GSX
-
Posts
938 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by GSX
-
-
Id like to add here that although I feel I have the right to criticise what US forces do and have experienced some amazingly stupid stuff around them, I feel very comfortable with them and including any Commonwealth force theres no other nations forces I'd rather serve with.
-
From what I have seen in raw footage from the field.. there appears to be a correlation to what was depicted in GK. Namely, there appears to be a sizable minority of American soldiers who have brutalized and taken advantage of the people they have been tasked with occupying, to say nothing of their crudeness and incompetence in counterinsurgency. This is just what I gleam from watching raw footage taken by the soldiers themselves.
In defence of the US here, this has happened to all nations forces over the years, from US to Canadians to Dutch and Brits. The nature of infantry means that it often attracts some very disturbed people. We are not all like that though, but admitedly there are always going to be bad elements.
-
The biggest difference in capability between US and Brit military capability (and any other military on the planet) is the US's ability to project power abroad at the operational and strategic level. No one comes close to the US military. No one can bring the combined arms combat power to the fight-anywhere in the world- like the US Army and US Marine Corps can. And that machine works 24/7 at a very high tempo. It was so awesome to see during OIF.
This is both impressive and awesome and no one comes close to the US ability to fight and win a battle anywhere in the world. We all know we can never approach that ability and so it does lead to a lot of jealousy at times from other nations and Im definitely included there.
-
I suppose losing a track doesnt really matter under those circumstances, where the enemy isnt present.
-
How does an IED weighing 2000lbs get moved around?
A Truck perhaps?
-
My 0,02€.
I think that the most feasible theatre for a temperate modern CM would be Korea.
Yes but unless you include the Chinese, what does Korea have that Syria doesnt?
-
2. Cherry Picking QB system
Can I ask why this cant be put into the current SF game? You have often said that the CM-2 code is far easier to work with than what came before and that things can be dialed in far more easily. So why is it not possible to dial it into SF?
-
I think the thing to remember here is that Strykers and many other vehicles aren't designed from the 'ground up' to be anti IED vehicles. They are designed for war fighting. The IED in Afghanistan is becoming more prevalent as the Taleban realise that stand up fighting more often than not gets them killed. Militaries can either use existing vehicles or have two sets, one for war and the other for police actions and who can afford that?
-
I have trained with Royal Marines and worked briefly with the Black Watch when a battalion of them relieved us (26 MEU) in north Babill province. Brit forces are universally professional and their soldiers are older and usually more experienced. US forces tend to be younger and on their first enlistment. The US has more of a quality spread amongst different kinds of units, especially between combat units and support units. But in terms of combat power and tactical capability, I observed little difference, just different techniques. And in some cases US skill sets exceeded Brit skill sets. For example when I was doing some sniper training with Royal Marine snipers, we found out that they rarely train to shoot past 600 yard whereas Marine snipers routinely practice out to 1000.
Its all relative, and the bottom line is that we are allies in the same fight.
I would go along with this. I have worked with US Air Force, Army and Marines in my time and your Senior NCOs and Officers are very good. What often lets you down is your enlisted cadre, but as you say, they tend to be younger and a lot of them join for differing reasons (College funds etc). A lot of our practices are very different but I do think the end result is the same. However a lot of your ROEs are totally different. Which is OK for you but leads to some confusion when acting jointly.
-
Blaming the military for doing a poor job of civil reconstruction is like blaming your carpenter for doing a crap job wiring your electrical system.
At any rate, I don't see how that compares to the UK's military failures in Basra. Perhaps you can enlighten me. OTOH, just the fact that four words provoked a paragrap from you is rather telling all it's own.
Would I be correct in saying it wasn't exactly your finest hour?
Well, I dont think Iraq has exactly been the US finest hour either to be honest. I kind of view the whole episode as myopic on the part of both our governments. The fact that we have gotten out of it is a bonus from my point of view.
That being said I dont think we [the Brits] have enough troops to do a proper job anywhere right now, including Afghanistan. I think the politicians say, lets do this and its been incumbent on the Armed Forces to just say OK, instead of saying not possible. We have the same 'can do' attitude and at times it becomes silly.
Was Basra a failure or is the cause ultimately a joke? And realising this, did the UK commanders make decisions based on keeping UK casualties to a minimum and keeping the local populace onside? I have no answer to that though.
The bottom line for me is this, is Iraq and the average Iraqi more secure now than it was in 2002. I dont have an answer to that but I do know that the previous regime while terrible did keep the fundamentalist element under wraps. I dont think Al quaeda operated in iraq before 2003. Still, time will tell.
-
Well, if it's gonna be that kinda thread...
Nice job in Basra.
Well if its going to be this kind of thread!
Nice job the US made of getting us all into Iraq and effing up the whole process in the 1st place! Putting over a million Iraqis out of work at a stroke and turning a whole country that might have been initially receptive to you against you.
Ive worked a lot of my life with many excellent US personnel, Marines included but your enlisted 'Gene Pool' can really do with some work and the vast majority of people Ive met arent in the military for the same reasons I am.
Thats said, Generation Kill does a good job of portraying the humour in between action that exists in a whole lot of militaries. I can tell you tales of the Brit military that go way beyond anything youve ever seen in GK.
-
GSX,
Er...
But no pressure, right?
You guys are really funny sometimes with your "hey, no pressure for a release date. Release it when it's done and I'll be happy. Oh, and by the way, give me an exact date when it will be done". It's straight out of a standup comedy routine like Who's On First
Steve
Not exactly. What im saying is that you stated that Id definitely be playing this thing by Xmas 2009. Now this kind of gets my hopes up a little as its you saying it. Then you say just after, now your saying march but before April.
Im not after an exact date, just an estimation of when I may be able to purchase it. I think its a fair question as after all your the one who keeps moving the goalposts.
-
I'm favoring the 80'ies Fulda gap too. Or the Falklands/Malvinas (but not much armor there...).
Falklands is definitely out, unless you could do an 80's Mod. Its just far too limited.
-
Well as someone who has spent my entire Summer living in a Southern winter, only to return to winter my answer to your plea has to be a resopunding Nein!
-
I have to admit to also liking the 1980's idea too. Youd also get much more life out of your modules I think as it would be a true epic with the inclusion of all the differing NATO and Warsaw Pact forces.
-
China has so much money invested in the US economic makeup that it is unlikely they would risk their investments in a war. I think at the moment any war between larger nations is strictly hypothectical unless some radical change of governments take place.
Thats irrelevant as the game will be a what if? Maybe the US would have to go to war as China called in its loans?
-
Reading the comments in other threads I'm assuming the game is no where near finished. As every module for CMSF has been delayed by a long while I'm guessing that CMN will be out a lot later than we all think. Hence thats why with a supposed 7 weeks to go we havent really seen or heard all that much about the game.
Best guess for me is Summer 10 for CMN, with an SF NATO module possibly coming out Spring 10.
-
How do you accurately and realistic simulate weapons and vehicles that either haven't been invented yet or haven't been built yet?
If China gets "what they may have in 2020", would NATO correspondingly get what it might have in 2020?
Well two things really. 2020 isnt that far away in military terms and most of the stuff we have now will be around then. Also, by the time they finish with Normandy, all of its modules, then the Bulge, then Ostfront it will probably be fast approching 2020 anyway.
One of the stupid things about CMSF is the weird future past its set in after all, so next time SF arrives maybe it should be set in the future and not the past? Just give China stuff that the Russkies may have sold them. What if games are after all just that.
-
I would have to agree with most of the above, except the simulation bit. I think a lot of people that have trouble with playing the game (SF) is that lack of information. In CM-1 we have firepower charts and armour values etc.
In SF everything is hidden under the hood and so we dont know the armour value of a soldiers body armour compared to a Syrian and we dont know how much punishment a Challenger can take. I think this is off putting to those people that like to play with every piece of information at their fingertips and like to weigh up chances and probablilities and treat the game more like battlefield chess rather than an actual battle situation.
Ive never been a QB fan but I imagine not having proper pick and choose QBs also annoys these types of players as 'kit picks' were an awfull big part of their gaming.
Still, as Ive said before, if after 2 years the game still isnt for you, wait for something else, its far past the time to stop moaning about it. But, remember that CMN when it comes along isnt going to be CM-1 v 2, its going to be CM-2 Normandy so all of the things you dont like about it are probably still going to form the core gaming experience.
-
Just a quick thought on the next SF game, if it ever comes to fruition. Dont make it NATO Vs Russia. Make it NATO Vs China and give China everything that they may have in 2020. Forget the normal and think future what ifs.
-
I dunno why BFC won't include one of the heavies. Currently B-1Bs are one of the primary CAS platforms in Afghanistan (and Iraq, I suppose?) because they can loiter over the battlefield for hours on end. I reckon they've gotten good at it by now and would have been eagerly used in that role in the hypothetical Syrian conflict.
Oh my, for the chance to give a linear targeting order to a B-1 and blast a whole ridgeline. The thought alone makes me giddy.
Ah the memories of B1's in the gulf, a great load out of precision weapons and a massive take off sound to boot. You havent experienced the body penetrating sound until you get to the end of the runway when they take off.
However, there are other things that do ground attack, the P-3 even comes to mind here and certainly that was doing its stuff in 2008.
-
This is really more evidence that CMSF and CMx2 is NOT a wargame. It is a simulation. I really think there is a difference here, being a wargamer all my life.
I would take the opposite view here. I think that Sf is a wargame rather than a simulation. For a start a whole lot of the game is pure guess work concerning unit capabilities, armour for instance. Also, infantry is not accurately modelled in its behaviour or immediate actions.
If you play around with the game it is immensely fun and in the majority of ways far ahead of cm-1 games. You just have to find the situations that work best for you.
-
We're always pressured to give a timeframe. We're always reluctant to give a timeframe. So we compromise and give an estimate based on nothing more than a gut feel and the ever present presumption that nothing unrelated will get in the way. But we don't live in a vacuum and stuff always nibbles away from our primary focus. Much of it stuff you guys are never aware of because its on the business side of thing. That's always been the case, always will be
Steve
Yes, I totally understand this part but it is you that is providing all the expectation here. You firstly state that the game will definitely be out in 2009 and then casually change this to the game will be ready to go before Xmas but for personal reasons will be delayed until right after it. Then you state that the game features are still being worked on, which leads me to think that theres no way its going to be released right after Xmas.
Now, in any of this I didnt really see how you could be pressured by any of us. As I said, I can find something else to do until Normandy and as others have pointed out its no huge deal breaker to wait a few more weeks or months or even years.
I just wouldnt mind an honest answer, can I expect it before 01 Apr 09? Or failing that answer just tell me to shut the heck up and it will be done when your all ready. I can then stop getting as giddy as a pre-teen schoolgirl as January approaches, saving up the pocket money miserly doled out by my wife for a game that will not arrive until summer, spend that money on something else and stop being obsessed with ww2.
-
The primary problem with SHOWING you guys stuff is that we have not prioritized the artwork for the terrain or soldier textures. There are plenty of vehicles to show off, but not more than initial test examples of the other stuff. We're trying to concentrate on the features rather than the brute force grunt work that is needed to make the game complete. The design and initial implementation stuff doesn't do well in screenshots
That being said, I'll see what I can do to get you guys to stop talking nonsense about BMP-1s going up against Panthers
Steve
OK, please dont take this the wrong way.
You originally stated that the game would definitely be out in 2009. I understand these things change so this doesnt bother me. However, you changed this to say that the game could be out by Xmas 2009 but that this would be the wrong time to publish it for you. Understandable given the time of year and all.
I would imagine that a game that is what, 7 or 8 weeks away from being able to be published would be at the almost ready stage, possibly just going through the campaign testing etc.
So given what youve already said above, and what you said before it seems that the game is far from being ready to roll by Xmas. So, can you please answer these question so that I can go back to lurking on CMN.
Will this game be ready before 01 Apr 10?
Has the campaign etc been tested or is it in testing yet?
There are plenty of other ways I can spend my time before a Normandy game comes out but as you were the one promising definites I wouldnt mind a straight answer. If the answer is 'we wont be publishing before Summer 10' then Im a big lad and can take it.
Cheers
Kevlar Coffins
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Not dwelling too much on the issue but the whole mission statement for being in Afghanistan in the first place is getting a bit skewed. I believe we are there to 'support the democratically elected Government', which as we now know means supporting a very corrupt government
I'm not entirely sure its in our strategic interests to be there, let alone de-stabilise its southern neighbour in the process.
That being said, I imagine the Aghanis that are fighting against us see themselves as 'Freedom Fighters' from both the Wests invasion and their corrupt dictatorship government. There is always more than one side to a story after all.
I agree with big Duke here. How else does a native force fight a superpower? And even a superpower cant afford to develop a different vehicle for every different situation and so Strykers and the like will have to be used in police actions instead of warfighting.
Maybe we should all stay in our bases and let them get on with it, in ten years time nothing will have changed except the fact that a lot of NATO soldiers didnt get ten years older, have kids and enjoy life a bit longer...
Im not against the conflice per se but I am against all this floundering around. If were going to do something lets just go and do it!