Dear Devs, can you please make more of the new sim features optional?

[Gizzmoe]

Sounds like all is well then. Glad that didn't blow up into a thing.

Lol, yes Like I said, I never had a problem with all that to begin with, the devs don't owe me shit, and I am deeply relaxed about the new features for myself.

But I also try to see it from a customer and customer support standpoint. I assume at least 80% of all CMO players use the current Stable and are not aware of how incredibly massive the gameplay changes are going to be in the next stable version, 80%+ have never tried the last betas. There will be complaints. Those can be limited by giving the CMO folks in-game options.

[BDukes]

Sounds like all is well then. Glad that didn't blow up into a thing.

Lol, yes Like I said, I never had a problem with all that to begin with, the devs don't owe me shit, and I am deeply relaxed about the new features for myself.

But I also try to see it from a customer and customer support standpoint. I assume at least 80% of all CMO players are not aware of how incredibly massive the gameplay changes are going to be in the next stable version, 80%+ have never tried the last betas. There will be complaints. Those can be limited by giving the CMO folks in-game options.

Yeah and nobody can fault you for that.

There could be a significant support impact by adding a lot of options. More points of failure would be added (did you turn this on, that off, back and forth etc., etc). I don't care as much about the biz as support people and devs are paid to do it but do care a lot about the expectations put on volunteer scenario authors.

M

[Gizzmoe]

There could be a significant support impact by adding a lot of options.

Yes, but this is not about adding a lot of options, it's about just two options for two major "hardcore" things. The radar changes and the speed bleedoff.

I don't care as much about the biz as support people and devs are paid to do it

It's not that simple, complaints are going to land in this forum as well, and some unpaid community members are going invest their spare time trying to help.

but do care a lot about the expectations put on volunteer scenario authors.

Yes. To all the ones having expectations to scen designers: Don't expect anything, do it yourself if you can or want

[BDukes]

There could be a significant support impact by adding a lot of options.

Yes, but this is not about adding a lot of options, it's about just two options for two major "hardcore" things. The radar changes and the speed bleedoff.

Oh I see. Two changes is probably fine.

I don't care as much about the biz as support people and devs are paid to do it

It's not that simple, complaints are going to land in this forum as well, and some unpaid community members are going invest their spare time trying to help.

Eh. Options will generate more. If its only two more though, who cares I guess.

but do care a lot about the expectations put on volunteer scenario authors.

Yes. To all the ones having expectations to scen designers: Don't expect anything, do it yourself if you can or want

No that's a bit cold and doesn't really reflect the relationship. I'd say just have fair expectations for people that are providing you a couple of hours fun for free

[thewood1]

I have both versions. I keep the Steam version up to current release and use the Matrix version for public beta. But, as most people know, its relatively easy to keep the Steam version on the beta cutting edge.

[Gizzmoe]

I have both versions. I keep the Steam version up to current release and use the Matrix version for public beta.

Perfect solution. I hope when the next Stable releases the devs add an option to Steam to keep the previous Stable.

[thewood1]

Can't you stop it from upgrading? I have done that with other games. I have to tell it to update. There's a setting for that.

edit: Just checked and the option to run not updated isn't there on Steam any more. Years ago I know it used to be there because I ran ARMA 2 that way. Now even if you say not to upgrade, it upgrades when you launch the game. Well...another vote for buying from Matrix.

[Gizzmoe]

Now even if you say not to upgrade, it upgrades when you launch the game.

Yes, that totally sucks. Some devs provide a fallback version, some don't.

[Easy301]

Sounds like all is well then. Glad that didn't blow up into a thing.

Lol, yes Like I said, I never had a problem with all that to begin with, the devs don't owe me shit, and I am deeply relaxed about the new features for myself.

But I also try to see it from a customer and customer support standpoint. I assume at least 80% of all CMO players use the current Stable and are not aware of how incredibly massive the gameplay changes are going to be in the next stable version, 80%+ have never tried the last betas. There will be complaints. Those can be limited by giving the CMO folks in-game options.

To be fair this isn't the first set of majors changes introduced. Command has gotten consistent updates and its features have evolved for years and years, it's yet to be a major issue. Sure there's going to be a learning curve and people will have to adjust some of the way they play to account for the changes, but that's absolutely never been an issue before and that's going to happen regardless of if there's options or not.

For large features options are good but it's a bad idea to add those options when it comes to reworks of sensors and simulation modeling imho.

You're approaching from a player perspective and I'm trying to do the same. At the risk of repeating myself, a current player and especially a new player shouldn't have to learn multiple missile performance models or radar models, or sonar models just because implementing the more realistic of the models would have to cause people to learn further or adjust tactics. The new players have to learn anyway and the advance players will have the knowledge and foundations to pretty quickly pick up on these new changes.

I'm genuinely, respectfully asking, because maybe you'll have some feedback I haven't thought of; I've pointed out some of the cons but what do you think are some of the positives for making -specifically- the realism changes when it comes to radar and missiles models optional?

If one of the points of wanting to make things optional is due to the fact that players will have a hard time learning the changes, (which again, historically hasn't been the case, compare the feature set of V1 or CMANO to the current CMO version.) wouldn't it be worse, more complex and more daunting for new players and current players alike to have learn and keep track of multiple models for extremely complex parts of the simulation?Parts that can drastically change the way you'll play and your tactics from scenario to scenario?

I'd say the absolute vast majority of the community is extremely receptive to and wanting to learn those changes if they increase the realism and fidelity of the simulation. It's why most of us buy into a platform inherently complex as this, a platform and genre that has historically grown, evolved, and changed sometimes massively in it's systems, all for the better.

Edit: I'm not asking these questions or making this long post in an argumentative way or to "win" an argument. I love Command and like hearing other people perspectives, I know I can be a bit long-windes when expressing myself so apologies. I don't know it all of course though and maybe there are some reasons to implement these things in options which would genuinely make it a better game for all users. Again, Command is my favorite game and I really enjoy discussing the many parts of it and it's development.

[Gizzmoe]

To be fair this isn't the first set of majors changes introduced. Command has gotten consistent updates and its features have evolved for years and years, it's yet to be a major issue. Sure there's going to be a learning curve and people will have to adjust some of the way they play to account for the changes, but that's absolutely never been an issue before and that's going to happen regardless of if there's options or not.

"absolutely never been an issue before"? Just asking, are you really in the position to judge that? Fwiw, I play that shit for 30+ years since Harpoon, and I don't recall ever seeing such an amount of drastic, and good, changes between two Stables. Maybe I simply forgot, someone please remind me.

what do you think are some of the positives for making -specifically- the realism changes when it comes to radar and missiles models optional?

I mentioned it before, it's compatibility reasons. Those two changes influence the design of existing scenarios very much.

[Gizzmoe]

I know I can be a bit long-windes when expressing myself so apologies.

Yes, and that's why Gainful wrote that "Calm down, you're getting waaaaaaay too deep into this, you didn't need to write a thesis about it" thing. I thought the same I appreciate your thoughts though, you were right with everything you said, you just didn't take into account certain aspects that are important to gamers.

[Easy301]

I know I can be a bit long-windes when expressing myself so apologies.

Yes, and that's why Gainful wrote that "Calm down, you're getting waaaaaaay too deep into this, you didn't need to write a thesis about it" thing. I thought the same I appreciate your thoughts though, you were right with everything you said, you just didn't take into account certain aspects that are important to gamers.

I appreciate your side and thoughts as well. Consider my input on the matter done as I think everything that can be said or expressed has been, at least from my end.

Happy wargaming.

[Gizzmoe]

No that's a bit cold and doesn't really reflect the relationship. I'd say just have fair expectations for people that are providing you a couple of hours fun for free

Yeah, thats sounds warmer, but the end result is the same There won't be many updated scens, and it will take quite some time... *shrug*

[Gizzmoe]

I appreciate your side and thoughts as well. Consider my input on the matter done as I think everything that can be said or expressed has been, at least from my end.

Not everything has been expressed from your end. Since you were very vocal against the idea ("I don't like this idea one bit") I would like to hear your opinion about what I and other "Pro-Choice" guys had to say about that. Compatibility issues, unbalancing scenarios? What's your take on that???

[BDukes]

No that's a bit cold and doesn't really reflect the relationship. I'd say just have fair expectations for people that are providing you a couple of hours fun for free

Yeah, thats sounds warmer, but the end result is the same There won't be many updated scens, and it will take quite some time... *shrug*

Yes.

CMO Federal Case 17364648 Closed.

Have a nice weekend!

Mike

[Gizzmoe]

Looool Thanks, dito

[Easy301]

I appreciate your side and thoughts as well. Consider my input on the matter done as I think everything that can be said or expressed has been, at least from my end.

Not everything has been expressed from your end. Since you were very vocal against the idea ("I don't like this idea one bit") I would like to hear your opinion about what I and other "Pro-Choice" guys had to say about that. Compatibility issues, unbalancing scenarios? What's your take on that???

I express a good deal about how I felt regarding the subjects above and answer those questions for the most part in my first thesis.

I'll keep this short and then be done as there's nothing else I can possibly say on this subject. Especially if people won't take the time to read what I write due to it's length. In my defense of the long posts, it is a nuanced subject.

Community created content, its balance and its compatibility is of the utmost importance in a game like this, I'd go as far as to say it's the absolute foundation that supports the longevity, growth and evolution of Command just as much as the developers do, and it's always been that way in the hobby.

Hell, we wouldn't even have Command today if not directly for the support and building of the Harpoon community and their community content.

I personally just don't think adding various system reworks - alternative sonar, radar, missile models as options is the answer to keeping community content balanced and compatible in the long run. Like I've expressed and given examples of, I think it would actively hurt the most valuable thing Command or any platform of this nature has always had: it's community and its content from that community.

Segmenting and fragmenting that content, the community and the environment they play in by not keeping certain things global and consistent, such as the ways radar, tracking, sonar and missiles work and instead implementing multiple optional variations of those things I think would be if not a disaster, then a big mess.

[thewood1]

I think I'm still aloowed to post here. Not sure, but here goes...

"Segmenting and fragmenting that content, the community and the environment they play in by not keeping certain things global and consistent"

This is how we ended up with CMO. Harpoon got hacked and people could suddenly create their own dbs. It led to a highly fragmented, chaotic, and antagonistic community. That led to the warfaresims guys going out and building their own game. I suspect anything that fragments the content creation beyond their control will have a hard time getting done.

[Gizzmoe]

I personally just don't think adding various system reworks - alternative sonar, radar, missile models as options is the answer to keeping community content balanced and compatible in the long run.

No, it's not the answer, and it's not supposed to be the answer The alternative for some CMO gamers to not having options for certain new sim features would be to use an older version of CMO for a while though, until scenarios have been updated. There's nothing wrong with using an old version per se, thewood1 suggested that already, but that's a segmentation and fragmention of the community as well.

[SunlitZelkova]

I fail to see the issue with just using an older DB version/update of the game.

Does Steam automatically update? With the Matrix purchase you start with the original release and could pick whatever update you wish to use.

I think the level of optional features is healthy right now. We are already getting sea state affecting speed as optional. I don’t think having realism settings for things like sensor and aircraft performance would make sense, as CMO has always been trying to push the limit on realism.

I’m not saying the other position is outrageous or unreasonable, but it doesn’t seem like it fits with the way this game works.