Omenowl

Yes, I know it is excessively large to do this for a 2 hour game, but I have 200 gig worth of disk space that is not being used. It would be nice to have the ability to have after action reviews of your tactics and plans based upon what was occurring. It would also be nice to have 2 options: The first is god mode where you can watch everything without fog of war; the second is you can watch as one player or the other. Ideally, you could switch between either player or god mode at anytime during the replay. All this in real time with rewind, fast forward and maybe the ability to skip scenes (ie 15 seconds or 1 minute time frames). I know this is not an ideal comparison, but warcraft 3 had this ability. I also know Total War had this ability (though their's was not a true replay).

I believe they changed the age for OCS to 39. That is what I was told when I looked into the national guard in 2005.

Temperate zone with modern Nato vs. Russian type units would be great. The type of game I always wanted...

They seemed to get a bit more accurate in 1.08...

I would like to see a unit roster. It reminds me of the old xcom games where you could see see the status of your soldiers. I don't expect any meaningful experience or promotions or even awards, but it would be nice to see all the ranks and names of all of your troops in a campaign. I do understand that is very problematic for very large forces, however for a company or maybe even a battalion sized force it would be kind of cool to see the status of your vehicles, troops, etc. Maybe it would be up to the scenario designer to allow for % chance of repair or replacements. A heavily decimated squad would allow the survivors to integrate back into other depleted units.

I do think protection of certain units should be worth more purely for the scenario. Tasks such as your job is to protect a group of translators. Casualties to the translators count more than others. Same with higher level commanders. Losing your CO or Battalion commander should count more than losing your squad leader. This helps more realistic tactics by understanding and placing your units in more realistic conditions. It also gives the enemy more incentive to attack an area if they find a high profile target (IE Prince William would have been a major relations issue if he was captured more than say his Battalion Commander).

I hope we will have anti air or SAMs. It is nice that sometimes your forces have air protection from planes.

It is family tradition to join the military. His grandfather was part of the sugargliders during Normandy, his father helped defend the country from red squirrels during the cold war and this little guy is just getting tired of the first sergeant breaking his nuts every day...

I like the ability for two different views. One is an extended battle. This was more CMx1 style where the battle took place over days in the same area. I would like to see burned out hulks and recovery of wounded, equipment replenishment, etc. Victory is determined at the end of the extended battle. The second is for a more comprehensive campaign system where you could reuse regions depending on how the campaign was progressing. A loss might mean a player goes back a map or a victory means they go forward a map with the date changing (ie weather, temperature, etc fluctuates depending on the date) . A final total of victory and success would be determined at the end of the campaign. This allows one to simulate German successes in the Eastern front, but if the player is slowed down then suddenly they are hit by terrible weather later in the campaign. I would like to see extended battles.

Thanks for the response Steve. It was a joke, but it would have been interesting to see WW2 vs. Modern weapons. China vs. Taiwan would be cool. A lot of us equipment vs. chinese/russian equipment. Perhaps Russians vs. Georgia or the Ukraine.

Hey Steve, Purely as a lark would it be possible if you have both the WW2 version and CMSF if you could have the two forces fight each other? I would be happy if you could get a Mac OSX version so I don't have to use visa to play on my macbook pro.

I am actually looking forward to a Mac version. I got a macbook pro within the last month and find I prefer using it to my xp desktop. Admittedly, the mac dual boots with vista, but after being underwhelmed by vista I would rather just play the mac version.

I admit I bought CMBO, but didn't buy CMBB. I actually bought 3 copies of CMBO (one for my father, 1 full price for myself and another copy for 5 dollars for myself). It is unfair, but the demo was just not as much fun as that with CMBO. Graphics were a bit more displeasing so just didn't muster up enough focus to buy CMAK or CMBB. CMAK I played the hell out of the demo, and should have bought, but was hoping the price would drop a bit. Then I found out CMSF was coming out and didn't buy it at all. It is quite unfair, but I do prefer modern combat over WW2.

If you want squads to "split up" when it is not part of their TOE then I would recommend using a distance limitation. Squad components would be unable to move further than X action spots away. I honestly see this being more hassle than it is worth. CMSF is about company engagements rather than being a squad leader so micromanaging squads seems to go into the wrong unrealistic direction.

I don't think this game has invalidated the infantry by any means. The vision of armor is poor and infantry with anti-tank weapons are absolutely devestating. Anything that confines movement and has places where infantry can hide makes unsupported armor suicide. Better maps are what is needed to make infantry more valuable. Same could be said for CMBO. I can do a flat piece of ground or at least LOS of up to 1000 meters in either CMSF and CMBO and in either case armor dominates.