Will the QB system have randomly generated maps...

[noxnoctum]

Just wondering...

[Paper Tiger]

That's an easy one to answer. No.

[Mord]

The maps in CMX-2 are a lot more complicated than CMX-1, so it's not as easy to create them randomly and have them come out without them looking stupid...has a lot to do with the tighter fidelity in the terrain I believe...There is talk of an auto generate feature that will place blocks of maps together for QB's...but that is down the road if it happens at all.

Mord.

[noxnoctum]

Great. Another key backwards step from an 8 year old game in the name of 1-1 representation.

[ChrisND]

Great. Another key backwards step from an 8 year old game in the name of 1-1 representation.

Pardon me, but you forgot to mention the 20 twenty steps that were taken forward at the same time.

[MikeyD]

Another key backwards step...

I'll admit I had a warm & fuzzy place in my heart for CMBB for a long long time. But nostalgia only takes a guy so far. As much as I loved it back in 2005 I can't stand playing for more than 5 minutes now. You must recall those random generated maps in CMx1 kind'a sucked 7/8ths of the time, right? If you really want roads to nowhere, walls placed in the middle of fields and nonsensically positioned occupy zones simply take 5 minutes and build some of your own in the editor!

[Panzerfest]

With the quality of the pre-made QB maps we have now, wierd random maps seem like a step backwards..

[MeatEtr]

Not to mention that 1:1 representation has nothing to do with why there are no randomly generated maps. This was all verified years ago before CMSF even launched.

[Paper Tiger]

As long as BFC give us the option to choose which quick battle map we play on, I don't see that there is anything to worry about.

And yes, I usually played CMx1 QBs on my own maps or scenario maps because the random maps frequently sucked so badly that they were total immersion killers for me.

[noxnoctum]

I don't know what you guys are talking about.

The random map generator was great. Yes sometimes it generated a map that was unbalanced, but then guess what, you spend 5 minutes quickly repurchasing your unitss with your opponent and then boom, you got a nice map. I've played quite a few QBs and thought that the map generator was quite frankly amazing.

20 steps forward? LOL. Like the the removal of a real QB system? (yes I know it will added in CMN thank God), the fact that you can't play wego over tcpip (and will be able to in CMN but only without replay according to one of Steve's posts), the fact that the linear campaigns unequivocally suck compared to the "Operations" of CMx1. It's like I'm playing an RTS campaign practically. I'd say a good 80% at least of the forum agreed with me on this point in the past, but it seems that they've just "accepted" it now, since BFC have made their decision, as misguided as it is.

And yes, it's cool that I can see all my little dudes running around shooting, but urban combat is a total nightmare. The abstraction of CMx1 made it more realistic IMO, because you just clicked "assault" on the buidling and would hear the sounds of gunfire and hand to hand combat and eventually one squad would prevail (the one with more SMGs usually). Now, in CMx2, you order an assault on a building and your dudes file nicely into a little column and into the room, stop, and then start to look around, guns at the ready. Oh wait!, by that time they're all shot to death by the 3 guys with AKs in the corner!

And MikeyD, all I can say is that you are incredibly biased, you've bashed on my posts before so I'm not even gonna bother to respond to you. You're more biased than Steve or the other devs (who have every right to be biased obviously since they're the game makers and want their game to do well).

I sincerely hope CM:N is a worthy successor to CMBB (even though it's on the western front... but I can live with that), but I'm not holding my breath.

[MeatEtr]

...the fact that the linear campaigns unequivocally suck compared to the "Operations" of CMx1. It's like I'm playing an RTS campaign practically. I'd say a good 80% at least of the forum agreed with me on this point in the past, but it seems that they've just "accepted" it now, since BFC have made their decision, as misguided as it is.

There's been plenty of long threads about CMx1 Op vs CMx2 Cam. They keep saying the scenario-string-campaign is what the majority wanted, even though most appear to be unhappy with it. Personally I think it has much more to do with technical reasons than what the tiny community wanted at CMBO launch time. Since Steve mentioned that was the time period of which the Op/Cam decision was made. Which is why they never updated the Op for the rest of the CMx1 games.

But the CMx2 campaign will be improved upon. IIRC Steve mentioned persistent maps with battle damage and AFV wrecks hopefully. So I guess consider the current CMx2 campaign as a WIP. It'll just take time until they get to it. Since CMN will get the much-needed QB update. It'll have to wait until the second West Front family or East Front family of games.

Hopefully I won't be dead by then!

[noxnoctum]

Haha.

Ah the joys of being 22

[Mord]

Well at this point...it is what it is...But if we end up with a bunch of pre-made maps (shipped or made later by the likes of Mark Ezra and Mishga) for the QB system, what's the difference? A map is a map, right? Or is it just a reason to bitch about 1:1?

"And yes, it's cool that I can see all my little dudes running around shooting, but urban combat is a total nightmare. The abstraction of CMx1 made it more realistic IMO, because you just clicked "assault" on the buidling and would hear the sounds of gunfire and hand to hand combat and eventually one squad would prevail (the one with more SMGs usually). Now, in CMx2, you order an assault on a building and your dudes file nicely into a little column and into the room, stop, and then start to look around, guns at the ready. Oh wait!, by that time they're all shot to death by the 3 guys with AKs in the corner!"

That's your opinion. I don't think it's a total nightmare...I don't think it's perfect either...but I always like that line of arguing...3 guys representing 12, that do everything together, from moving, fighting and fleeing is much more realistic than 12 guys you can actually see, who fire, cower and break individually...I'll take 1:1 and it's quirks any day compared to 3:12 and it's quirks. It's been 10 years, 3:12 is as stagnant and stupid as a 2D was back when CM was released. Time to move on...But if you can't...well, you are in luck...you can play CMBB all day long and get all those features you love...

Mord.

P.S. As far as MikeyD's answer...he was being nice, I thought...You hanging with Dudley and the Gang by any chance?

[noxnoctum]

Well obviously you've been playing a different game from me. Unless you shell the living crap out of a building before entering it, your huge Marine squad WILL get killed by a few dudes with AKs (or at least 50%+ of them). This is a serious serious issue. There needs to be an "assault building" order where the guys storm in, possibly throwing a grenade in in advance, and then be ready to shoot anyone in there the instant they go in the room.

Yes MikeyD was nice in his post. But he's flamed me several times (and I've seen him do the same to others) before in the past so that was just my reaction. So I apologize, it was uncalled for. Maybe he's chilled out or started smoking some dank? (which I heartily approve of, so it's not an insult Mikey)

[Mord]

Hey, I am in agreement that the 1:1 can be improved...I think we all are...especially when it comes to buildings...I think I mentioned something about that recently...there are a few threads around explaining the best ways to attack them, that seem to work...To tell the truth I haven't played an abundant number of scenarios that involve multi story buildings. But one of my biggest niggles is balconies...they are death traps.

Cool, that was nice to apologize...

I think if you stick around and watch we are gonna see lots more improvements with this engine...stuff to make us all happy...eventually.

Mord.

[TheVulture]

That's your opinion. I don't think it's a total nightmare...I don't think it's perfect either...but I always like that line of arguing...3 guys representing 12, that do everything together, from moving, fighting and fleeing is much more realistic than 12 guys you can actually see, who fire, cower and break individually...I'll take 1:1 and it's quirks any day compared to 3:12 and it's quirks. It's been 10 years, 3:12 is as stagnant and stupid as a 2D was back when CM was released. Time to move on...But if you can't...well, you are in luck...you can play CMBB all day long and get all those features you love...

'Realism' can mean two different things. It's like the difference between accuracy and precision is science. Precision is how many decimal places you include. Accuracy is whether they are right or not. 1:1 is more detailed (more precise) - it isn't automatically more realistic (better reflecting reality - or at least what the player would expect (which may have little to do with reality )).

I'd say that the assault command specifically is something that has increased detail and lost realism. In CMx1, the whole squad moves as a mathematical point (with some fudging), and the whole behaviour of packet movement, using micro terrain etc. is abstracted but implicitly there and factored into determining the result. In CMx2 we actually get the packet movement - one team moves while the other stays still. It is undoubtedly more detailed (and hence more realistic in that specific sense), but I'd argue less realistic overall (what it models in detail doesn't match up to reality so well). One specific failing is assaulting into a building: you don't see the defenders until they open fire, which is quite reasonable. But they open up at short range on the assaulting team, and the morale state of the whole squad is affected, leavign the overwatch pinned or worse and crawling for cover, and putting out no covering fire.

Of course, some of the realism issues are purely perception. In CMx1 we saw a token that loosely represented the unit and what it was doing, and everyone was fine with the implication that you had to imagine the individual soldiers doing their own stuff that wasn't directly shown. In CMx2 all the soldiers are now shown and the room for your imagination to fill in the gaps has been removed. The 1:1 representation draws your attention to the fact that not everything can be simulated (and probably never could, even in principle), while the 3:12 representation directly simulated far less, but didn't need to because of the abstraction.

Having said all that, I prefer the 1:1 model of CMx2 to the point that, although I am only really interested in the east front WWII (CMBB was the dog's proverbials), I only play CMSF and just can't play the CMx1 games any more. CMSF has its shortcomings. As did CMBB before it. They have different sets of issues, and some things CMBB did better than CMSF does. But CMSF is much better overall.

[Paper Tiger]

Well obviously you've been playing a different game from me. Unless you shell the living crap out of a building before entering it, your huge Marine squad WILL get killed by a few dudes with AKs (or at least 50%+ of them). This is a serious serious issue. There needs to be an "assault building" order where the guys storm in, possibly throwing a grenade in in advance, and then be ready to shoot anyone in there the instant they go in the room.

Nah! We're playing the same game. However, I'd say I'm definitely playing it very differently from you. I LOVE the Modern Era infantry game and I've been doing this kind of thing a LOT of this lately and I'd say a lot of the problems you are experiencing are simply due to bad tactics.

I split squads up and give the overwatching split teams Target Light fire commands while the assault team approaches the building, often using infantry-placed smoke to boot. But I don't just rush the assault team in there. I stop them outside the door and give them a Target Light command for a few seconds and then go in. Very different results from your approach.

This can be done in WEGO too. You just need to use the PAUSE command to your assaulting team issuing them with the TARGET command at the waypoint.

Do you know where I learned to do this? The tactics section of the original Squad leader rule book. Most, if not all of my CM tactics are SL/ASL derived. Masses of overwatching/Prep firing guys while only a small part of your force moves. It works in CMx2 too. If your tactics don't work, try doing something different instead.

[Mord]

One specific failing is assaulting into a building: you don't see the defenders until they open fire, which is quite reasonable. But they open up at short range on the assaulting team, and the morale state of the whole squad is affected, leavign the overwatch pinned or worse and crawling for cover, and putting out no covering fire.

.

Now, that I've never noticed, I'll have to keep an eye out.

As for the rest, I do know where you guys are coming from...the whole imagination thing, I remember explaining that to my brother when he first got CMBO, and once I did, he was much more comfortable with the abstractions.

My point now, being, it's just time to move on, the sooner BFC approached these hurdles the sooner they could start to conquer them...maybe not to a point of perfection, but somewhere that is a happy medium. I think once the entire CMSF engine is given it's final patch, with all features and fixes in place, Steve can come along and explain better some of the abstractions we are still dealing with in 1:1 and what lies ahead in fixing them as the engine progresses. But the positive in all this, teething process, keyboard smashing and cussing aside, is that the road has been paved...things should only get better. It had to be done in my opinion to further the genre and the enjoyment. I've thought for a long time (since back in 2002) that it was time to give the infantry the same level of treatment the AFVs and Tanks had in CMX1 and was very happy they went that route for CMX2.

BTW I recently just reinstalled CMBB for old times sake and for a taste of WWII and it just drove me crazy with the 3:12 or should that be 3:4? infantry...So, I played a game with just tanks but as awesome as it used to be, it's just too dated for me to use for anything more than a research type tool...

Mord.

[Paper Tiger]

But they open up at short range on the assaulting team, and the morale state of the whole squad is affected, leavign the overwatch pinned or worse and crawling for cover, and putting out no covering fire.

This is simply a result of keeping the squad intact. If you split them up, the morale status of one team does not influence the other until the two/three split teams are reintegrated. Once again, proper tactics will overcome these 'perceived' flaws. I just finished running a test to make sure what I was posting was correct and it works exactly the way I thought it did.

[noxnoctum]

Well obviously you've been playing a different game from me. Unless you shell the living crap out of a building before entering it, your huge Marine squad WILL get killed by a few dudes with AKs (or at least 50%+ of them). This is a serious serious issue. There needs to be an "assault building" order where the guys storm in, possibly throwing a grenade in in advance, and then be ready to shoot anyone in there the instant they go in the room.

Nah! We're playing the same game. However, I'd say I'm definitely playing it very differently from you. I LOVE the Modern Era infantry game and I've been doing this kind of thing a LOT of this lately and I'd say a lot of the problems you are experiencing are simply due to bad tactics.

I split squads up and give the overwatching split teams Target Light fire commands while the assault team approaches the building, often using infantry-placed smoke to boot. But I don't just rush the assault team in there. I stop them outside the door and give them a Target Light command for a few seconds and then go in. Very different results from your approach.

This can be done in WEGO too. You just need to use the PAUSE command to your assaulting team issuing them with the TARGET command at the waypoint.

Do you know where I learned to do this? The tactics section of the original Squad leader rule book. Most, if not all of my CM tactics are SL/ASL derived. Masses of overwatching/Prep firing guys while only a small part of your force moves. It works in CMx2 too. If your tactics don't work, try doing something different instead.

When did I say I didn't provide cover fire when assaulting? OF course I do. I think everyone on here knows that "target light" orders while half your squad moves in is how you clear a building.

The point is here though, that it shouldn't be necessary. Now this is CMSF, where blufor has overwhelming firepower and assets. Looking forward to CM:N you won't always have those automatic rifles covering your assault.

Or what if, in either CMSF or CMBB, you're in a situation where you can't split the squad, because you've lost your men for one reason or another.

Specifically in WW2. Imagine.... a squad, 5 men down, you got 3 guys with a garand and one with a tommy. There's an MG42 keeping an entire company pinned but your squad (after losing 5 guys) managed to get around the flank and is right outside where the MG42 building is. It's a 2 story concrete building. Of course, the MG42 has 2 guys with STGs watching his back. Do you start firing at the building while you're right outside it and hope that hey, maybe one of my bullets will just happen to go through the exact spot to kill the guys inside? Or do you kick in the door and start shooting, surprise their asses, and kill them?

My point is, you should not need to have to use cover fire to assault a building. Yes, of course, ideally you always want to, but there will be situations where you can't... and therefore THERE NEEDS TO BE A WAY for a squad to attack a building in such a way that they don't march to the waypoint and THEN start looking for baddies, but rather, storm in, guns blazing.

Watch this, the relevant part is from 6:25 onwards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTns92wgnxE

[Paper Tiger]

When did I say I didn't provide cover fire when assaulting? OF course I do. I think everyone on here knows that "target light" orders while half your squad moves in is how you clear a building.

The point is here though, that it shouldn't be necessary...

My point is, you should not need to have to use cover fire to assault a building

You want the game to do it all for you then? Where's the fun in that? Where's the intelligence? You claim you know that you can achieve all this by splitting your squad up and providing lots of covering fire and then complain that you shouldn't have to do this? There's no serious serious issue here. I am happy to create my own drills as far as the game allows me to do so. You want commands that do all that for you.

[TheVulture]

But they open up at short range on the assaulting team, and the morale state of the whole squad is affected, leavign the overwatch pinned or worse and crawling for cover, and putting out no covering fire.

This is simply a result of keeping the squad intact. If you split them up, the morale status of one team does not influence the other until the two/three split teams are reintegrated. Once again, proper tactics will overcome these 'perceived' flaws. I just finished running a test to make sure what I was posting was correct and it works exactly the way I thought it did.

I know. I'm just pointing out an example of where adding more detail doesn't automatically add more realism. Take the basic "give a squad a single assault waypoint" from CMx1, and it doesn't work in CMx2. The greater detail means that "give a squad a single assault waypoint" is less realistic. Greater detail means that the game is capable of more realism, but it means the designers (and players) have to put more work in to achieve it, but simply adding more detail in doesn't automatically mean greater realism come what may.

Quick digression: The greater detail also, as a by product, means that while in CMx1 you pretty much always used squads intact (aside from the 'gamey' use of split squads to take of advantage of the fact units could only target one thing at a time; no matter how much firepower one unit puts out, it can only suppress one half of a split squad...), in CMx2 you often have to manage individual teams rather than squads, at least in urban combat.

[noxnoctum]

When did I say I didn't provide cover fire when assaulting? OF course I do. I think everyone on here knows that "target light" orders while half your squad moves in is how you clear a building.

The point is here though, that it shouldn't be necessary...

My point is, you should not need to have to use cover fire to assault a building

You want the game to do it all for you then? Where's the fun in that? Where's the intelligence? You claim you know that you can achieve all this by splitting your squad up and providing lots of covering fire and then complain that you shouldn't have to do this? There's no serious serious issue here. I am happy to create my own drills as far as the game allows me to do so. You want commands that do all that for you.

Again, there are situations (especially in WW2 where "blufor" didn't have "hand of god" weapons facing off against scruffy guys with no training and only 50 year old assault rifles, and a few completely outdated tanks), where suppressing/covering fire will not be possible, or desirable.

For example, in the video that I asked you to watch their mission was a prisoner snatch (unfortunately the video clipped out a couple shots where they showed them scaring the **** out of the Germans and having them throw their hands up while one of the Americans was screaming in German)... it was at night, they were instructed to not wear helmets (so as to not have the moon shine off them). It was stealth. Obviously you can't have a 30 cal opening up from across the river until AFTER the team has gotten the prisoners and is on the way back.

So situations where you need this option:

1) Stealth situations

2) Situations where your squad is too depleted of men to be able to split squad

3) Situations where you've managed to sneak your squad(s) into a good position and want your whole force to charge into a building(s) guns blazing instead of having your covering element open fire giving their position away to that tiger parked down the street so they can get decimated while your assault team is clearing out said building(s).

Oh and did I mention that having a squad run into a building, stand for a second, and then scan the room looks absolutely RETARDED??? If they want to do 1-1 do it right PLEASE! (a quick word of praise here to BFC for the jumping over walls animation, they look very cool IMO)

But agree to disagree. I doubt I'm going to convince you, and you're not going to convince me. Whatever. And I really doubt BFC will implement this, certainly not in CM:N... maybe in CMx2:Ostfront by the time we get around to that in 2025 :cool:

[Paper Tiger]

The Vulture:

Yes, I read your post. The reason I singled that particular comment out is because Mord did so first in post #18 [Now, that I've never noticed, I'll have to keep an eye out.] and I didn't want him to think that the game was somehow deficient.

[Paper Tiger]

Again, there are situations (especially in WW2 where "blufor" didn't have "hand of god" weapons facing off against scruffy guys with no training and only 50 year old assault rifles, and a few completely outdated tanks), where suppressing/covering fire will not be possible, or desirable.

For example, in the video that I asked you to watch their mission was a prisoner snatch (unfortunately the video clipped out a couple shots where they showed them scaring the **** out of the Germans and having them throw their hands up while one of the Americans was screaming in German)... it was at night, they were instructed to not wear helmets (so as to not have the moon shine off them). It was stealth. Obviously you can't have a 30 cal opening up from across the river until AFTER the team has gotten the prisoners and is on the way back.

So situations where you need this option:

1) Stealth situations

2) Situations where your squad is too depleted of men to be able to split squad

3) Situations where you've managed to sneak your squad(s) into a good position and want your whole force to charge into a building(s) guns blazing instead of having your covering element open fire giving their position away to that tiger parked down the street so they can get decimated while your assault team is clearing out said building(s).

LOL. You really don't know when the horse is dead, do you?

But agree to disagree. I doubt I'm going to convince you, and you're not going to convince me.

And there we agree on something.