Sequoia

From another thread:

Then how will we ever get a realistic CMSF II game?!

Is that how the Dutch Airforce got Tornados?

I thought we were going to war with North Korea? Oh that was last week.

Here is a note from The Capt who was the inside man for Module.

Yes like my fantasy about Alizee the French Resistance fighter. We were promised Alizee!

We have been waiting for Normandy longer than Stalin did the original!

With WWII I'm sure it helps that the TO&E work you did for CM1 is still valid.

If Labyrinth is any where as good as Twilight Struggle, a Cold War game that it reminds me of, then it's worth checking out.

There are no plans for Viet Nam. They haven't said they would never do it but they have so many other priorities with WWII and Modern. The best chance would be for a third party do it as Snowball did for Afghanistan.

I know it's way early but Steve mentioned they won't do 3 new armies in one module again as they did with NATO. I'm wondering however since a lot of the work has already been done we might see something like this (If for example it was vs the Russians): Base Game Blue force US Army Module One Blue Force British AND USMC Module Two Blue Force Germans and Poles Module Three Blue Force French and Canadians In otherwords the Marines and British are combined and we can get new armies we haven't seen before such as the French. I'm not familiar enough with the Modern Russian army to know how many modules it would take to get everything. Of course if we're going Korea it would be more something like this: Base Game: Blue US Army, Red North Koreans Module One : Blue South Korea , Red China. Module Two : Blue US Marines AND Japan Module Three : Blue British and Canadians In other words I'd like to see at least a couple NEW Blue armies. Thoughts?

Lot's of new stuff in the NATO module that people haven't tried yet especially now that the Canadian and Dutch campaigns are fixed, plus Holidays in the US. That said scenario design is often a thankless job.

Well NATO came out for Canadian Thanksgiving

So any other wildcards come up in your hand lately?

True, what I am ultimately considering doing is making an old fashioned cardboard counter wargame primarily based on the map that came with the original game, which is fairly accurate in terms of Syrian order of battle, and again using the map and campaigns and real life contingency plans, as best as I can deduce them to be, to come up with the Coalition order of battle. This is not as cool as SDPs meta-campaign and website, but once done would certainly take much less time to play out and allow exploration of different operational deployments. I am willing to bend "reality" to certain degree but not too far. For example I have now added a British Battalion to the order of battle in Turkey because there is a campaign based on such a unit, but I am not making it the Devonshire and Dorsets as the campaign briefing has it, but rather their descendants The Rifles. This may not be the most logical method of constructing an order of battle, but there would be a certain pleasure, for me at least, in using a unit in my boardgame in which I have already fought a virtual tactical campaign with. In any event it is difficult to say what "reality" would really be, which is why I put up the provisional order of battle in which I am very pleased to be getting feedback. I am sure however that I won't be getting an knowledgeable service member from each nation to respond, but I feel that any mistake I may make won't be any worse than some I have seen in published wargames of actual historical events. Russian Campaign- I'm looking at you and your German cavalry corps. Anyway I had not noticed the game's Canadian Campaign order of battle until recently. What they have listed is this: A Company- support 1 Combat Engineer Sdrn. 1 Antitank TOW platton, Coyote Recon platton, 2 section mortar plattoon. B Company -Recon (not in game) C Company - Light Infantry Company 3rd BN PPCLI -partially airmobile D Company - LAV Infantry 1st BN PPCLI E Company - LAV Infantry 1st BN PPCLI F Company Tank Squadron LSH (RC) (broken up into support platoons). This is now Cannon as far as my game is concerned but I'd like to add your composite Armored Regiment to it with maybe another LAV Infantry Company added to it to come up with a composite brigade as the Canadian Land Force contribution. Also there would be a artillery regiment, to answer Jon's question, in support of both units comprised of 2 105mm towed batteries, a M777 155mm towed batery and a M-109 155mm self propelled battery dug out of mothballs. Since the game has all these artillery types for Canada I have to include them. How's that sound? Finally you may not have noticed but I had an entire battalion of the Special Operations Forces in support. I am going to downsize that as well. I'm sure a large chunk of them were in Afghanistan.

Most of the coalition Airforce is out hunting for Scud missle launchers as the Syrians have threatened to launch a dirty bomb into Israel unless the Coalition forces withdraw and Israel has threatened to go Nuclear on Syria if Syria does launch the dirty bomb. This also explains why the Coalition forces are in such a hurry and willing to sustain casulties they otherwise wouldn't. They want to over run all missle sites as soon as possible. Yes I just made that all up.

DG- Here is a thread that may interest you. You and the Capt. need to get together. http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=93556

Well CMSF is essentially done now and we won't see anything new added to it except for some bug fixes. There will not be a French Module and Battlefront wants to move on to Normandy, which we hear is nearing completion, and its modules and we won't return to modern warfare again until CMSF II in its temperate setting and we don't know if that will be before or after or concurrent with the Bulge/end of war family. I understand this. I also understand Battlefront does not owe us any new features for CMSF. But let me ask, would you be willing to PAY for new features? I don't think any one has ever asked. What would you pay for water for example, even if it's only to CM:Afghanistan standards? A large part of the coding must be done already. I don't know how much it would take to add of course but probably not as much as adding a new army in a module. Barbed wire is my pet desire. I assume we'll get it in Normandy, though I can't recall a confirmation of that in the initial release. Maybe it's more tricky then I think with all new AI and animations required but let me throw it on the table. I'd pay $10 for water and barbed wire. Of course there's always a limited amount of programming resources for everything that's desired and another downside is further fragmentation of the community besides different module ownership but hey, at least let me ask. Is this something that would interest you?

Or you could go here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=92281&highlight=list+campaigns

Thanks for the input. It makes a lot of sense. I assume your Canadian and won't feel slighted by the downsizing of the Canadian contribution. I wanted to give them enough units so that any thing in the campaign (which I have not played) would be covered.

Personally I feel there is enough infantry. We have the 23rd Gebirgsjaeger brigade which is trained in urban warfare and the Stryker brigades have plenty of infantry and there is an entire US Infantry brigade. Also I added lots of airborne elements to fulfill that role.

That raises a good point though. In one respect scenario designers will have it easy as they can use the research that went into a CMBO scenario and create a new version for CM:*.*Normandy. I understand there's a $5 full downloadable version of CMBO somewhere that plays on todays computers.

To quote Sgt Schultz "I know nothing - nothing!" but I doubt they'll add new terrain or doodads in modules or be releasing Holland specific terrain in the initial release. I'm not really sure what you have in mind. Elevated roads? Those aren't Netherlands specific. Surely you don't mean windmills? I think they never added new doodads to CMSF modules as they would cause problems by making scenarios require a specific module when they otherwise wouldn't. I think this is an area where modders can fill in. It seems we have fewer modders for CMx2 though than we did for CMx1. There were some great building mods for CMx1.

I think we should wait until they release the 1.30 patch for those without NATO before we start asking for 1.31

They provide cover but not concealment.