Ant

I'm just playing through my first campaign game at the moment and I've been getting the impression that submarines are a bit overpowered to be honest. They should be little more than convoy raiders with minimal combat ability and yet my large surface forces lose a lot of strength to them. It seems a bit unrealistic to me. Why bother having battleships, cruisers and dreadnoughts when you can just churn out submarines.

I've always thought that the greatest problem in modifying units in games such as this was getting the AI to use them properly. I was a bit dissapointed at the lack of Mountain troops, but if they aren't coded in to the game then the AI won't be able to use them properly anyway. It sort of makes them pointless.

ok. Thanks for the reply. I'm sure I'll enjoy this game anyway. Mountain troops or not

Exactly. For all the part played by marines in WW1 then multiply that by ten for the role played by mountain troops. When I looked at the unit list for this game I was happy to see marines in there, until I noticed that there was no mountain troops. I simply can't see why you'd include marines in a WW1 game but not mountain troops.

Thanks for the info. That's great. Any chance of putting some mountain troops in?

Hi Bill Thanks for the reply. Yes, I'm aware of roles played by marines in WW1 but, as you mentioned, it was never a big role. On the other hand Mountain divisions played a huge part in the fighting in the mountainous regions of the Italian and Balkan theatres. Most of the major European nations involved in WW1 had very large specialised Mountain formations, they were pretty de rigueur during the WW1 period. I suppose I'm not really questioning the inclusion of marines as much as the exclusion of mountain troops essentially. I think they're far more deserving of a role in a strategic WW1 game than marines are. If we can get both then great, if it's an either/or then we should have mountain troops without doubt.

Just looking at the unit list and I see marines there. Odd choice for WW1 I wasn't aware that there were really any major actions involving marines. Gallipoli, the biggest amphibious operation, was mainly standard infantry. On the other hand there was quite a lot of use of mountain troops on both the Italian and balkans fronts, yet they aren't in. I'd have thought that mountain troops were a far more appropriate unit to have included instead of marines. Are we being a bit Americanocentric with this game?

Yeah, I know; a bit premature given that the game has only just been announced, but I don't really constantly check up on game developments, so if possible is there any estimate as to when I should check back on this to see if it's close to release? As it's based on an existing engine I should imagine it will take considerably less time that a 'from scratch' game but I've still no idea how long that'll be: three months, six months, a year?

The best portrayal of urban warfare I've ever played was the old original classic Xcom game 'UFO enemy unknown' Well modelled towns, buildings with stairs, rooms, plenty of areas that you could blow up. Even civilians getting in the way so you couldn't just toss a grenade blindly into a house...well, you could, but it was considered a bit naughty to kill civilians Yes, I know it's not strictly speaking a wargame, but I'm surprised that not a single game released since has come even close to such a great depiction of urban combat.

Games releases seem to have become more cyclical too. A few years ago I'd buy one game a month, and there was always something around to buy that I'd like. Now I can go months without buying a single game, because nothing interests me....then about four good games will all be released at the same time.

I won't be buying CMSF. It was a huge disappointment for me when the details of the game's setting were finally made known. Not that I don't like modern day combat, I do, but US V Syria If they were going to delve into the realms of the hypothetical then they could have come up with something far more interesting than this. The only reason I can think for the choice made is that BFC are hoping to sell it to the US army as a tactical simulator. If that happens and they make big money out of it then good for them, maybe they can then make a game with more appeal, or bring out the promised add-on modules to expand it into something more interesting.

I have to say that that's one of the most eloquent and enlightening vents I've ever read.

No. Not me. I just go there for the airshows.

Thanks for the info. They've got a load of stuff like this up at Duxford, as I'm sure Shmavis will attest

As well as Moscow I stayed in Rostov. Good hotel, dirt cheap and lots of stuff to see and do. I found eating out in Moscow was very cheap too, but then we usually ate out well away from the city centre in one of the suburbs, where we were staying in an old soviet era appartment block. Even in the centre of Moscow the food was only about the same as I'd pay at home.