luderbamsen

Fine, now for that E-100... :cool:

If we get any Eatern Front action in CMx2WW2 (I don't think we will, but still), I want Soviet war slogans on my tanks this time PS: I'd still like that E-100, even for the ETO scenario.

I bloody hate bunnyhoppers!

In that case, you should have a look here , and take it from there. Gimme a shout if you have any questions. I played those games too, as well as CM. I'd say CM prolly fits nicely into your game tastes.

No horses and motorcycles? OK. Then how 'bout the E-100 then, just for fun?

I have a few: - ("This is your brain:") "This is your brain on LSD". - The dark side of the Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy. - "Sir, I know recruitment is down, but mannequins?". - The latest innovation in paratroopers: HANO (High Altitude No Opening).

Try the demo. If you're an old school turn-based wargamer I suspect you'll find the WEGO system a refreshing change. If you're a bit of a bit of an action whore, like me, I suspect you'll find the WEGO system more gratifying and less "boring" than traditional turn-based games, as I did. Hopefully, you're not as dimwitted as me and will actually be able to play the game effectively (i.e. winning, at least sometimes) rather than just marvel at the little 3D models scurrying about and blowing each other up, as I do.

The really cool thing about the EFV is that you can waterski behind it... (not that I've tried, or ever will).

I'd say a future, fictional but realistic scenario, say, 2050 or thereabout.

Maybe we could all agree that the MRAP isn't going to win or loose anything on its own?

Hmm, that article sounds a bit like a round of the usual Blame Game to me: "Would have, could have, should have". Identifying issues in the procurement process is always a good idea, but laying the blame for dead Marines at the feet of the procurers is going a bit too far IMO. The MRAP is a very mission-specific vehicle. It does what it does very well, but it only does that (protect from mines and ambushes).

Oh what the hey. Let's get an Iranian module for CMSF and find out for ourselves...

Peter, The C-RAM (land version) uses self-destructing munitions to prevent collateral damage. That said, what goes up, must come down and the risk of collateral damage is always there. Especially in densely populated areas, of course. But they DID ask these questions. I don't know where C-RAM is deployed, but I suspect you won't find it shooting down incoming rocket and mortar fire over downtown Baghdad. Source: globalsecurity.org

I'm sorry, but with the Phalanx having seen naval use for decades I just can't get all that exited because someone figured out to mount it on a trailer and park it in the desert (so to speak). Though I'm sure the local troops don't mind incoming mortar rounds being knocked out in mid-air (as opposed to landing on their noggin).

By "mod" you mean module or sequel, right? I'd say large-ish scale mech battles: Fulda Gap ca. 1985. Israel vs. Neighbors (6-day War, Yom Kippur and present day). I also have a soft spot for "CMBB 1945-48", but that's just me.

OK, so the attraction of the MBT is the three key features: Mobility, armour protection and firepower. Mobility: A lot of vehicles have similar (or in certain circumstances superior) mobility to the MBT. Moreover, light vehicles have superior strategic mobility (i.e. being air portable). Armour Protection: MBT's have an awful lot of armor protection. And they can mount slat cages and active protection systems just like any other vehicle, so they still have a huge advantage in terms of protection. Firepower: The main gun is a powerful and versatile weapon. It can engage a wide range of targets at very long range. When and if any and/or all of these features no longer offer any significant advantage over the enemy, then MBT's will dissapear. If not before then when superior weapons turn them into burning hulks.

Agreed. Personally, I kinda like the idea of an air portable mech force (i.e. Future Combat Systems), with UAV's and beyond line-of-sight weaponry as a substitute for heavy armour and big guns. But the trend seem to be back towards heavy vehicles. Apparently, the US Army Stryker/USMC LAV are being overhauled, bringing their weight well beyond the limits of a C-130. And the Abrams/Bradley HBCT are recieving "spiral" spinoff technology from FCS (rather than all budget focus being on the FCS vehicles). A true air mobile/air portable force (as originally envisaged with FCS) will fore the foreseeable future likely be a specialised rapid reaction force, like the 82nd and 101st divisions with extra (light) armoured vehicles, based on existing designs. Or so my crystal ball tells me... Peter Cairns, You're saying that UAV's and precision munitions make the MBT obsolete the way the aircraft carrier made the battleship obsolete in WW2? A valid point, but I just don't think we're at that point. Yet. [ January 28, 2008, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: luderbamsen ]

Excellent. I've always believed that you should only take realism and authenticity so far. A game like this should enable authenticity, not force it. CMBB allowed me to conjure up "Barbarossa II" scenarios where, in 1946, a Luftwaffe Tiger II/JagdTiger sPzAbt (from "Panzer Armee Hermann Göring") rolled into Soviet-occupied Poland and took on numerous but woefully unprepared (T-34/76-1942) Red Army units. Personally, I would have loved to add something like the E-100 to that scenario. But as always the question of where to draw the line is as much a matter of personal taste as any "scientific" reasoning. And for BFC a matter of development cost vs. increased sales. As for CMSF, I'd say that something like the MRAP vehicles would make a reasonable addition and some point, as would the Trophy active defence system on Strykers (providing it's being fitted as planned). I'd like to go quite a bit further (say, unmanned ground vehicles, some armed, of various sizes), but eventually it's up to BFC to draw the line.

I'm thinking a Top Gear Special version of one of those Syrian technicals: Remember the episode where they drove through Alabama with "creative writing" on their old cars? White pickup, pink letters: "Man Love Rules OK"...

I suppose this vehicle is another example of Russian/Soviet weapons designers not being afraid to take a few chances and think outside the box. In an urban/close range environment, with enemy infantry running all over the place, rapid fire 30mm HE might be more useful than slow fire 125mm HE, and the mini-turrets would definately fit that role as well. I'm not entirely sure what the missiles are good for, unless of course the enemy has armour as well. Could they carry FAE or bunker-busting warheads or sumfink?

More content is always a good idea, and if micro-transactions fit the bill (i.e. small content packages contain the necessary to add another nation or service TO&E) then great. Profitability is always the key issue though.

You're right about that. Free content (mods) is no replacement for quality content. Which still leaves us potentially short on content. Part of the reason why this wasn't much of an issue with CMx1 was that it included just about every bloody unit you could imagine.

"You'll shoot your eye out!"...

Never read it. Btw, taking out a gun turret with a rifle? Are we talking a hyper velocity hand-held railgun here? If the case, I suspect the author may have forgotten about Newton's 3rd Law of Motion...

OK, let me see if I got it right (and bear with me as I'm a bit of a thickie): cool breeze: I has great idea that will make ATGM useless. Who do I talk to? I is 21 and has thinking over this long time. forum: what is your idea? cool breeze: is secret! (apologies to cool breeze for my poor representation of his grammar, making him sound like a cross between Yoda and a Vietnamese prostitute. In no way do I wish to imply that he is a prostitute, nor a Jedi Master). Anyhew, at this point the thread essentially disintegrates into various ways of making fun at cool breeze's expense. Mr. breeze, on the other hand, seem oblivious to the fact that his rather silly posts (see above) pretty much leaves ridicule as the only sane response. Am I getting this right?