What is with the propoganda at BF???

08-08-2007, 01:11 PM,

Bored and reading BF forums, and can't help but choke on some of the hackneyed propoganda that friends and close supporters of BF are posting over there.

Face it, it's over. No more CM as we know it. End of the line. This game is dead... all we have now are CMAK CMBB and CMBO.

But they don't have to wage a war to make us look like we don't know what we want, and that what they put out should be what we want.

Simply, it's not.

The complete and utter disdain for the fact that the game is not what was promised and more importantly, is highly flawed, should not be mitigated by these false prophet advertisements.

I understand that there are going to be many people that like the new game, despite and even FOR its shortcomings... but let's get real people... this is not Combat Mission.

Change is necessary, and change is inevitable. This is, I fear, a new coke mistake of the largest proportions for BF. Unfortunately, I do not see a return (or the capacity) to brewing up classic coke after the new recipe bombs...

I just wish they would stop "lining up" the talking heads... we're not stupid.

Cheers!

Leto

jomni · 08-08-2007, 01:36 PM,

Their biggest mistake is calling the game "Combat Mission".
It is clearly a different game already but I kinda like it despite the difference.

RedMike · 08-08-2007, 01:51 PM,

I'm "not" sorry. I have all versions of CM and I personally like CMSF best.

Regards,
RedMike...out

~~Colonel Talvela~~ · 08-08-2007, 03:35 PM,

I havent given up on CMSF yet. Definitely needs some work, but I think there is hope.

But I agree with you some of their statements are crazy. I had a long debate with them about QBs and what it came down to was they think the game is better with only computer picked QBs. That doesnt even make sense.

They get kind of pigheaded about certain things - but that was even true in the CMx1 series. For example no KTs in CMAK and never creating an import utility. That latter is a biggie to me, because the community could do some great mega-campaigns, but they refuse to allow it. Strange.

Runyan99 · 08-08-2007, 03:38 PM,

Would you care to explain why CMSF is not Combat Mission? To me, it looks a lot like Combat Mission with individual soldiers and better graphics.

jomni · (This post was last modified: 08-08-2007, 03:53 PM by jomni.)

Runyan99 Wrote:Would you care to explain why CMSF is not Combat Mission? To me, it looks a lot like Combat Mission with individual soldiers and better graphics.

Combat Mission is a:
1) highly detailed WEGO game
2) where players can take their time planning their next moves
3) and make their own random battles by buying troops setting map parameters

CMSF is a:
1) highly detailed WEGO / Real-Time hybrid (that is more playable in real time)
2) that is actually a micromanagement clickfest
3) where players cannot make their own random battles because there's no troop buying and random maps

See the diff?

Runyan99 · 08-08-2007, 04:47 PM,

1 and 2 are not valid. I play CMSF in WEGO, just like in CM. There is no difference. The fact that there is a realtime option doesn't change my gameplay experience at all.

There are no random maps, and no points for troop purchases. That's true. If that was the core of CM to you, okay I guess. I disagree.

With a minimum of effort you can cherry pick units in the scenario editor and play a game a lot like a QB on a premade map.

jomni · (This post was last modified: 08-08-2007, 05:02 PM by jomni.)

Runyan99 Wrote:1 and 2 are not valid. I play CMSF in WEGO, just like in CM. There is no difference. The fact that there is a realtime option doesn't change my gameplay experience at all.

There are no random maps, and no points for troop purchases. That's true. If that was the core of CM to you, okay I guess. I disagree.

With a minimum of effort you can cherry pick units in the scenario editor and play a game a lot like a QB on a premade map.

You are Battlefront's ideal customer. :)
But there are a lot there who think otherwise (make a big fuss out the points I raised).

Runyan99 · (This post was last modified: 08-08-2007, 05:17 PM by Runyan99.)

Well, I think you're right that there are/were a lot of people for whom CM meant playing gamey QBs where they bought units on crappy maps, resulting in very unrealistic battles. I never liked to play that way.

BFC apparently is trying to move CM into more realistic territory by removing the gamiest aspects of the QB, the unit point system, and replacing it with purely random force selections on premade maps.

Was it a mistake for BFC to alienate the QB crowd for whom CM meant point purchase games? Perhaps. Maybe they should cater to players who want to play very unrealistic games.

But it is still Combat Mission. It's still a tactical WEGO game where you command squads and vehicles. Let's throttle back the hyperbole just a little.

RedDevil · 08-08-2007, 09:17 PM,

1 on 1 details do not mix well with asymmetrical calculations. They are trying to do too much with too little experience in the area. Granted, they MIGHT get it right some day, after thousands beta test their design for them at their own cost, but that day is long away and some people cannot afford to stuff BFC's coffers while waiting for a game to show up.

This is nothing like Combat mission original, you cannot MOD anything, you do not have separate calculations for each turn, you have to use multiple clicks to give orders, there are no LOS or targeting lines options, there is NO historical aspect, and there is no AI worth mentioning.

there is no comparison, CM works and CMSF don't