would have done China, North Korea... see where we're going?

Now, while that would be FANTASTIC for us, how would that possibly help BFC? They sell one title and that's the end of the story for them. They can't possibly compete with the collective creativity of this community. And, make no mistake, some of those user-created mods would be of a very, very high quality indeed because there are some very talented modders within our little community, of which I count you as one. Possibly these mods would be so good that a LOT of folks who already had them wouldn't want to shell out $45+ for BFC's official WW2 title or whatever.

So, once again, no. I disagree with your assertion that those worries are overdone. 'Open for modification' means a swift and certain death for BFC.