The King is Back

[schweggy]

Questions regarding TacView:

Which version(s) are supported by C:MO? I'm guessing all?

Lastly, is there a "recommended" version?

[Rob322]

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

ORIGINAL: JPFisher55
I'm in. I'll buy it when released. Just curious, will CMO handle ground combat or logistics differently than CMANO?

Yes. We'll probably need to do a dedicated article on this because the changes are significant.

It appears that roads become a feature and "terrain" to travel (I'm totally reading into the screenshots) … will bridges factor in?

This is looking great!

[DONNIE67]

Hi

I have a question regarding chains of war. Will all features be available or only those for the CE. I recall there were a few features like comms jamming that were reserved for Pro use.

Thank you and best wishes.

[cgn-9]

ORIGINAL: IainMcNeil

Just to answer some of the common questions

. . .

* There will be a significant incentive for players who want to upgrade from CMANO to CMO, so you will not be paying the full price if you already own CMANO. Details TBD.

Considering I bought CMANO a few weeks ago, this is welcome news indeed. [:)]

[magi]

i want this real bad..... hurry....

[ParachuteProne]

Sounds great!
In the current CMANO very few naval units can carry troops but in reality most naval units can carry some troops.
Even a small sub could land a squad or team.
Will this be reflected in the new game ?

[sfbaytf]

I’ll buy when it comes out. There is a YouTube video that talks about this.

Only thing missing is multiplayer

[LMychajluk]

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

ORIGINAL: Duck Doc
Is there a new mission planner in The King?

If you mean the AMP no, but there is an improved version of the existing one, with great emphasis on showing "just enough" options as relevant (e.g. don;t show settings for ships if the selected mission has only aircraft assigned). The aim is to avoid flooding the player with too many options and settings.

I hope that the missions can still be configured prior to assigning units, as I tend to do this. More often than not, I set up the mission, then (in the case of air bases or carriers), assign aircraft from the aircraft screen. Not having seen the new interface, if I have to create the mission, then close the mission window, assign the units from the aircraft window, and then go back into the mission window to set options that just appeared because of the units just assigned, it would seem like more work.

[Dimitris]

ORIGINAL: ParachuteProne
Sounds great!
In the current CMANO very few naval units can carry troops but in reality most naval units can carry some troops.
Even a small sub could land a squad or team.
Will this be reflected in the new game ?

This sounds like a DB request. Can you please post this on the DB3K & CWDB threads? Thanks.

[britten]

ORIGINAL: RodionHerrera

I have a feeling this will be a BIG debate in the coming months... on why CMO isn't an "upgrade" of CMANO (and by upgrade, meaning, current CMANO owners shouldn't pay for CMO in full and just pay a smaller amount instead because they feel they are just "upgrading" from being CMANO users), so here's my two cents. I actually like the fact that this is going to be a separate product, and I'm willing to shelve out money to get it.

The main reason I like that it's a new product is simple--it's completely re-written from the ground up, and thus the limitations of the old engine are gone--they took a more proactive route which means that this new engine looks forward and is more anticipatory of new miltech that might come out soon and need to be integrated into CMO. As a former computer science major, I do understand that sometimes, just trying to keep patching something up just to keep current or to keep bugs away, is not always a good solution--sometimes rewriting things from the ground up with more efficient code and algos can really make software shine.

Another reason is that I do like to see the old CMANO still exist as-is (and hopefully with continual support from Matrix/Slitherine/WS) because it's still a great game as it is.

One final reason why I like CMO to be a separate product is to support the devs. This is a niche product, and unlike what teenaged gamers nowadays want in a game, CMANO/CMO is not that "in demand" and thus I would think it's hard for a company like MatrixGames to really sell and market such a niche product, and they really need the support of the community so that they can keep on improving.

To those among you here who are fans of the ARMA series of games, this situation is akin to how Arma 2 users felt when Arma 3 was announced--they secretly wished that somehow, Arma 3 was just an "improvement" of Arma 2, and that they, the players wouldn't have to pay a FULL price for a new product and rather just pay a smaller fee and receive the new Arma 3 as an "upgrade"... that never happened, and I think it was for the good of the incoming product, and now it's clear that Arma 3 being a separate product that users pay separately for, was a good decision.

This is an excellent post. I totally agree and already reserved money for C:MO. I am sure it will be a great success.

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: AKar

Great, if somewhat unexpected news.

I wonder if the drop of specifier "Air/Naval" means that the level of simulation for proper ground ops will be more with the sequel. As the terrain map appears much improved, is the bathymetry improved as well for us who still like ships? In littoral combat where some naval emphasis appears to be today, higher resolution bathymetry - perhaps even ship draft being accounted for - would be benefitial.

Me too. I hope so.

TacView seems a must also. WOnder how much it will cost. TacView is what's making me really consider getting this. Better ground ops would seal the deal.

WW2 I'd bite your hand off:)

[AKar]

ORIGINAL: wodin

Me too. I hope so.

TacView seems a must also. WOnder how much it will cost.

Advanced version (with strategic view and some other coolness) is not exactly cheap at about 62 €, but I have other uses for it with flight simulation stuff, so that makes it very good deal for me.

[JPFisher55]

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

ORIGINAL: JPFisher55
I'm in. I'll buy it when released. Just curious, will CMO handle ground combat or logistics differently than CMANO?

Yes. We'll probably need to do a dedicated article on this because the changes are significant.

Great, eagerly waiting for CMO. Thx for answer to my question.

[tjhkkr]

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

ORIGINAL: Duck Doc
Is there a new mission planner in The King?

If you mean the AMP no, but there is an improved version of the existing one, with great emphasis on showing "just enough" options as relevant (e.g. don;t show settings for ships if the selected mission has only aircraft assigned). The aim is to avoid flooding the player with too many options and settings.

Will the mission editor allow programming ground units -- even rudimentary setting of speed, etc

I am SOOOOO looking forward to this.
Thank you Dimitris and staff!

[LORDPrometheus]

Will there by chance be the option to more easily save custom units in scenarios? The current system with SBR files is clunky and I've had endless issues with it. The ability to add data links to units in game the same way you can add magazines and weapon mounts just seems like a nice quality of life feature. For example if I want to make my own interpretation of the arsenal ship and give it full AEGIS and a couple hundred air to air missiles I want to be able to do so without adding lines to a text document

A further stretch of this is a sort of in game unit builder that let's you create a new unit from the ground up selecting size armor mass parts etc. This would basically be an in game modding tool. Since units only have icons and ate all essentially text files it does not seem like it would be too challenging to have custom units save locally for reuse and become a part of the mission file on export. This would give a huge amount of freedom for users making scenarios involving platforms not yet in game and would get around the understandable apprehension you have shown to modding so far by ensuring anyone could load up the scenario even with modified or new units and not have to worry about compatibility. A tool like this may even make your lives easier in terms of setting up and changing units quickly

[Filitch]

Great news!
Could someone of developers explain what exactly means:

New sim features:
- Realistic sub comms

Thanks in advance

[LORDPrometheus]

ORIGINAL: Filitch

Great news!
Could someone of developers explain what exactly means:

New sim features:
- Realistic sub comms

Thanks in advance

I'm guessing it means you won't have immediate real time communications with a submerged submarine and will instead get real time if they are close to the surface and can use SATCOM or slow comms replicating the slow low bandwidth of the ultra low frequency radio that they use to talk to submerged subs.

This does bring up the question or just how communications will work when they can be so readily disrupted. I worry it may turn subs into platforms that you just set on a mission and forget about because you can't directly control them. I guess a possible mechanic is to allow you to select a unit as your command platform and get full real-time from it and then delayed or disrupted comms from the rest

[Hoeist6634]

I am not all happy with the fact that you have to pay extra for Tacview and of course, wouldn't you forget, the game itself. I hope that the publishers will make some gesture towards the gamers in 'combining' this game with Tacview.

[LORDPrometheus]

ORIGINAL: Hoeist6634

I am not all happy with the fact that you have to pay extra for Tacview and of course, wouldn't you forget, the game itself. I hope that the publishers will make some gesture towards the gamers in 'combining' this game with Tacview.

TacView is a different program produced by a different company. Both had to work together to add the integration and both deserve to be paid for their product. TacView is an extra not a requisite you are not being asked to buy 2 games you are being offered one game and one extra piece of software. Owners of CMANO are also already getting a discount as it is so it will be fine

[tjhkkr]

ORIGINAL: LORDPrometheus

ORIGINAL: Hoeist6634
I am not all happy with the fact that you have to pay extra for Tacview and of course, wouldn't you forget, the game itself. I hope that the publishers will make some gesture towards the gamers in 'combining' this game with Tacview.

TacView is a different program produced by a different company. Both had to work together to add the integration and both deserve to be paid for their product. TacView is an extra not a requisite you are not being asked to buy 2 games you are being offered one game and one extra piece of software. Owners of CMANO are also already getting a discount as it is so it will be fine

Thank you for explaining that.
I am not sure if this 'Tacview' will add to game play or not. There is a lot to keep track of already. ALTHOUGH, I do not know what TACView means so maybe it would be useful.