CMx2 Market Garden was almost *cancelled*?

[Redwolf]

Comparing your game development effort to Duke Nukem Forever might not be the way to go,,,

 

[Geordie]

Im interested in the phrase where comparing past project timelines isnt a good way to predict future ones?Steve has been saying this since 2007. Every six months or so BFC announce future titles and Modules and then they consistently fail to deliver a product. By now we were promised what, 4 new games? Weve seen CMFI.This is what I dont understand with them, THEY drive expectaions by giving dates and projects then they turn around and say people are moaning because they expect too much too soon.If they didnt drive it, I wouldnt expect it. Ive learned to take any date they say with a huge pinch of salt and Im only really expecting to see a CMBN MG Module this year, anything else would be a 'Billy Bonus'And I still have to type in one huge paragraph, damn you Miliatry Computer system....

 

[Redwolf]

Honestly, I don't care about releases, games and modules and whatever.

What I care about is how much stuff there is to play that is different from what I played before. And changes. Are there new game mechanics elements that improve reproducibility of historical outcomes? What kind of bugfixes are there? What kind of game mechanics that didn't work so well have been replaced with something better?

If I look at the list of new things for MG... No. That's not enough for the second module in so many years for CMBN. I appreciate historically accurate infantry formations as much as the next wargamer, and I know a lot of work is going into that. But they don't make gameplay. They don't bring in a large audience, and I don't think they can even retain existing audiences (where retain means "make them spend new money"). Plus this game is not a good reference for WW2 vehicles and formations anymore like CMx1 was.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

The "Advent of Packs"....means what? Is there going to be a Nativity Pack for Christmas? Does that count towards my bet with Elphis? Will the next Base Game coincide with the second coming of Christ??

 

[Elvis]

The "Advent of Packs"....means what? Is there going to be a Nativity Pack for Christmas? Does that count towards my bet with Elphis? Will the next Base Game coincide with the second coming of Christ??

Nope. That is why I was very (maybe overly) clear. New base PC games or modules. No packs or tablet/phone games or upgrades.

 

[Geordie]

I appreciate historically accurate infantry formations as much as the next wargamer, and I know a lot of work is going into that. But they don't make gameplay. They .

Thats where we differ. I think one of the fundamental things lacking in a game that claims to be the best simulation out there is proper Infantry formations. A loose gaggle of troops meandering about and banging into each other every 3 seconds is not how military personnel move in combat or any other situation outside of 'Monty Python'. If bullets are tracked 1-1 and infantry moves about in one huge clump then you have to put a fudge into what should be representative. So for me accurate infantry formations definitely does make gameplay. My preference is at the Platoon or Company level with a few vehicles and so it would make a good difference to me.

 

[Geordie]

Nope. That is why I was very (maybe overly) clear. New base PC games or modules. No packs or tablet/phone games or upgrades.

And do you envisage a new game in 2013? Thats game, not Pack or Module?

 

[Redwolf]

Thats where we differ. I think one of the fundamental things lacking in a game that claims to be the best simulation out there is proper Infantry formations. A loose gaggle of troops meandering about and banging into each other every 3 seconds is not how military personnel move in combat or any other situation outside of 'Monty Python'. If bullets are tracked 1-1 and infantry moves about in one huge clump then you have to put a fudge into what should be representative. So for me accurate infantry formations definitely does make gameplay. My preference is at the Platoon or Company level with a few vehicles and so it would make a good difference to me.

I didn't mean formation as in movement commands. That would be awesome.

I meant as in OOB in the game. With the current mechanisms only.

 

[Elvis]

And do you envisage a new game in 2013? Thats game, not Pack or Module?

I expect there to be....but my batting average is less that stellar. Release dates aside...I can confirm his recent statements, about what is actively being worked on, are true. Time will tell. I wouldn't count on any release dates until a pre-order opens. They've been pretty good with the 4-6 weeks (when they've missed 6 weeks it has only been a couple of days).

 

[NUTTERNAME]

I meant as in OOB in the game. With the current mechanisms only.

But OOB is what they are selling. That IS the Product.

Actually, I am wondering if the present 'assembly-line' is just cranking out 2.0 products in parallel. If EF is truly 'well on it's way', then I can't imaging any great game engine evolution considering that MG and whatever else is taking up the coding hours. Steve still pontificates about 'Upgrades' but, really, they haven't even delivered on the 'back-end-work-load' (Hey Guys! You get a FREE stuff with PATCHES!!!). Packs? What Packs?? WE DON' NEED NO DIRTY STINKIN' PACKS!!!!!

To be honest, I forget all the promises since a new wave of promises is overwhelming the old wave. They said they would update CMFI? CMBN 1.0? with machineguns and things? I wonder how much urgency that has with all this other stuff going on. Is CMBN 2.0 waiting on something patch-wise? jeesh. I guess I gave up caring.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

I expect there to be....but my batting average is less that stellar. Release dates aside...I can confirm his recent statements, about what is actively being worked on, are true. Time will tell. I wouldn't count on any release dates until a pre-order opens. They've been pretty good with the 4-6 weeks (when they've missed 6 weeks it has only been a couple of days).

They would drop a patch on CMBN 2.0 prior to MG? Or maybe not, is CMFI still waiting on a stand alone patch? That is, people with CMFI that have not purchased Gustav?

 

[slm]

Not quite sure what this new pack product will be like, since none have been released. But the old plan of basegame + modules was much easier for customers to understand.

If you're planning to play a PBEM with someone, is it that you both need to have same modules and packs or is it enough that both have modules and packs required by a scenario?
Are packs priced differently from modules (cheaper) or why do we need the whole pack concept - instead of just modules?

 

[slm]

double post

 

[Elvis]

Not quite sure what this new pack product will be like, since none have been released. But the old plan of basegame + modules was much easier for customers to understand.

If you're planning to play a PBEM with someone, is it that you both need to have same modules and packs or is it enough that both have modules and packs required by a scenario?
Are packs priced differently from modules (cheaper) or why do we need the whole pack concept - instead of just modules?

The idea is to release oddball units and vehilces that don't fit into a specific battle, like Normandy or Market Garden.

To play PBEM both players need to only have the units and terrain for the scenario. If one player owns everything and the other only the base game but the scenario is based on the base game then they can play it. The only exception to this is if one player has 1.xx and the other ha 2.xx.

My understanding is that packs will be cheaper than modules.

 

[Redwolf]

What, packs are real?

What are they?

 

[Elvis]

What, packs are real?

What are they?

Um.... I explained as clearly as I can think of in the post above yours. Is there an aspect of that that I didn't make clear?

 

[NUTTERNAME]

What, packs are real?

What are they?

Some 'Wacky-Pack' news...

Some misc. comments...

In theory we'd love to do an even larger range of topics, but that is impractical for either development (we can only do so much) or marketing (the cost to make is more than the potential to sell) reasons. Which means it's unlikely there will be much more than what I already outlined.

The new concept is to have a Family consist of Base Game + 1 Module + ?# Packs. The Base establishes the general environment and the beginning portion of the timeframe. The Module expands the timeframe and (usually) environment (think Netherlands for Normandy Family, Gustav Line for Italy Family etc.) Packs flesh out the forces and possibly extra terrain bits and bobs.

Eastern Front is too massive to do anything but chop it up into major yearly components. The current plan is to have these divided up into 4 Families (as described above), but we're going to play that by ear. It may prove better to have this be an exception and consist of one Base, 3-7 Modules (as defined above), and oodles of Packs. Currently I'm leaning towards the latter, but until you hear otherwise it's still the original 4 Family concept with modified Module/Pack strategy. We have time to figure this out as Bagration (the first EF game) is well along and yet which way we go doesn't really matter at this point.

As a quick aside about the old equipment sticking around when new equipment arrived. For sure minor models variations were retained until adequate replacements arrived. But the Germans did try, often, to refit entire units with full sets of new equipment. Didn't always work that way, but the intent was to not have mixed vehicle models for logistics and/or tactical reasons. The equipment pushed out of a unit was then either utilized by other units within the same larger formation (Battalion, Regiment, Division, etc.) or was sent to another unit within the same theater or was shipped back to the rear for refitting. Those then either went to other fronts or, in some cases, foreign allies. Some were retained for training, such as the PzIIIs that took part in Market Garden (they came from a tank school).

Lastly, it is going to be a challenge to keep all Families updated with the Upgrade system. Each has unique challenges and testing requirements. Depending on what the new features are it could mean 4-6 weeks for a single Upgrade or perhaps several months (as was the case with the massive Normandy v2.0 Upgrade). However, we have already set up our testing so that we can do them simultaneously and we are not planning any changes as massive as what Normandy had to experience (we redid *every* unit's and soldier's artwork. Ouch).

Steve

So, the good news is that Steve is reading my posts here and is leaning towards my idea of just having one base game starting with the Eastern Front. Modules would then be aplenty and have a wider audience since the whole 'Base game'+1_Module scheme is stupid.

 

[slm]

The idea is to release oddball units and vehilces that don't fit into a specific battle, like Normandy or Market Garden.

To play PBEM both players need to only have the units and terrain for the scenario. If one player owns everything and the other only the base game but the scenario is based on the base game then they can play it. The only exception to this is if one player has 1.xx and the other ha 2.xx.

My understanding is that packs will be cheaper than modules.

I hope game UI will show which packs some scenario or QB requires, just like it now shows which modules are used.
And I also hope that having so many game families in progress simultaneously does not stop game engine improvements.
I think additions like the recent MG fix or maybe getting flame throwers or tank riders are much more important than graphical tweaks which I frankly barely notice.

 

[Elvis]

I hope game UI will show which packs some scenario or QB requires, just like it now shows which modules are used.
And I also hope that having so many game families in progress simultaneously does not stop game engine improvements.
I think additions like the recent MG fix or maybe getting flame throwers or tank riders are much more important than graphical tweaks which I frankly barely notice.

Nothing should need to change for that. For instance, if you only have the base Normandy game and put a CW scenario in your scenario folder, that scenario will not show up when you go select what battle you want to play. Similarly, when playing a QB the only options, for units, dates etc..., that you have are for the ones available in the game and modules you own.

 

[Redwolf]

And I also hope that having so many game families in progress simultaneously does not stop game engine improvements.
I think additions like the recent MG fix or maybe getting flame throwers or tank riders are much more important than graphical tweaks which I frankly barely notice.

This is what I'm concerned about. We don't even have CMx1 feature compatibility even *announced*. The MG fix is greatly appreciated, of course. I really wish fixes would continue.