c3k

Um, To IMPROVE the game? Ken

DaveH, Amusing, but you presuppose that I'll be playing as the Americans. How about when I play as the Syrians? Wouldn't it be nice for me to know when my squad is getting scared? When they've been infuriated and are about to charge? How about their ammo status? You know, the things any commander could tell by HEARING his men? Regards, Ken

BF.C, Kudos for the immersive factor and detailed simulations in all your previous CM games. Based on your past record, I assume CM:SF will have the non-U.S. forces (be they Syrian soldiers or non-Syrian fighters flocking to the cause) speaking their respective languages. PLEASE INCLUDE A TOGGLE SO I CAN HAVE THEM SPEAK IN ENGLISH!! Or have subtitles. Or little floating bubbles over their heads with the English translations inside. Not only will that increase the level of enjoyment, I may actually learn something new, like useful phrases in foreign languages. Thank you, Ken

Agreed.

I agree that any anti-Syrian coalition would NOT include IDF participation. I'd guess that any U.S. administration facing such a situation would pull every tool out of the box to keep the IDF on their side of the border. Given that, I'd hope that the next installment/module would be British forces, then Euro RRF. Regards, Ken

Barrold, Damn you! I actually clicked on that link. We all knew the secret resources would French products, but fromage? Thanks for the laugh, Ken

sgtgoody (esq), Thank you!! That is EXACTLY why I'm asking BF.C to respond. The Stryker concept intrigues me. It relies on technology as a force multiplier. What if the technology doesn't work as well as anticipated? By going into a hypothetical field of conflict, BF.C is going to be open to some serious questions on how different assumptions are addressed. I'm trying to get a discussion going on that subject. Technicals and civilian/fighter intermingling were seen in Somalia. What part of the OIF battleplan accounted for that? What about the seeming prevalance of IED's, both fixed and vehicle borne? Any simulation of OIF would NEED to give the Iraqi/Insurgent side access to those weapons, yet they were not present in an Iraqi OOB. Therefore, extrapolating into the near future, if U.S. forces invade Syria, there will be something the Syrian forces use which will be "out of the box", unanticipated and effective. French weapons? German night vision? U.S. electronics? Chinese weapons' trials? Innovative Syrian use of existing weapons/devices in manners unforeseen? Ken

Okay, more on this subject: I just read in another thread about the UNANTICIPATED use of (highly effective) Kornet ATGM's by Iraqi forces against U.S. forces. The Iraqi OOB was NOT supposed to have them. Hmmm, what will the Syrian forces have? I hope there will be some home-modified weapons, using more accurate fire-control than anticipated. I hope that French weapons will be used (we all KNOW the French are friendly with Syria and if they can make a buck selling weapons which will be used against the U.S., they'd love it). Anyway, let's NOT make U.S. forces the best thing since sliced bread, while we simultaneously keep the Syrian forces in a tight little box of mediocrity. Regards, Ken

BF.C, Not slinging stones your way, but how will these areas be addressed? Or, are you satisfied that all weapons systems' characteristics have been sufficiently proven in the field? Thanks, Ken

Another thought: who predicted, prior to Black Hawk Down, that RPG's could be used with great effect against helicopters? What unforeseen fallibility, and what unknown ingenuity, will be included in CM:SF? Regards, Ken

Gents, While happy, overall, with the new subject matter - as if I had any choice! - I am concerned with how unit and force capabilities will be modelled. In Bosnia-Herzegovina, the mission planning attitude of the U.S.A.F., combined with motivated, imaginative tactics by their adverseries, led to the first combat shoot-down of an F-117: that was NOT supposed to happen. The U.S. forces' capabilities were vulnerable in a way not imagined. How will this be portrayed in CM:SF? It seems that the 105mm (?) armed Stryker vehicle has an autoloader. How frequently will it jam in dusy enviroments? How will the Syrian forces tap into the U.S. force location information? Those are just some quick examples off the top of my head. However, I don't think any weapon system or force structure has ever quite performed at its hoped for levels. How will a future-based game take these unknowns into account? Thanks, Ken

As a long-time member of the U.S. military, I'm actually MORE interested in playing as a third-world force in an asymmetric battle against U.S. forces. Regards, Ken

Thanks!

I don't know about graphics or gameplay, but I think we all realize, with a shudder, that the scenario briefs will include instructions on marching to the fight by using celestial navigation. Ken

Gents, I'm wondering if BF.C had addressed the issue of weapons' penetration abilities for CMx2. If so, I must've missed it. I'm talking about the different characteristics of an SMG round going into a wooden building versus a full-powered rifle round. That thin-walled shack which your squad is hiding in may stop incoming SMG rounds, but they'll get shredded by the LMG. Thanks, Ken (Go ahead with all your "penetration" comments...)

Hmmm, Okay, off the top of my head, how about this? The computer remembers how long it takes the player to plot the movement of each unit. THAT time is the delay that unit will occur. Example: Player selects unit A. He plots a point. Looks around at different views, zooms, pivots, etc. Plots more points. Finally, he's done with unit A. He selects unit B. Elapsed time on unit A was 3 minutes. Unit A now has a 3 minute delay before it moves. Ken

Halberdiers, I like that idea...BUT, after a few minutes I came up with a counter-example. Disregard WWII as a viewpoint. In (the yet to be announced) CMx2 initial release, "CM: Combat Soldier 2020", it is standard tactics for each soldier to have 1 meter resolution satellite imagery for the entire area of operations available on their helmet sight. This allows their squad leader to order them to assume an EXACT position. Hmmm, on second thought, if it WERE WWII being modelled, the different modules could take that into account. CMx3, "CM: World War II Revisited" could use 'fuzzy' waypoints (unknown to the player). Okay, my third and final thought is that it's still a good idea. Now we have to find out if BF.C likes it. Ken

I refuse to participate in this thread. Ken

Philippe, I like your description of the Argentinian possibilities on page 2. Count me in for CM: Argentina vs. Everyone. Ken

Michael Dorosh, Your responses to me are interesting. I'd love to continue, however, this is not the place. If it would help get you over your 20,000th post, perhaps we could start up a thread elsewhere? Regards, Ken

JasonC, Thank you for a detailed response. (I don't know if it was meant to be snide or arrogant: I can see how it could be read that way, however, I choose to believe that is just a function of writing style.) I will not argue how many able-bodied soldiers were crushed. Nor will I pick holes in the hypothetical examples you took the time to create. I will ask you to consider, in the same context of those hypothetical examples, if soldiers in prepared positions were being heavily suppressed by small-arms fire, would they show such alacrity in leaving their protected positions? Finally, do you think CMx2 would be a better GAME with, or without, the ability of tanks to physically crush weapons, equipment, and/or men? Regards, Ken

Michael Dorosh, I find the statement, "...skip the sarcastic crap..." incredibly amusing, both in the context you chose and in the fact that _you_ wrote it. Carry on. Ken

(Dear God, forgive me....) JasonC - do you hold that no live, able-bodied soldiers were crushed in their defensive positions by tracked vehicles? (...I know not what I do...) Regards, Ken

It was me.

Seanachai, I suggest a dictionary (one with pictures, if you must): sight; site; cite. Get to it! Regards, Ken (who now knows that all his posts will be scrutinized with glee)