Are these features in?

[Lanzfeld]

...and if you are in the answering mood Steve perhaps you could clear something up that is bothering me?

You said that "close combat has been improved for CM:BN" when we were in the context of discussing hand to hand combat. Just to get this straight: If two squads are close to each other with no ammo they will still kill each other (no animations) correct?

You know Steve, if this feature has not made it into CM:BN yet it is okay to just say "No, it is not in there". I am starting to feel as if you might be avoiding it because you dont want to say its not in there when the original post strongly suggested it is. I know your intention is not to mislead us so it is best to clear it up now maybe?

Two squads, face to face, 2 meters apart, no ammo. In CMSF they would just stare daggers at each other forever. In CM:BN, do they at least start to get killed as the hand to hand is abstracted???

Many many thanks for your candidness.

[gibsonm]

You know Steve, if this feature has not made it into CM:BN yet it is okay to just say "No, it is not in there". I am starting to feel as if you might be avoiding it because you dont want to say its not in there when the original post strongly suggested it is. I know your intention is not to mislead us so it is best to clear it up now maybe?

I suspect its just that he’s one guy and he’s trying to monitor the 150+ threads here plus the stuff on the Beta Forum plus not doubt a watching eye on the CM:SF forums too.

[Canada Guy]

Steve,

One thing you mentioned was that roadblocks would be in but not "Jersey Barriers" which I have no idea what they are.

Will roadblocks be able to be cleared by engineers or a large HE blast or are they permanent for the scenario?

What else will Engineers be able to do besides clear mines? I imagine their wall breaching will be limited as a satchel charge is just a little too big to just put a small hole in a wall.

Yea! Now at 200 posts. Where is the confetti?

[LongLeftFlank]

Jersey barriers are the solid cement segments you see dividing highways and protecting road crews. They're typically cement, about 4 feet high and flared at the bottom. Sometimes they're coloured plastic and filled with sand if they're temporary.

You have definitely seen them, even in Saskatoon ;-) But they didn't exist in WWII and probably not until the 1970s.

[Lanzfeld]

I suspect its just that he’s one guy and he’s trying to monitor the 150+ threads here plus the stuff on the Beta Forum plus not doubt a watching eye on the CM:SF forums too.

Understandable.

He did answer questions that were bracketing mine though. I dont want to pester. Its just that Elvis said that in close combat:

"Hee hee. No, there is an animation. One guy shoots the other. Or more accurately they both try to shoot each other."

Which really makes me wonder if they troops are doing hand to hand fighting (new) or just shooting at close range (same as CMSF).

[Rocky Balboa]

There's a couple hundred threads about Campaign stuff over the years, and a bunch over in the CM:SF area specifically.

The short of it is some people REALLY want this, some people don't. Of those who do there is no real consensus as to the exact approach. Some want us to focus on making more detailed shorter Operations (as we had in CMx1), others want us to go way beyond what Close Combat Had. And endless variety within.

Because Combat Mission is a tactical game and that is where we MUST spend our limited time and resources, I can tell you that we will never have a "Strategic Layer" to the game such as Close Combat had. Never. It would be just about the worst possible thing we could ever do for our collective customer base. The "Strategic Layer" is basically a game on its own. It would require a year just to make an acceptable one, and probably another couple of release cycles to get it so most people that asked for it would stop telling us how much it sucks. And throughout this time the tactical aspects of Combat Mission would be neglected. Just like what happened with Close Combat.

Therefore, a Strategic Layer is not on the table as a possibility. And no amount of lobbying for it will change that because we already know what we're up against and it's not going to change simply because someone asked us about it for the 10000th time.

Instead we will continue to refine the existing Campaign system as CMx2 is enhanced, but it will never grow into something that detracts from the tactical combat which is why Combat Mission exists.

Steve

Let me be clear, I'm not suggesting that you sacrifice the tactical game for the sake of a strategic game and I fully appreciate your stance on the issue. I thought perhaps with the newly acquired programming help or the right 3rd party partnership, this might someday become a reality.

Sure you've been down this road before with CMC so I don't blame you guys if you have a bad taste for it but it could work if the right partner came along and wanted to take it on as a project.

In any event, any improvements you can make to the current campaigns would be much appreciated.

[scottie]

There's a couple hundred threads about Campaign stuff over the years, and a bunch over in the CM:SF area specifically.

The short of it is some people REALLY want this, some people don't. Of those who do there is no real consensus as to the exact approach. Some want us to focus on making more detailed shorter Operations (as we had in CMx1), others want us to go way beyond what Close Combat Had. And endless variety within.

Because Combat Mission is a tactical game and that is where we MUST spend our limited time and resources, I can tell you that we will never have a "Strategic Layer" to the game such as Close Combat had. Never. It would be just about the worst possible thing we could ever do for our collective customer base. The "Strategic Layer" is basically a game on its own. It would require a year just to make an acceptable one, and probably another couple of release cycles to get it so most people that asked for it would stop telling us how much it sucks. And throughout this time the tactical aspects of Combat Mission would be neglected. Just like what happened with Close Combat.

Therefore, a Strategic Layer is not on the table as a possibility. And no amount of lobbying for it will change that because we already know what we're up against and it's not going to change simply because someone asked us about it for the 10000th time.

Instead we will continue to refine the existing Campaign system as CMx2 is enhanced, but it will never grow into something that detracts from the tactical combat which is why Combat Mission exists.

Steve

I feel like we are getting reprimanded by a parent

[Erwin]

Actually, I think the existing Campaign "game" feature is fine. I just was hoping that at some convenient time in the future some form of "experience gaining" element be added, (not necessarily with medals per Silent Service - but that would also be nice).

[Battlefront.com]

What else will Engineers be able to do besides clear mines? I imagine their wall breaching will be limited as a satchel charge is just a little too big to just put a small hole in a wall.

I can't give specifics on this yet as I hope some things will change in the next week or two.

Let me be clear, I'm not suggesting that you sacrifice the tactical game for the sake of a strategic game and I fully appreciate your stance on the issue. I thought perhaps with the newly acquired programming help or the right 3rd party partnership, this might someday become a reality.

Think about it, do you think we added the help because we had nothing for them to do? Nope, they were brought in because we needed to do more in a shorter period of time than we had capacity to handle. Diverting them to campaign stuff, therefore, means less rich tactical wargames released less frequently.

Sure you've been down this road before with CMC so I don't blame you guys if you have a bad taste for it but it could work if the right partner came along and wanted to take it on as a project.

We had a bad taste for it BEFORE CMC. CMC just reinforced how difficult it is to actually pull off. We're certainly not going to try. And not because we think we'll fail, it's because we know we will. At least according to our twin goals of keeping the focus on tactical and speeding up releases. There's just only so much we can do and recognizing that is the key to success.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Lanzfeld,

I have no specifics to give at this time. All I can say is that hand-to-hand combat will be handled better in CM:BN than it currently is in CM:SF. Since there's no fancy animations going along with that it really just boils down to improving the rather obvious behavioral shortfalls currently seen.

Steve

[dan/california]

Some utterly simple visual indicator that the unit was engaged at bayonet range would be nice. Even if was just a flashing code on the icon.

[gibsonm]

Some utterly simple visual indicator that the unit was engaged at bayonet range would be nice. Even if was just a flashing code on the icon.

Its called the map.

A Blue icon and a Red icon in the same space is your usual combat indicator.

[YankeeDog]

Obviously, I have no special knowledge of what BFC has planned for CMBN in regards to Close Combat, but I do hope people aren't expecting *too* much, because if so I think they'll be disappointed.

The vast majority of the time, if a soldier is holding a perfectly good firearm in his hands, the first choice is going to be to shoot the bastard, whether the range is 1 foot or 1000 yards. At closer ranges, depending on availability of cover, second choice would probably be throw grenade, duck for cover, and then pop up and shoot the bastard if he's still breathing. Both of these options already happen in CMSF (though I would like to see some more fidelity added wrt how grenades are used).

Don't get me wrong. Even in modern combat, occasionally it does come down to bayonets and rifle butts. And in the WWII era, when a lot more of the soldiers were carrying rifles with small mag capacities and slower reloads, it's more important to the simulation. But I think Hollywood has given some people an unrealistic impression of just how often WWII combat reached the point where soldiers started stabbing and clubbing, rather than shooting and fragging.

Cheers,

YD

[Redjac]

I read through this blog seeing if Destraux question about mouse control was ever answered. So are there different mouse control styles? Most games offer two. The mouse-look RTS/FPS style Or the elliptical Free-Mode used in Medeval total war.

[gibsonm]

I read through this blog seeing if Destraux question about mouse control was ever answered. So are there different mouse control styles? Most games offer two. The mouse-look RTS/FPS style Or the elliptical Free-Mode used in Medeval total war.

Well from what I can see his question was about camera control but anyway.

Sorry have no idea about “the elliptical Free-Mode used in Medieval Total War“ or “mouse-look RTS/FPS style“.

So again although it may sound like a boring response:

Download the CM:SF demo and see if that answers your question.

CM:BN is an evolution from CM:SF not a total departure, so if you like what you see (and here I guess how you see it) in CM:SF you’ll probably be pretty happy when CM:BN comes out.

Of course you will no doubt be able to download a demo of that too and confirm before you spend any money.

[Destraex1]

gibson I own all the CMSF games and really you have a clunky in-house mouse control version only. It makes it hard to track units and follow the actions. It makes your guess whether your mouse is hitting the correct edge for the correct spin direction.

It is most certainly not as elegant as what is standard in most RTS games. I spend just as much time getting my camera angle right as playing the game.

[gibsonm]

gibson I own all the CMSF games and really you have a clunky in-house mouse control version only. It makes it hard to track units and follow the actions. It makes your guess whether your mouse is hitting the correct edge for the correct spin direction.

It is most certainly not as elegant as what is standard in most RTS games. I spend just as much time getting my camera angle right as playing the game.

Well if you say so.

I’ve never have (and wont) play any RTS stuff so I can’t comment on that.

I find the mouse control in both CMx1 and CMx 2 fine (so I guess its just a question of individual preference).

I doubt very much though that BTS / BFC would change it just to be in line with RTS products.