SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Sub/Naval + Other Games > Sub/Naval & General Games Discussion
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-13-20, 03:03 PM   #31
Threadfin
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,062
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skybird View Post
I did mention what campaigns exactly...?



I was replying to this, which is the post directly above my reply.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat View Post

In CMSF2, if you ever buy it, the best campaigns IMHO are the Dutch and the Canadian one, both of which have been reworked from SF1. BTW, the Canadian Campaign was made by Paper Tiger.
__________________
What? Behind the rabbit?
Threadfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-14-20, 05:22 PM   #32
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

One thing that I desperately miss and what I remembered after playing another mission this evening again after long time, is that I cannot make notes on the map, I mean markers for planned positions and destinations, to coordinate vehicle movement better, or mark suspected enemy positions. Made me cursing in the apst - and still today. In urban areas, you can use nearby buildings for mentla notes on places and locations, but in an open plain without features, you are lost.



Not even numerical GPS coordinates, or a map with squares and coordinates!
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-20, 10:27 AM   #33
Threadfin
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,062
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0
Default

You must be playing on some big maps!

Drop a spotting round next to 'em and you'll have a marker in the form of a shell hole. Not a very elegant solution to be sure.

Then again, in SF2 it's rare the enemy will just be deployed in the middle of nowhere. Usually there will be a trench at least. Which scenario are you playing?
__________________
What? Behind the rabbit?
Threadfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-15-20, 10:40 AM   #34
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

I am more about maintaining cohesion of formation, especially during approach or transit. And scenarios with single RPG shooters in the middle of a field between farming complexes.



I tend to absilutely hate kaing losses in this title, I tend to not run a storming stampede, but to meticulously micromanage every units movement and final pspootion. Plus SF has no hull-down command, making it even more important to really scan open terrain for slightest of elevations carefully. In a way, I play it like chess - move by move, building up step by step and hiopefully staying out of sight for as long as possible so that indirect fire does not spoil it for me. It may not be realistic, but it is the way I enjoy it - and keep losses extremely low, hopefully.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-20, 09:10 AM   #35
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Steam release delayed. New date Septembre 1st.

https://www.wargamer.com/articles/co...lease-delayed/

https://www.gamewatcher.com/news/com...eem-steam-keys
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-20, 10:30 AM   #36
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Its released at Steam. Main game 35 Euros, each of the three modules 30 Euros, all four together as one superpack 90 Euros. My location is Germany.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-20, 03:47 PM   #37
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Interview: why the game actually made the jump to Steam.


https://www.wargamer.com/articles/co...eam-interview/
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-20, 05:20 AM   #38
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Tried, and refunded.

I played a single mission for 100 minutes, the first in the German campaign, which i know quite well. I played the same strategy and moves. I noticed the Germans had not those two mortars additonal to their howitzers anymore, else evertyhing seems to have been the same. I noticed no differences. None. The looks are the same, too. The sounds. Its practically identical to the first version. I am not certain that the textures were new, if they are, the difference does not spring to the eye. The landscape at a distance is slightly more "smeary" and more difficult to read, I would not call this an improvement, I have been in these regions, it simply is not like this. The differences they list to have made, like hull down, infantry watching at both corners of a wall or house etc, did not make themselves felt at all. Whatever they have changed under the hood, it is of practically zero relevance in practical gameplay. Worse, the aI has not improved, makes the same silly things on occassions as before, runs on the point while slowly sneaking to the door in assault or fast mode, tracks terribly bad a route to waypoint on occasions. Here would have been the most obvious opportunity to improve the game. I read they have amphibious swimming units now, well, honestly said, I do not care too much. This is Syria. In the Black Sea game that might be more relevant.

That is way too little for a verison 2, and another call for money. They obviously shied away from investing some real work leading to a worthy version 2, me thinks. The graphics engine is - how old? It performs the same in this game as it doesin the version 1 game for me. I can run it easily, but with plenty of units in sight it has low frames for s second, becasue in no way does the engine make use of multi core processin, it uses just one. Heck its the year 2020 and i use an i7 8700K and 32 GB.

Its a good game, still, if you are new to the series, go for it, its probably the best of its kind, I am just about that if you already have version 1, there is no reason to think of this one and pay much or ltitle money for it. Even for a up-polish for 30 bucks updating fee from a previous version, its too little what you get new, additional. And as I said, the sometime sshowing obvious weaknesses of the aI all are still there. I do not say the game drowns in aI bugs, it does not, but on some critical superhot occasions you see them doing stupid stunts that make you yell and curse and can turn a squad into freshly grinded meat within two, three seconds. My fsvourte was three Marders for no apparent reason starting to crisscross through a small settlement, in reverse, wildly, while not beign under fire (but then attracting missiles from the distance while trying to advertise their presence,: they finally succeeded.

In principle this game is so good it desperately deserves a complete new engine, and massive AI overhaul. If they would do that, and then market it via Steam and Slitherine, then they would have a potential hit on offer. But this way as it is in CMSF2, it is just 13+ years old coffee powder used for the x-th time. The original SF1 was second version of their CMX game engine, this SF2 now should be version 4.

Disappointing a bit.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-20, 02:15 PM   #39
Threadfin
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,062
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0
Default

I agree with your conclusions.

I was disappointed in it too (we re talking about SF2 right?). I did not buy Shock Force, but bit on SF2, and while I like it, that's mostly down to never playing the original. If I had I would have been more disappointed.

Battlefront need a complete revolution with their design and roadmap. Re-releasing Shock Force to me is a sign that the well is dry. That was a lot of work to basically give us the same game again. The engine changes are minor in the grand scheme, and anyway only affected a very small bit of the available content, most of which is still SF1-level.

I'm a long-time player, going back to the original CMBO demo, and I'm done buying new products until there's a major change. I have no compelling reason to buy new, the many titles I already own are more than enough when I want a CM fix.

I still think that the tactical battlefield is the best of its kind, and I have high praise for WEGO, spotting, C2 and ballistics. But virtually everything else is outdated or substandard, including but not limited to AI, campaign system, UI, camera, editor, QMB, graphics and more. I may have made these same points further up the thread, but there ya go.

Battlefront need to get with the times. They have fallen behind. As a long time player this is not good, but it's been the case for a decade at least. And it's OK, it's their product and they can do as they wish. And there is plenty of gaming to keep me going without Combat Mission.
__________________
What? Behind the rabbit?
Threadfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-20, 10:40 AM   #40
Bilge_Rat
Silent Hunter
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: standing watch...
Posts: 3,790
Downloads: 343
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Threadfin View Post

Re-releasing Shock Force to me is a sign that the well is dry.
well no actually, SF2 was released because a lot of players wanted the original SF brought up to the same standard as the other games. If you had SF1, you could upgrade to SF2 at 75-80% off the price which is a pretty good deal.

BFC actually put a lot of effort into SF2, originally it was just supposed to be a software upgrade, but they wound up putting in a lot of new units and reworking all the scenarios, campaigns and QB system.

So far, CMSF2 has been very well received on Steam, reviews are very positive.

As to what the future holds, new modules are coming out for the existing games, CMRT next.

Is the CM series perfect? no, but BFC is the only company making these kinds of 3D tactical land warfare games. which is why I keep coming back.

The big advantage of the CM series is the MP community. I have a bunch of PBEM games going and these games really shine when you are playing a human opponent.
__________________
Bilge_Rat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-09-20, 02:38 PM   #41
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Actually, i still have SF2. They refused to refund. Steam insists on that I had played more than 2 hours, while I had actually a timer running down to 90 minutes and an alarm at the end, and I am very confident that I had not exceeded the time limitz, and very clearly so.

Well, I wa snot in the mood for endlessly trading emails, and I can afford beign dumped this time, and so I left it to that. Needless to say that I will enver trust their refunding pllciy again and will never test-buy a game again. That way, they have in the long run lost more regarding me and my wallet, than they have gained this time. Small gain. Bigger loss.

Having played three missions in it that I know well form the first game, I fial to see the claimed "biog" changes. There are some small chnages in the OOB of these scenarios, a mssing prtar here, a Fuzchs instead of a Marder reionforcmeen tthere. Changing scenario OOB I do not rate as game engine uodates. Whatever the yhave done to the engione and under the hood, the chnages are so small that they escape the eye in ordinary gameplay. There is the hull down command, whcih works, well , not as you would want it, and I do not use it anymore, only "hunt", as before. The flaws also still are there. And I woudl swear that wheeled and even tacked vehciles get even more easily stuckl at moderate and low speeds but opffroad, than was the case in v1. The infantry A1 still sometiomes acts maybe A, but not I. No visible improvements there.

I stick to it, this is not a visibly new game engine, and it looks and sounds the same (playing German scenarios). For itself, its a good game, and new players ot the series cna be invited fullheartly to it. But there is no justfiication worth any money for owener of the verison 1 game. The differences are too minor.

BTW, Bilge Rat, the app you linked me to when I asked you about unbaking campaigns to get the single missions into the editor, did not work in version 1 of the game, and did not work with the demo of v2, but now with the full version of v2, also the modules cna be loaded and their cmaopaigns unbaked - except the British campaign. The British cannot be loaded into the app, all others can.

Seen that way I gained something, though at a cost.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-20, 02:59 PM   #42
Threadfin
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,062
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat View Post
well no actually

Are you suggesting that Battlefront put aside their plans for entirely-new products in order to make happy the people who wanted an updated SF1? SF2 is just more of the same, and all of the work they did makes little difference as both I and Skybird alluded to. Drones are cool yeah, and I can see my F/O kills now. Engine 4 is not a leap forward, it's a tweak that should have been a free patch, not a paid product (for each game even!) or requiring a new game in my view. As an example of what I think they need is a single CM base game where each module plugs in to it, allowing cross-play and where any and all upgrades affect all titles under that banner. It's all just so archaic. The Steam/Slitherine arrangement helps some, but there's a long way to go.

Fire and Rubble (I suggested Red Thunder:Reckoning or Across the Oder, among others but Fire and Rubble won! after they ditched the copyright infringing one that I forget already) is more of the same. New units and a handful of scenarios and maybe a campaign or two for a six year old title, covering what, the last year of the war?. Just the fact that after 6 years we still have just 1944 shows how dated this approach is. CMBB did the entire war on that front and that was nearly 20 years ago and in a single title. At this rate it will be 2040 before I can play Barbarossa in a CMx2-engined game, and by then CMx2 will be 30 years old!

I have no problem with BFC proceeding as they see fit (they seem fine blokes), and customers from purchasing or not depending on how they see things. For me though the series is out of date, and becoming more so every day. I don't want Battlefront to fail. I want them to get with the times and take my money. With the products they release, their lack of ambition and innovation, and the direction they are taking, that looks to be a long way off. I'll vote with my wallet, and it will take a completely new approach to get me back. For me the player experience has to be as important as the accuracy of the uniforms and ToEs and right now I do not feel that is the case. I have plenty of Combat Mission to play when I want it, and no compelling reason to purchase anything new.
__________________
What? Behind the rabbit?

Last edited by Threadfin; 09-11-20 at 03:52 PM.
Threadfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-20, 05:36 PM   #43
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

SF 2 to me actually is just a SF 1.1 . Its good, its not much of a change, and its not more than just that. Other developers or studios roll out such small changes without so much bongo-banging. Scenarios are just - scenarios, and the campoaign consists of canned static scenarios, with sometimes offerign them in two or three slightly altering OOB to reflect a little bit the outcome of the previous mission (in own losses). But its just static canned scenarios that do not dynamically react to your previous performance. I mean I have de-canned the campaigns except the British and can see the structure in them now. Its very simplistic. Single missions. AFAI'm concerned, the whole cmapaign idea could be skipped. Give those missions as single missions, and done you are.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-20, 09:06 AM   #44
Threadfin
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,062
Downloads: 38
Uploads: 0
Default

Of all the things I criticize about Combat Mission, the one I care about the most is the campaign system. And not just how it works mechanically, but the way it falls on the community to create this content.

Single missions and the QMB don't do it for me, outside of PBEM where this works fine. As a Combat Mission campaign player I am tethered to the supply chain. All veteran CM players know of the handful of sites hosting these campaign downloads, and while I am grateful for this service, the fact is there is little available. CMBN and CMSF have a decent number available, but other titles have so little it's disheartening.

A big part of the problem is the editor. It takes a hell of a lot of work to make a campaign. Paper Tiger took 800 hours! to make Road to Montebourg. Admittedly that's probably the longest CM campaign there is, but still, when a campaign author as skilled and experienced as he is must devote the equivalent of 33 entire days to create it the problem seems clear. Imagine how daunting it is for a new campaign designer.

So we are left with little to play. Have a look at any other title, say Final Blitzkreig or Red Thunder. I might not even need both hands to count what's out there. And beyond that, if I then filter this low number by the types of campaigns I like, it's even less. I don't care for urban battles, night fighting, battalion+ force size or exit mechanics. What does that leave? If I want to play parachute infantry at company size how many campaigns are available? Four? Less?

And then there's the nature of the campaigns themselves, the episodic formula we've been using since Operations were killed and Combat Mission: Campaigns went belly-up. That was fifteen years ago! It's a series of narrative-related single battles strung together. There's little continuity from one battle to the next, with exceptions. In the main, crucial operational factors such as ammo conservation, lines of communication, veterancy, key terrain and logistics are either glossed over or ignored entirely. Some campaigns buck this trend, like the excellent Kampfgruppe Engel for CMBN which uses a core force and features ammo and damage-state carry over. But these mechanics are rarely used, and even then the next mission is an entirely new battlefield with new objectives. Fighting so hard to take that important hill or town in one battle, means nothing in the next. We've moved on.

I could write pages about the CM campaign system, what I feel are it's strengths and weaknesses and what I think it needs to improve. It's clear though that nothing is in the works to change it in any meaningful way. Battlefront are content with what it is, as is their right, but it's also within my remit to point out it's failings and provide suggestions, however futile. The core tactical game is so excellent (WEGO, spotting, C2 and ballistics are fantastic) that I think it's a shame to have such a rudimentary campaign system to use it with. And as BFC have said, there's no plan to improve it or change it in any meaningful way. Combat Mission desperately, in my view, needs an operational layer and a dynamic campaign. To continue to make new narrow modules for existing old titles without giving the campaign system any attention is a massive miss and lies at the core of my apathy. It could be so much better.

Which brings me to one last point, and one that Skybird hit upon when talking about unpacking the campaigns, and that is the "AI" system. None of my ideas would be workable until or unless the AI was completely redone. As it is, Combat Mission doesn't really have an AI. It's script and trigger-based. The TacAI works well enough, but in a general sense the enemy AI is incapable of thinking on it's feet. To react or exploit or conduct a tactical withdrawal. To use reserves to plug a gap or mass it's forces to exploit success. Any sensation of a competent opponent is purely by happenstance and a result of the designer's ability to create this illusion through careful planning when creating the scenario. As a result, AI on the defensive can put up a good fight, but if it's attacking the result is adequate at best and a complete mess at it's worst. And again, it's all down to how well the author can manipulate the AI scripts and triggers and to the extent the player "falls" in to the envisioned conduct of the battle.

In my view, Battlefront need to stop creating modules and concentrate on giving the players the proper structure to take full advantage of the excellent core systems in Combat Mission. An operational dynamic campaign generator is what this series needs. Aside from not having any desire to actually make my own campaigns with tools unsuited for ease of use, the fact remains that even if I did, I would already know everything about the campaign I am about to play -- the enemy OoB, key terrain and positions and well, everything. If I build a scenario with four AT guns, after I knock them out I know there are none left. I need to proceed as if there are four more possibly still hidden or Combat Mission loses the uncertainty that makes it so compelling.

Until Battlefront address this issue and remove the tether players are chained to and give us a way to easily generate endless, tailored campaign play the series will continue to suffer from a severe lack of content. Give me the tools to produce the experience I want and end the current reliance on generous but scarce and overworked authors to produce the content I want to play.
__________________
What? Behind the rabbit?

Last edited by Threadfin; 09-12-20 at 12:54 PM.
Threadfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-20, 10:32 AM   #45
Skybird
Soaring
 
Skybird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: the mental asylum named Germany
Posts: 40,340
Downloads: 9
Uploads: 0


Default

Hm. I just looked into the game folder, and after having uncanned the campaign missions and moved them to single mission (main game campaigns, USMC, Canada, Germany - the British I cannot uncan, the mod tool fails on the British campaign), I have around 90 missions in that folder now. Plus those missions I can reach by playing the British campaign as it is included.

So, lack of content is not what I can complain about. But as I said, I play ever ym ission as a single mission, I do not care about the campaigns beign campoaigns, whether I play a mission because the campaign reaches it or becasue I picked it as single missions, make sno difference to me in thsi game.

The AIU generlaly spekaing is okay, what irks me is when it fails in doping something. Mainly the route planning and behaviour when coming under fiore is what occaisonalykl makes me yell and curse. The pathfinding is sometimes very dubious and quesitonbable, even if lettign vehcuiles roll slwoly thgrouzgh urban arewa and giving iut plenty of waypoints with little distance between them. They still sometimes stroll off.The running of soldiers is absurd, they run in place and by fra not as much as I wan tthem to hurry when telling them to hurry upo and get cover. Instead they make movements like running, but still just walk by net speed.

I would like to have a tool with tgerrain colopur codin g to quickly detemrien what can be seen from a given psoition, adn what not,m and to what degree a vejhcile is exposed (urret, full ´hull, or fully concealed). The LOS/line of firing tool they have, does not really cut it for me, its handling is grindign things down too moften. This is something that Steel Beasts Pro and Armoured Brigade do better.


That it is called version 2, while such things are not being fixed after one and a half decade - that is what irks me a bit. Nol optiomization for multi core CPUs, I have a systenm that is overkill for this game - and sitll sometikmes have a brief second of stuttering, because it all runs on just one thread - while 12 are available, plus a monsterous GFX card and 32 GB RAM. Thy miss the technological advances of one and a half decade.
__________________
If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

Last edited by Skybird; 09-12-20 at 10:46 AM.
Skybird is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.