Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I can't wait to see what toys the Uncon Forces get in the new engine.....We already know they have on map mortars (WooYay!  :D ), but what else will we find that's new?  MANPADS perhaps?  I'm intrigued to see their force structure, what Specialist Teams do they have?  How about Individual Vehicles?  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I can't wait to see what toys the Uncon Forces get in the new engine.....We already know they have on map mortars (WooYay!  :D ), but what else will we find that's new?  MANPADS perhaps?  I'm intrigued to see their force structure, what Specialist Teams do they have?  How about Individual Vehicles?  :ph34r:

I am totally blowing the NDA, but they have nukes.... okay not really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/06/2018 at 6:59 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

The definition of terrorism has been twisted beyond all recognition by the media in recent years.....Hitler (accurately) used the term "terrorist' to describe both Commandos & Resistance/Partisan forces. 

I would be more than happy to both play and write scenarios for any of these Unconventional Forces were they made available to me in the CM engine.....Small units blowing big units to pieces always makes me smile!  ;)

Actually, in academia the definition of terrorism is fairly well defined; it refers to violence committed by non-military actors against non-military and/or civilian targets, with the direct victims not usually the ultimate target. So Commandos and Resistance/Partisans attacking military targets are emphatically not terrorists. Quelle surprise, Hitler was wrong.

 

A helpful source is attached.

The Revised Academic Consensus Definition of Terrorism.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn...I am sorry for opening this Pandora's box.

I'm a terrorist, you're a terrorist, we all terrorists. Excpet for man of war under 51, he no terrorist, he a LEXICON

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, BrotherSurplice said:

Actually, in academia the definition of terrorism is fairly well defined; it refers to violence committed by non-military actors against non-military and/or civilian targets, with the direct victims not usually the ultimate target. So Commandos and Resistance/Partisans attacking military targets are emphatically not terrorists. Quelle surprise, Hitler was wrong.

 

A helpful source is attached.

The Revised Academic Consensus Definition of Terrorism.pdf

Thanks for the .pdf. In your summary you have missed 'illegal state repression', which is mentioned in the .pdf. The .pdf also opens with the statement ''Terrorism is a contested concept", rightly so imo. 

To get back to the subject and why I agree with Kozlice: irregular forces supportive of the Iranian regime operating inside Iran against military forces of belligerent nations hostile to Iran, are not to be called terrorists. Whatever the tactics they use, be it kamikaze strikes etc. Besides, when a Syrian in The Netherlands cuts down a few people with a knife while under psychosis he's a terrorist. While if depressed Hendrik-Jan guns down a bunch of people at the mall with a semi-auto rifle, he's just a psycho. Find the differences! :)

Anywayz,
For the next CM I would like a modern(ish) ERA with Chinese forces simulated. For example a hypothetical invasion of Taiwan, and a chance for US 'vacationers' (among others) to show up. :)

Edited by Lethaface

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Besides, when a Syrian in The Netherlands cuts down a few people with a knife while under psychosis he's a terrorist. While if depressed Hendrik-Jan guns down a bunch of people at the mall with a semi-auto rifle, he's just a psycho. Find the differences! :)

This is kind of an old myth that keeps going around.

I've read several news reports about white guys killing random people and then being called terrorists, and people from other ethnic backgrounds killing random people and being called mentally ill.

One example is the Iranian who shot and killed nine people in Munich in 2016: "Police say he was a depressed loner receiving psychiatric treatment" according to The Telegraph.

In the end, what the media calls a shooter usually depends on whether the person did in fact have a known mental illness and was under psychosis, or if he acted on religious or political urges.

Edited by Bulletpoint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
22 hours ago, Sulomon said:

Squarehead what's with the uncon obsession.  You talk about them a lot.

My guess is he's looking at the scenario potential (within and) outside of the SF setting. The more updated they are (equipment wise) the more options there'll be for other wars/situations/settings. This is the kind of stuff that wargamers who create, think about: options, options, options. The more there are the more that can be done. Take a look at all the scenario threads in the SF forum. No more an obsession than people talking about the Germans, Soviets, US, Russians etc. all the time.

 

Mord.

Edited by Mord

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Not very.

Such a game would require a completely new engine, even a completely new kind of engine. I mean, talk about switching horses in midstream! Geesh!

Now, between you and me, I would love a naval game done to BFC's high standards, but BFC is up to their elbows just trying to complete the game families before we are all too old to remember what wargames are and why we cared about them.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Lethaface said:

For example a hypothetical invasion of Taiwan, and a chance for US 'vacationers' (among others) to show up.

It might be a bit challenging to try to pass off the USN Seventh Fleet as merely vacationers out to get a good tan.

[With tongue in cheek.]

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎6‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 6:28 AM, Sulomon said:

Squarehead what's with the uncon obsession.  You talk about them a lot.

Unconventional asymmetric warfare is my primary area of interest, if LRDG/Commandos/Resistance/Partisans etc. were available in the WWII games I'd be writing scenarios for & against them too.....As it is these forces are presently only to be found in CM:SF & CM:A, so that's where I spend most of my time.  ;)

These older games are somewhat limited in what they can do, simply due to lack of AI groups and so on, which can make scripting convincing unconventional warfare scenarios a bit challenging, but CM:SF2 will offer the full spectrum of tools.....Why wouldn't I be excited?  :rolleyes:

I know you prefer head to head play, but maybe give Ashsh Al-Dababir a go.....Hopefully you'll see what I'm trying to achieve, a fun, challenging scenario against the AI that's a bit different to the norm.....In that one I've had to use more OpFor than I'd ideally like, in the new engine I can use less, better.  B)

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2018 at 10:46 PM, Bulletpoint said:

This is kind of an old myth that keeps going around.

I've read several news reports about white guys killing random people and then being called terrorists, and people from other ethnic backgrounds killing random people and being called mentally ill.

One example is the Iranian who shot and killed nine people in Munich in 2016: "Police say he was a depressed loner receiving psychiatric treatment" according to The Telegraph.

In the end, what the media calls a shooter usually depends on whether the person did in fact have a known mental illness and was under psychosis, or if he acted on religious or political urges.

Well in my country recently (and earlier) I've observed the exact opposite. It is all just anecdotal though, I don't know about any statistical facts and obviously this isn't a true/false thing that goes for all instances. Anyway I should probably digress about the subject since this is not the right forum for it, but I don't think that some form of xenophobic bias regarding Arabs/Muslims etc and terrorism is a myth in our societies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/11/2018 at 8:56 PM, Kozlice said:

Damn...I am sorry for opening this Pandora's box.

I'm a terrorist, you're a terrorist, we all terrorists. Excpet for man of war under 51, he no terrorist, he a LEXICON

You´re welcome, don´t be too hard on yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/12/2018 at 2:39 PM, Michael Emrys said:

It might be a bit challenging to try to pass off the USN Seventh Fleet as merely vacationers out to get a good tan.

[With tongue in cheek.]

Michael

The greatest challenge ever perhaps? Sounds like you have just the right man for the job! At least it would be a (great) chance to outdo Putin, something someone might consider of great importance. I see your green man, and raise you with these blue man!

[Great tongue in greater cheek].

Edited by Lethaface

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well to be fair theres

CMANO

DCS added the F18 and naval ops are going to be greatly enhanced

That Battle of the Atlantic turn based game

Cold Waters ( yes i know its not ww2)

plus mods for SH3 and 4 imcluding one where you control surface ships.

If anything naval warfare is pretty well represented in the realism front. while it seems we have a plethora of ground based strat games most are jokes realism wise...

 

And Im not even big on sea games 

 

Edited by Sublime

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×