sburke

If he is killing your buzz, you need to graduate to better stuff.

beats the screaming exit from the room that was reported by the Nurses association at the presence of one M Emrys. The one occasion being reported of a nurse not running was when he stopped to vomit on the door step. Yes I said he. Seems the screaming was regardless of gender.

Command OP's has editors, I recall someone creating a d day fight. However it is real time single player only which imho really limits it's usefulness.

What he said. Also does anyone have projections for combat range for a naval air group? From the Aegean to Crimea is approx 300 miles. Do US carriers even need to enter the Black Sea to have an immediate impact to the air war? My completely uneducated guess based on some cursory searches is about 350nm strike range.

well the premise and conclusion seem to be a bit awry. To be honest the gist of the article to me seems more "if we position heavy forces in the Baltics, we prevent the vacillation of our political leadership to mount a counter offensive and not compromise trying to keep the situation from escalating". In essence we create a situation where we do not have to depend on our political will as a deterrent and for Russia to have any doubts as to resolve. Assuming for the moment that their argument is entirely true, it only assumes Russia could seize Latvia and Estonia leaving the west with very few military options that don't risk escalation to nuclear worrying about what Russia considers a red line. The assumption seems to be the western political leaders would vacillate and NATO would possibly collapse and a new cold war begun. Unfortunately I think too much of their concept is still built around the cold war West versus East standoff. We aren't talking about the USSR here. We are talking one nation, Russia, risking complete economic isolation. The west doesn't have to wage a bloody counter offensive. It is pretty simple. Russia is cut off from Swift until it withdraws, all trade, all banking. If Russia wants to become the new Iran so be it. If anyone doubts the effect of just sanctions, take a look at Iran's civilian airline infrastructure. It has pretty much collapsed. Some of the first of the new contracts are for new airliners from Boeing and Airbus. China isn't going to back Russia, China is very much part of the global trade environment. The old cold war is gone. Russia's biggest military threat is they could maybe take Latvia and Estonia. and that gets them what? Granted I am sure Latvia and Estonia would prefer NATO stationing forces to prevent the whole from ever occurring, but it isn't like not doing so means there is a fait accompli that Russia will occupy them and somehow just negotiate their way to marking a new border. Hell sanctions over Ukraine should be enough to make clear to Russia the west is more than willing to use it's economic heft as it's big stick.

Yes unequivocally it would be. Also be really cool to export a game save to the editor to use as a base ToE for a new game. Between the two it would really facilitate campaign making.

At least they are still awake and present.

I don't see that either - however - they do intend to do 1942 Eastern Front. I would expect a Stalingrad scenario at minimum, but there is so much more that would be interesting from a Campaign perspective. If the 1942 game follows the 1944 game it would be fall 1942 to summer 1943. Operation Winter Storm, the Chir river battles, Kursk. well who knows. The 1942 family would theoretically have maybe 6 campaigns (the base release and two modules). On the other hand what would be absolutely cool and I think has market potential is a Stalingrad building set pack. The buildings themselves could be usable for other Eastern front games as well. Once that stuff is in the game, a campaign could be done for Stalingrad by the user community.

I think that is an awfully optimistic assessment of what the Black Sea fleet is capable of. A couple US carrier groups in the Aegean would make life hell for any subs "parked" on the other side of the strait. They aren't going to be subtle about it, they don't have to. They would likely just flood asw assets (helo and other air assets) and ping the crap out of anywhere they want close to the Turkish coast. The air space there would be extremely hostile space for Russian aircraft. What air assets are sent to try and block the carrier groups aren't going to be there to help defend against NATO air forces over the mainland. Not sure what Naval forces you are expecting to be active in the Med or Aegean, but they would preclude mining the straits. If Russia puts units in the med then tries to block the straits with mines they must be assuming those assets aren't coming home. Probably a good bet. As to mining, you can forget mining by aircraft. Anything that ventures even close is gonna have to do so in hostile air space. Turkey is more than willing to shoot down Russian aircraft. That leaves submarine mine laying as about the only option. Any Russian surface ships that leave the protection of port will be resting on the sea bed pretty darn quick. The Russian sub fleet would need to sortie prior to hostilities through the strait if they are going to contest the Aegean. That is going to be blatantly obvious to NATO. So Russia's choice- telegraph it's punch and sortie the sub fleet or assume it is not going to contest the Aegean and stay in the Black Sea. That allows free movement of US carrier groups into the Aegean with little opposition. (a sortie would also face Turkey potentially denying access.) Granted this is all conjecture, but Russia does have a limit to how many air missions it can take on and if we are discussing a general escalation, that covers the Baltic to the Black sea. Major commitments can't be done everywhere simultaneously. On the other hand NATO has a lot of assets to put on the table and can pick where to concentrate assets and do it simultaneously from multiple directions. I frankly do not know the actual figures, but even if we assume the ones given by @panzersaurkrautwerfer (dude you need to consider shortening your handle. If it weren't for cut and paste I'd have to give you a cheesy nickname) are overblown and cut NATO's assets by half (and I don't see the basis of doing so, but just for argument's sake) we are still left with a Russian air force being forced to a defensive posture. There are simply too many threats from too many directions. Are you going to provide resources to attempt to provide a large CAS capability, try to defend Black Sea air space, try to cover the Baltics, make sure the Pacific bases are protected? You can't do all of these.

could be, I don't recall the last statements on this. I have been pretty lucky with my upgrades that I haven't had to reactivate in a while. I just upgraded my RAM for example and CM products did not object.

no idea, BF has been reticent about it, but they have also been known to surprise. The driver in that would likely be more financial. I have no idea how well the North Africa theater generally draws in this genre. I am sure BF has a better idea. I don't think anyone saw CMFI coming and while it may not sell as well as the other titles, I believe BF has said it has done quite well.

I don't understand this statement. Exactly how is upgrading hardware, outfitting units and training them in the use of those units somehow a cheaper proposition in Russia? Lower training standards fewer field exercises, skimping on maintenance? If anything with the corruption in manufacturing, procurement etc I expect it may actually be more costly. Granted businesses have been known to skim in the US on military contracts for sure, but the transparency in process allows for review of project costs by the public. Add to that a lot of the high tech components are imported and those are costing a lot more these days. Still I think the quote is applicable. I just suspect the quote is more universal than really a special statement about Russia.

well in summary I think we all pretty much agree that there really isn't a scenario that makes sense from even the Russian perspective to warrant invading the Baltic States. Little to no return for the risk involved. The threat may be more interesting from a pressure perspective for Russia and maybe an incident could occur because of brinksmanship on both parties, but an actual invasion is far fetched. Not to put you on the spot Steve, but it does beg the question as what might be a scenario for an additional modern era CM game. You could go totally hypothetical with something like the story line in Larry Bond's cauldron, but I don't see you guys going that route.

These present issues and a lot of overhead. I have played on a couple maps that folks have created with mods like this and while they are intensely atmospheric they also get very awkward about how units behave. Pathing can get funkier than usual and LOS can really get to look weird. Units that you'd think should be visible aren't because the wall that was there is now transparent. BF would really need some different building types to support this - factories for example don't really behave right using the modular buildings. That is a pack I'd pay a lot for. Would be great for CMRT - an urban building pack stock full of different type buildings that would facilitate this kind of modding effort.

Besides what JonS noted above, you also have another factor. Actual battles can translate poorly to scenario/campaign design. Some things just can't be simulated well if you have too much familiarity with the engagement. Also the soft factors and FOW that would have altered decision making usually don't play out well in CM. We typically don't considering stopping just because we have heavy casualties

Honestly I don't ever recall seeing that. What I did see occasionally is troops firing through the vertices at corners. I look for windowless walls as safe locations for breach teams so I am pretty certain it hasn't been a feature. Then again I am getting older and more senile everyday....

Just open a ticket. They will set you up. They recognize the need to be flexible and are pretty darn quick.

yeah live and learn the hard way. I love watching the infantry in CM. Put together a nice urban map with that and I am in heaven. The armor and all is fun, but not quite as personal. This was the first time I'd tried this. The breach teams usually take care of whoever is already in the room. It is the guys who come in afterwards that can be an issue. Having a team positioned right at the breach point means anyone entering is usually walking right in front of them. I still lost two guys, but 13 of the enemy went down. The Spartan Resolve campaign gave me ample opportunity to learn. I am really hoping to see CMSF or something like it in the up to date engine. Between the newer options for map creation and tactical commands, it just makes it more flexible.

cool, I may have to run through this campaign again.

He is just trying to get time with your intern. Shameless, but understandable.

If the Baltics were invaded those forces in Kaliningrad aren't going anywhere. If they do they may find Polish troops sitting on the docks when they come back. Russia has to factor these in and it is a good 200 miles plus before Russian troops not in Kaliningrad can make it to the Polish border and they have to cross the Daugava first. This data is 5 years old. Another reason for Belarus to insist on neutrality. As of 2011, the Armed Forces are in the middle of a long-term modernisation programme. Immediate plans involve new anti-aircraft missile systems, ballistic missile defence systems, a Lead-In Fighter Trainer (LIFT) aircraft, medium transport and combat helicopters, submarines, unmanned areal vehicles, as well as self-propelled howitzers. Land forces[edit]Main battle tanks: 1,000 (Leopard 2A4, Leopard 2A5, PT-91, PT-91MA1, T-72, T-72A, T-72M1, T-72M1D)[27]AFV: 2,000 (KTO Rosomak, BWP-1, BWR-1S, BWR-1D, HMMWV, BRDM-2)[27]Artillery: 1,200 (120 mm (5 in) or greater).[27]Howitzers: 120 AHS Krab, [28]Army Helicopters: 200 (PZL W-3, Mi-8, Mi-17, Mi-24, Mi-2 )[27]Air Force[edit]Jet Fighter: 112 (32 MiG-29A/UB, 48 F-16 C/D Block 52+, 32 Su-22M-4K/UM3K )[27]Jet Trainer Aircraft: 54 (PZL TS-11 Iskra, + 8 M-346 from 2016)[27]Turboprop Trainer Aircraft: 37 (PZL-130 Orlik)[27]Cargo aircraft: 41 (C-295M, C-130, PZL M28)[27]Helicopters: 53 (PZL W-3, PZL SW-4, Mi-8, Mi-2)[27]Navy[edit]Frigates: 2 (Oliver Hazard Perry Class)[27]Corvettes: 1 (Kaszub class)[27]Submarines: 5 (Kilo Class, Kobben Class)[27]Fast Attack Craft: 3 (Orkan class)[27]Mine Counter-Measure Vessels: 19 (Gardno class, Mamry class, 206FM class)[27]Minelayer-Landing crafts: 5 (Lublin class)[27]Over 40 other vessels (including survey ships, tankers, rescue and salvage and training ships)[27]Aircraft: 12 (PZL M28B Bryza)[27]Helicopter: 30 (Kaman SH-2, PZL W-3, Mil Mi-14, PZL Mi-2, Mil Mi-17

I am not so sure that is true even if it is intended. I have CMBS save with a sniper pointing his barrel right into a tree trying to target an enemy soldier. He fires repeatedly and it ricochets off the trunk. If that behavior goes against what the game is supposed to do I can submit a ticket on it. I can submit anyway as a request to change behavior. Just need to know which it is.

Images like this and you're worried about a messy page ?LOL seriously I think you needn't worry that anyone will notice. We are too busy scraping our jaws off the floor. My only heads up is that when modding this heavily, what you see is not what you usually get. CM still tends to block LOS/LOF despite the transparencies. Visually it is phenomenally appealing, playing it can be a bit frustrating. For example there is no way to duplicate the factory halls. CM walls will still exist, LOS/LOF and movement all still follow the original building designs. Having said that, I'd still love to see it even if only for playing at screenshots/dioramas. Incredible work. I bow to your creative endeavor.

That 1/3 ratio is I think predicated on a prepared defense model worst case scenario. As much as I think Russia's offensive capabilities are over rated, I don't think the above ratio is applicable either excepting for built up areas. Russia forces would be much more mobile than the defense. It would be interesting to see what the defensive strategy is, in other words what are likely choke points that ciould slow down a Russian advance if any. Sounds like a great opportunity to check out a map!

at a minimum you'll need to define set up zones. Not sure what else would make a QB special. I'll do a test run when I get home.