Jump to content
Aquila-SmartWargames

Western Allies vs Soviets Expansion Module

Recommended Posts

Quote

A CM title that includes both Western forces and the Soviets would fantastic IMO.  My hope is that the last release for CMFB will be an equipment pack introducing Soviet forces/equipment into CMFB.  Call it meeting on the Elbe River or something.  Then the US, Commonwealth and Soviets would all be in the same Combat Mission game.   No BFC created scenarios would be needed.  Just an equipment pack of already designed equipment ported over from CMRT.  Scenario designers and mod creators could do all kinds of cold war, neo-colonialism stuff.  Patton goes east 1945, Fulda Gap 1948, Korea, Suez Crisis, etc.    Just put them in the same game. 

I saw this proposal by @MOS:96B2P in another thread with a rather unrelated topic and I wanted to give it a dedicated thread before it might get buried. I really like this idea as it would enable us to play CM in a new unique way and open up alot of opportunities for scenario & campaign designers.

 

I would not think twice about buying this and hope that it will be indeed considered at some point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC Steve even hinted once they might do it but it's all a matter of priorities as Battlefront can't do everything both they and us fans would like them to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd lean more towards something in the 1980-85 period myself when both NATO and the Warsaw Pact had a similar level of readiness for a major war. Around this time both sides were facing major junctions in terms of arms procurement and manpower balancing. Lots of old equipment was still in stock for the Warsaw Pact partners like the Mosin Nagant and T-34 at the same time the Russians were bringing out the gas-turbine powered T-80. The M1 Abrams and Leopard 2 had only just entered production and substantial numbers of M48 Pattons were still kitting out the Federal Republic's Panzer Brigades. 

Meanwhile many of the NATO signatories were finding it necessary to slash headcounts. France had effectively given up on Divisions and reorganized most of its Army around small Brigades. While Britain was progressively de-mechanizing BAOR (British Army on the Rhine), turning Armored Divisions back into Infantry Divisions because of the need to cut expenses. These soft de-mobilizations were a major reason the US was conducting its REFORGER exercises to quickly deploy III Corp to Europe, because it looked as if NATO wasn't going to be capable of composing a continuous front if war broke out in the 1980s. 

Edited by SimpleSimon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SimpleSimon said:

I'd lean more towards something in the 1980-85 period myself when both NATO and the Warsaw Pact had a similar level of readiness

I would also like this, especially since I served in the 1980s.  The reason to ask/petition/beg Battlefront for  a Soviet Forces equipment pack for the CMFB game family is that it (I think) would be easier to add an equipment pack (port over from CMRT) than to build a 1980s game from the ground up.  So maybe the time & resources vs profit would make it worth while.  I would think that they don't even have to make any scenarios for it.  Just put the existing Western & Eastern equipment & TOE in the same game.  Scenario designers could run wild with that. :)    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there would be a vote before Battlefront decides to begin the work with this DLC, or module what I should call it, I would definitely prefer the Red Army. The Western Allies are already present in FB with the US Army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it were to happen it wouldn't be a module, it would have to be an entirely new 'counterfactual' title. It would need a whole new backstory with strategic objectives for both sides spelled out. If they're going to go that far they might as well go full-on Cold War, push the date forward a few years and introduce M47s and T54s into the mix. What was an early US 'battle taxi'? The M75, I think. first entering service in 1952. I would imagine, though, that factions for each side would get upset about how 'their' side was being portrayed. "Side A is too weak! Side B is too strong!" :P

m75_with_troops_dismounted-741x464.jpg

Edited by MikeyD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

If it were to happen it wouldn't be a module, it would have to be an entirely new 'counterfactual' title. It would need a whole new backstory with strategic objectives for both sides spelled out. 

Backstory?  Strategic objectives?  Counterfactual? ........... Why? 

The more complicated this is the less likely it would be worth while to do.  

Port over CMRT Soviet TOE into CMFB.   Then sell it.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MikeyD said:

 I would imagine, though, that factions for each side would get upset about how 'their' side was being portrayed. "Side A is too weak! Side B is too strong!" :P

 

But that's happened unsurprisingly in CMBS but Battlefront did it anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MikeyD said:

If they're going to go that far they might as well go full-on Cold War, push the date forward a few years and introduce M47s and T54s into the mix. What was an early US 'battle taxi'? The M75, I think. first entering service in 1952

Ack now you are making it hard. The whole point of making the WW2 just kept going scenario is that BFC would have *all* the necessary models and formations because they would have to complete end of WW2 TO&E for the Soviets and the Allies already to go. If we just create a strategic back story for fighting to continue for six more months all that would be required would be the creation of the game and the amalgamation of resources from the CMRT and CMFB plus the creation of scenarios.

Once you start adding new cool units and reorganization of armies then it becomes a whole big thing :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, IanL said:

Ack now you are making it hard. The whole point of making the WW2 just kept going scenario is that BFC would have *all* the necessary models and formations because they would have to complete end of WW2 TO&E for the Soviets and the Allies already to go.

+1.  THIS!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've had experience before of Steve 'simply' doing projects. CMSF2 was originally 'simply' going to upgrade the CMSF1 game engine... except he completely redid the TO&E, reworked all the graphics, introduced new soldier models and animations, updated all the scenarios, and threw in an additional 200 QB maps, besides. He was 'simply' going to extend CMFI to war's end and wound up juggling eleven different nations and several subgroups, besides. In this case I'd imaging Steve would 'simply' port over The Russian to fight the allies... then he'd start thinking about the geopolitical ramifications, start researching weapons systems that were in the pipeline and war's end, and the whole project would snowball.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

We've had experience before of Steve 'simply' doing projects. CMSF2 was originally 'simply' going to upgrade the CMSF1 game engine... except he completely redid the TO&E, reworked all the graphics, introduced new soldier models and animations, updated all the scenarios, and threw in an additional 200 QB maps, besides. He was 'simply' going to extend CMFI to war's end and wound up juggling eleven different nations and several subgroups, besides. In this case I'd imaging Steve would 'simply' port over The Russian to fight the allies... then he'd start thinking about the geopolitical ramifications, start researching weapons systems that were in the pipeline and war's end, and the whole project would snowball.

Well, things change. After CMFI R2V 'One road too much' (they still ended up in Rome though), I guess a more simple project would be a nice challenge for a change 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As an example of how complicated a title like this can get, here's a pict of a cast hull M4A1 76mm with HVSS suspension. First shipped to Europe in April 45 but never saw combat. There's also the HVSS M4A3 105mm howitzer version that also never saw combat. Then there's the really obscure American Hybrid hull Sherman mounting the British 17 pounder! (GASP!) Also sent into the theater too late to see combat. On the Russian side there's the IS-3 of course but also the T-44 which was being produced but didn't seen combat. If this title were to start May 1945 then things get very complicated very quickly.

M4A1 HVSS.jpg

Edited by MikeyD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

 If this title were to start May 1945 then things get very complicated very quickly. 

The idea is this.  Take the already developed Soviet TOE in CMRT and port it over into CMFB.  May 1945 would be the end date.  NO extra work.  Just use what is already there. 

Maybe something to think about: CMFB starts in October 1944 and CMRT start in June 1944.  Would the entire CMRT June 44 to May 45 be ported over or just October 1944 to May 1945?  Both titles will at some point have the same end date but will have different start dates.  I vote for which ever is easier / quicker / simpler to do.        

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MikeyD said:

If it were to happen it wouldn't be a module, it would have to be an entirely new 'counterfactual' title. It would need a whole new backstory with strategic objectives for both sides spelled out. If they're going to go that far they might as well go full-on Cold War, push the date forward a few years and introduce M47s and T54s into the mix. What was an early US 'battle taxi'? The M75, I think. first entering service in 1952. I would imagine, though, that factions for each side would get upset about how 'their' side was being portrayed. "Side A is too weak! Side B is too strong!" :P

m75_with_troops_dismounted-741x464.jpg

Still in use in 1996 New York

EIoV4QAWoAgccDu?format=jpg&name=small

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/18/2020 at 4:14 PM, Aquila-SmartWargames said:

I would not think twice about buying this and hope that it will be indeed considered at some point. 

It wouldn't even need to be a full title, a forces expansion pack added to the top of Red Thunder or Final Blitzkrieg (basically just porting some OOB's and equipment from one title to the other), to allow scenario designers to make hypothetical scenarios would be welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, General Jack Ripper said:

It wouldn't even need to be a full title, a forces expansion pack added to the top of Red Thunder or Final Blitzkrieg (basically just porting some OOB's and equipment from one title to the other), to allow scenario designers to make hypothetical scenarios would be welcome.

+1.  THIS!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

It wouldn't even need to be a full title, a forces expansion pack added to the top of Red Thunder or Final Blitzkrieg (basically just porting some OOB's and equipment from one title to the other), to allow scenario designers to make hypothetical scenarios would be welcome.

Also + 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A release like this could be a good test to see if selling a product without any playable content will work...

If it is a succes maybe then it could be something to considder with regards to the future  eastern front releases...

releasing those games in two steps...

step 1 - a TOE/OOB pack for selected period

step 2 - a campaign, scenario pack

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...