Jump to content

Dillweed

Members
  • Content Count

    317
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About Dillweed

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 06/03/1985
  1. So, I think we need a nice list of the reasons why CMSF is worth our time. Something to show to friends to get them impressed. While it isn't really our job (*cough* website *cough*), a nice 1 or 2 page summary would do wonders for the newbies. I'll get the ball rolling with the big ones Cutting edge graphics Improved urban warfare modeling 1:1 Soldier representaion Real-time capable Add your own!
  2. Well, I was gonna stay out of this, but... If I were president in 2002 and wanted peace in the ME I would have knocked over saudi arabia and isreal. The saudi's issues have been well documented. Anyone that says Isreal hasn't done some very questionable things with the Palasinians needs to start reading the news. I'm not saying they are in the wrong morally. I think they are about equal now. Unfourtunetly, being a nation state I really think they need to hold themselves to a higher standard than a group of admitted terrorist thugs.
  3. They just don't learn And speaking of biting off more than you can chew
  4. Last I heard Steve had said hopefullt Q1, but prolly Q2 of '06. I fully expect that to be delayed if they feel it is not ready for prime time then. Did you see this shot> http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=000543
  5. I got one better. Our man of vision would be rotting in the ground from when the showy bully who actually became dictator put one in the back of his head 20 years ago. Lets be honest, people don't get to be dictator through prudent defensive minded means. Syria is in a bit of pickle strategically, no doubt. Here is what I'd do if I thought there was a good chance the country I was ruling was going to get freedomized in 18 months or so. *I* (not that guy in charge in 2007 of the CMSF timeline would) certainly want to have all of this in place before pulling (or giving any significant su
  6. US Army Rangers are not really out of the question from a scenario point of view, as they operate in a distinclty diffrent fashion from the other Special Operations Forces mentioned. Platoon/Company/Battalion seized assault or blocking actions are still part of their mission profile and that would fit well into CM:SF. You can't rule them out on the ground of them being part of SOCOM. But if you choose to include them or not is another thing altogether. </font>
  7. I set up a little test for SF types commanding some irregular forces and came up with a fantastic scenario idea. Basicly, I loaded up cmbo, did a random map in a "town" in april of 45. German forces had 1 platoon HQ and 1 squad of "elite" waffen SS, about the size of a A-team. They command a company of Green Volkstrum. I also gave them signifigant air support. The setup area was within the town. Against them was an American infantry battalion 45 and a company of shermans. My intent was to simulate how despite the small of very good troops the larger regular force would quickly ove
  8. That sounds like it might be a good game, but ask yourself is that Combat Mission? I don't know, a SF module might be cool. But only if they can make it substantially different from the main game. 1) CM:SF Rag-tag Syrians vs mech and armored US units doesn't seem sufficiently different from 2) CM:SF(SF) VERY rag-tag syrian rebels led by small groups of Elite SF troops vs slightly less rag-tag armored and mech Syrains to warrant a module. Of course I don't make wargames, so maybe BFC can find a way. As for the last question. Because the company that made BF2 is PUR
  9. Ignoring VERY hypothetical scenarios based around features DEFINETLY not in the game *cough* civillian traffic *cough* I think the most important weapon for the Syrians will be the RPG-7. I mean the ATGMs sound nice, but they don't have lots and lots. I imagine RPG supply will not be a problem. The RPG is also fairly versitile: 1) It'll punch right through US body armor. Not to be taken lightly when just a few KIAs are a pretty big deal. 2) If those pesky chechens can take out a reactive armored t-80 with 3 RPGs, I can't imagine the stryker's slat armor will stand up much longer to sev
  10. That being said, if they dedicated a whole module to SF giving them the attention they deserve with a campaign centered around them??? Who knows, might be cool. I still think if the smallest unit you control is a fire team the scale would be all wrong. I know one of thier big jobs is training of indigenous forces, tho. I could see a campaign centered around a company of SF trained militia with the nucleus being the 12 man squad.
  11. Well ignoring the new "less is more" paridigm that BFC seems to be going by, would it really be worth it? Moving 1 squad (or more likely 2 fire teams) around doesn't seem terribly fun. Besides, I imagine modern SF is much like airborne in WW2. Very tough, extremely stubborn defenders with fairly limited attack capcity simply because the only have what they can carry on their backs with ammo being the big issue. I imagine most of their power comes from the stealth/suprise angle. I just can't see 12 "legs" (even 12 very tough well arms legs) making a memorable impression in a mech compa
×
×
  • Create New...