animalshadow Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 Lol View from the Axis side explained everything. P.S Thanks for your answers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 7, 2013 Share Posted April 7, 2013 sburke, I knew the Germans had smokeless/flashless powder (will BFC ever model it?), but is that Panzerschreck powered by compressed air? I see no evidence it uses propellants! animalshadow, The first part of your sig reads like the SEAL Creed(?) read at Kris Kyle's remembrance ceremony at Cowboy Stadium. I saw and heard it movingly read on TV. And it rang in my brain anew when I read your sig. Are you a SEAL, former SEAL or know people in that elite circle? Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animalshadow Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Are you a SEAL, former SEAL or know people in that elite circle? Sorry, but no 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted April 10, 2013 Share Posted April 10, 2013 sburke, I knew the Germans had smokeless/flashless powder (will BFC ever model it?), but is that Panzerschreck powered by compressed air? I see no evidence it uses propellants! John Kettler Would be nice but probably not essential given the level we are playing at. I am happy enough without that specific feature. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of Charlemagne Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 Hi, Sorry if this question has already been asked; will we see destructible buildings/terrain in the 3.0 engine?, and when are you going to make the transition to 3.0? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 Hi, Sorry if this question has already been asked; will we see destructible buildings/terrain in the 3.0 engine?, Yes! As sure as there's a God in heaven, AD. ....and when are you going to make the transition to 3.0? BF doesn't generally respond to questions like this. Especially if you've got a low post count. For example, '1'. Guesstimate: toward the end of the year. With the first installment of the Eastern Front series. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 BF doesn't generally respond to questions like this. Mainly, I suspect, because they themselves don't know the answer yet. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpratt88 Posted April 15, 2013 Share Posted April 15, 2013 If I remember right...battlefront had said that 3.0 would come out towards the end of the year with the next modern war title...but I would say given that Gustav Line is about to come out and we have not seen Market Garden yet...I would assume that we will not see the modern war title with the 3.0 until the first qtr of next year... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Guy Posted April 16, 2013 Share Posted April 16, 2013 I am not sure I understand the question. Do we not already have destructible terrain? Trees Buildings Fences Shell holes or were you referring to other types of terrain? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Am not sure if CM: NATO's in this thread, but if so, this should give prospective players something to think about. This is the manufacturer's (Splav) vid for the 300mm SMERCH MLRS. Note well the submunitions, SFWs, rocket delivered UAV for targeting and other high tech misery. I first heard about such capabilities in 1985! Anyone here wildly anxious to come under laser guided 122mm rocket fire? Also dates to same period. People all worked up about MLRS, ATACMs, CBU-97 and such need to understand that if Russia's in the fight, the tech available is broadly similar and, in some cases, surpasses ours in deployed systems. Oh, and they outnumber us! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agusto Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 Humans are most creative when it comes to blowing each other up. The artillery delivered UAV was what impressed me most in this video. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 18, 2013 Share Posted April 18, 2013 But for those dying for the GPW, may I present Russia's "Tank Overhauling" equivalent show? ISU-152! IS-2 I'd rather hear this one roar and snort, but the tank's movement and accompanying music make splendid martial poetry. Amazing how well it hides! agusto, It could be fairly argued that the very best of human genius has gone into weapons and warfare. Our progress there, if you can call it that, has been beyond incredible. That UAV is a brilliant idea, and I forgot the thermobaric warhead option. Toys must have a full range of accessories! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
$Pec5 Posted April 19, 2013 Share Posted April 19, 2013 I cannot even look as far in advance as 3.0 There is a lot of exciting releases scheduled prior to the 3.0 engine! Eastern Front, and Market Garden, primarily 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 For the drooling over NATO crowd (myself among same), take a look at this. Not only is it a visual tutorial on the tanks (unless Russophone), but it covers the defensive systems, starting with Drozd, in a way which absolutely staggers the mind. Soviet/Russian survivability tests, live fire field tests vs. AT 3-4, SPG-9, RPG-7. How Shtora and Arena work. Inside their ERA. Installation and firing trials. Spectacular aftermath. Bonus: WW II tank maskirovka, multiband camouflage system Nakidka and more! Russian Tank Technology (treadhead must see!) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQzeynBZlfw Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quintus Sertorius Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 Has anyone ever considered a CM Korean War game? That could be interesting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 Has anyone ever considered a CM Korean War game? That could be interesting. Nope, not at all http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=109530&highlight=Korea Personally I'd like it, but it is definitely one of those that is not to everyone's taste. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted June 8, 2013 Share Posted June 8, 2013 A near future Korean War would be very interesting (as would Israeli wars) but highly unlikely due to political correctness etc. The historical situation would be great for an operational game (since airpower was such a huge part) but seemed a very unpleasant experience tactically on the ground. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 A near future Korean War conventional war wargame would be utterly boring. The North Koreans would make it seem as if Saddam Hussein's Iraqi Army and Airforce (either the 1991 or 2003 editions) were competent. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 AtheistDane, Welcome to your overt presence here! To answer your question, I believe this is something BFC would like to see, but it's not merely the work on the coding and graphics end, but the huge hit on the CPU and video card for the customer. We're talking about very complex modeling in a game which already tracks every single bullet that's fired. With terrain being rendered in 8m AS (Action Spots) and elevation resolved to the meter, the computational demands are simply enormous, in turn killing frame rate on many computers. This is why BFC has provided us with numerous options on scene rendering, anti-aliasing and other issues. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aragorn2002 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 A near future Korean War conventional war wargame would be utterly boring. The North Koreans would make it seem as if Saddam Hussein's Iraqi Army and Airforce (either the 1991 or 2003 editions) were competent. Again I would like to ask everone's attention for the next CM option; a confrontation between the western allies and the Red army in the summer of 1945. Based on the Red Gambit series of Colin Gee (http://www.redgambitseries.com/) it would be a great formula for a CM game. These books are very, very well written. Apart from that I still would like to see a CM game about the continuation of WW2 in Europe in 1946, with new German, allied and Russian vehicles and weapons. Korea? No, not my cup of tea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wodin Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 A near future Korean War conventional war wargame would be utterly boring. The North Koreans would make it seem as if Saddam Hussein's Iraqi Army and Airforce (either the 1991 or 2003 editions) were competent. Thats not what the pentagon think...300,000 allied casualties in first few weeks.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 A Korean War game could 1 Be set with any date from the 1970s to the near future with a mix of equipment for both sides suited to that date 2 Involve Chinese and perhaps even Russian intervention 3 Include South Korean, Japanese and perhaps even Taiwanese allies (so you get to do a Chinese invasion of Taiwan or Japan as a bonus) 4 Allow for winter warfare in all those frozen Korean paddy fields Yes the North Koreans would probably lose if the US was involved but it would likely be a hard fought conflict due to the often difficult forested and mountainous terrain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Again I would like to ask everone's attention for the next CM option; a confrontation between the western allies and the Red army in the summer of 1945. Based on the Red Gambit series of Colin Gee (http://www.redgambitseries.com/) it would be a great formula for a CM game. These books are very, very well written. Apart from that I still would like to see a CM game about the continuation of WW2 in Europe in 1946, with new German, allied and Russian vehicles and weapons. Korea? No, not my cup of tea. I'd love the setting, but Colin Gee as a writer? Nah I have read through a couple and finally gave up as his writing is so utterly horrible. The Native American diving into close combat with... tomahawks? It was more like a description of a Conan character, but without Howards ability to actually write. And that is only the most blatant of his two dimensional characters. I tried to ignore the characters and concentrate on the battles as scenarios, but it was just too much. Still yeah I would love to see an East West conflict in 1945/6. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 Thats not what the pentagon think...300,000 allied casualties in first few weeks.. Allied casualties as in soldiers? I find that to be a ridiculously high estimate. When the Korean war began, the S Korean army was pretty much overrun and had no armor to combat N Korean tanks. Later the forces of the PRC surprised the UN forces with a massive intervention. Despite those two opportunities to inflict lop sided casualties, the total casualty count for several years of war was: According to the data from the U.S. Department of Defense, the United States suffered 33,686 battle deaths, along with 2,830 non-battle deaths during the Korean War and 8,176 missing in action.[251] South Korea reported some 373,599 civilian and 137,899 military deaths.[9] Western sources estimate the PVA suffered about 400,000 killed and 486,000 wounded, while the KPA suffered 215,000 killed and 303,000 wounded.[24] I find it difficult to believe that the NKPA could do better now and the likelihood that China would intervene on their behalf is pretty low compared to the geo political situation in the 1950s. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted June 9, 2013 Share Posted June 9, 2013 A "Patton vs. Zhukov" special module for either the Bulge or the Bagration game would be sweet, and sort of what the modular system is made for. Although it could be hard for BFC to tell if there's any money in it - but since they're working simultaneously on the end-of-war in both west and east fronts (and Italy), once they have both covered to May 1945 adding either Russians to Bulge or Yanks to Bagration should be trivial. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.