Omenowl

Yes, I know it is excessively large to do this for a 2 hour game, but I have 200 gig worth of disk space that is not being used. It would be nice to have the ability to have after action reviews of your tactics and plans based upon what was occurring. It would also be nice to have 2 options: The first is god mode where you can watch everything without fog of war; the second is you can watch as one player or the other. Ideally, you could switch between either player or god mode at anytime during the replay. All this in real time with rewind, fast forward and maybe the ability to skip scenes (ie 15 seconds or 1 minute time frames). I know this is not an ideal comparison, but warcraft 3 had this ability. I also know Total War had this ability (though their's was not a true replay).

I believe they changed the age for OCS to 39. That is what I was told when I looked into the national guard in 2005.

Temperate zone with modern Nato vs. Russian type units would be great. The type of game I always wanted...

They seemed to get a bit more accurate in 1.08...

I would like to see a unit roster. It reminds me of the old xcom games where you could see see the status of your soldiers. I don't expect any meaningful experience or promotions or even awards, but it would be nice to see all the ranks and names of all of your troops in a campaign. I do understand that is very problematic for very large forces, however for a company or maybe even a battalion sized force it would be kind of cool to see the status of your vehicles, troops, etc. Maybe it would be up to the scenario designer to allow for % chance of repair or replacements. A heavily decimated squad would allow the survivors to integrate back into other depleted units.

I do think protection of certain units should be worth more purely for the scenario. Tasks such as your job is to protect a group of translators. Casualties to the translators count more than others. Same with higher level commanders. Losing your CO or Battalion commander should count more than losing your squad leader. This helps more realistic tactics by understanding and placing your units in more realistic conditions. It also gives the enemy more incentive to attack an area if they find a high profile target (IE Prince William would have been a major relations issue if he was captured more than say his Battalion Commander).

I hope we will have anti air or SAMs. It is nice that sometimes your forces have air protection from planes.

It is family tradition to join the military. His grandfather was part of the sugargliders during Normandy, his father helped defend the country from red squirrels during the cold war and this little guy is just getting tired of the first sergeant breaking his nuts every day...

I like the ability for two different views. One is an extended battle. This was more CMx1 style where the battle took place over days in the same area. I would like to see burned out hulks and recovery of wounded, equipment replenishment, etc. Victory is determined at the end of the extended battle. The second is for a more comprehensive campaign system where you could reuse regions depending on how the campaign was progressing. A loss might mean a player goes back a map or a victory means they go forward a map with the date changing (ie weather, temperature, etc fluctuates depending on the date) . A final total of victory and success would be determined at the end of the campaign. This allows one to simulate German successes in the Eastern front, but if the player is slowed down then suddenly they are hit by terrible weather later in the campaign. I would like to see extended battles.

Thanks for the response Steve. It was a joke, but it would have been interesting to see WW2 vs. Modern weapons. China vs. Taiwan would be cool. A lot of us equipment vs. chinese/russian equipment. Perhaps Russians vs. Georgia or the Ukraine.

Hey Steve, Purely as a lark would it be possible if you have both the WW2 version and CMSF if you could have the two forces fight each other? I would be happy if you could get a Mac OSX version so I don't have to use visa to play on my macbook pro.

I am actually looking forward to a Mac version. I got a macbook pro within the last month and find I prefer using it to my xp desktop. Admittedly, the mac dual boots with vista, but after being underwhelmed by vista I would rather just play the mac version.

I admit I bought CMBO, but didn't buy CMBB. I actually bought 3 copies of CMBO (one for my father, 1 full price for myself and another copy for 5 dollars for myself). It is unfair, but the demo was just not as much fun as that with CMBO. Graphics were a bit more displeasing so just didn't muster up enough focus to buy CMAK or CMBB. CMAK I played the hell out of the demo, and should have bought, but was hoping the price would drop a bit. Then I found out CMSF was coming out and didn't buy it at all. It is quite unfair, but I do prefer modern combat over WW2.

If you want squads to "split up" when it is not part of their TOE then I would recommend using a distance limitation. Squad components would be unable to move further than X action spots away. I honestly see this being more hassle than it is worth. CMSF is about company engagements rather than being a squad leader so micromanaging squads seems to go into the wrong unrealistic direction.

I don't think this game has invalidated the infantry by any means. The vision of armor is poor and infantry with anti-tank weapons are absolutely devestating. Anything that confines movement and has places where infantry can hide makes unsupported armor suicide. Better maps are what is needed to make infantry more valuable. Same could be said for CMBO. I can do a flat piece of ground or at least LOS of up to 1000 meters in either CMSF and CMBO and in either case armor dominates.

I forgot the ability to call in artillery with smoke instead of just explosions.

I would like to see the scaling up of vehicles and men like CMBO. At least the unit markers help a lot.

Ok, since the 8 months or so since CMSF was released you have fixed a lot of my complaints. (Especially the refresh rate). So here are my unreasonable requests. Ability to enter Digital elevation models Random topography in the editor More Doodads in the editor Greater variety of weather conditions (snow, sandstorms, rain, etc). More triggers for the editor More terrain types The ability to save a replay for the entire mission.

I am hoping that we can get DEM (digital elevation models) to be imported into our system from the USGS. It would be cool to actually have real world terrain without having to build it ourselves.

Lets face it the stuff our founding fathers did to the natives were pretty atrocious by 20th century standards. We tortured germans POWs in WW2. It was kept very secret, but we did do it and with tacit approval from the top. We infected black men with syphilis. Forced sterilizations for a large group of people who we didn't want to breed. We firebombed civilian populations and by any standard our leaders (FDR, Truman, and several others) were responsible for war crimes. We were illegally involved in supplying weapons to Bosnian muslims fighters who later ended up in Chechyna and Afghanistan. We illegally bombed Serbia and split off Kosovo despite the UN charter specifically stating that internal affairs will be handled the We have run out an elected president in Guatemala to protect a food producer. It also didn't help that we agreed to protect Hungary from the USSR if they decided to break free. They broke free and we did nothing. Same thing could be said for South Vietnam. The real difference between many of our failed wars and efforts and our successful ones was our long term commitment. If they aren't white and European we don't care. We should get involved if it involves a dictator, but not if it involves a dictator and oil. Ok to invade Haiti and Kosovo, but god forbid we actually enforce UN sanctions. The real question has always been where do we go from here? I know where we have been and it is easier to be objective 20-50 years later, but pointing fingers does nothing about moving forward. Bush will be gone next year and the question remains do we abandon Iraq like we did Afghanistan in the 1990s? Do we stay there hoping it will improve like Korea? No good options, but finger pointing and yelling is pointless.

Perhaps there should be a friendly condition added so you don't get points if so many people are killed. This is in addition to the regular friendly condition of friendly casualties. It would promote having your troops sit tight until their buddies are treated. I do not favor giving the enemy any extra points for inflicting KIAS vs. WIAs. It only encourages complete barbarity and unrealistic scenarios where the enemy will start killing every man. As much as I say this I still stop and treat everyman. The system also encourages this by having them pick up the casualties ammo. I don't need points to encourage myself to do it. If you do want a mechanic how about morale is sapped more if men are left untreated. The closer to the unit is in command structure the more morale is sapped during the scenario. IE squad, platoon, company, battalion.

Lets see why we have so many problems with oil. Russia is resurgent and has a strong distrust of the US after the 1990s economic policies crippled it. It has nationalized some of its oil and uses it to intimidate its neighbors. Venezuela is saber rattling with Columbia and has kicked out some foreign oil companies after nationalizing the oil. You can already see its efficiency has diminished. It has dropped almost 8%. Iraq is still fragile with its aging infrastructure. Iran is more worried about pursuing nuclear power than refineries and investing in its oil infrastructure. It also doesn't help that most of the people put in charge of the national oil are incompetent. The price of oil is about speculation and when there is instability it goes up regardless of the real economic conditions. You can hate Cheney and Bush all you want, but I see little hatred towards Putin or Chavez. I also see little talk about illegal actions in Haiti, Bosnia, Serbia or kosovo. Even though none of them had explicit permission to invade or attack we did it anyway. My only wish is that we leave Iraq stable enough so it won't tear itself apart or threaten its neighbors. The argument of what happened over the past 4 years is one thing, but very few people ask what legacy do we want when we leave? Do we want another Somalia or Haiti or a Germany and Japan? I see no good options besides staying. I don't relish the idea of Turkey invading Iraq because of Kurds, Iran supporting shias and the arab world supporting the Sunnis. If we think it is bad now it could get much worse.

And stick it to the rest of the world as well. Lets be honest Russia likes high oil prices, as does OPEC. Hell the economy here in Texas is doing pretty well as long as you aren't in the housing industry. Speculators keep the price high just like why the commodity market is doing so well. It also doesn't help the dollar has fallen by 2/3 of its value to the Euro. Compared to the 1990s where they were near parity. If they were still near parity it would be about 60 dollars per barrel. Iran's problem is mismanagement amongst other things. It is ironic that much smaller countries who share oil fields with Iran actually pump more out of those fields. It also doesn't help Americans shifted from cars to SUVs. It makes a huge difference when my girlfriends Honda Civic gets 41 mpg and her truck gets less than 18mpg. We also have no clue what the real state of the middle east has for their oil fields. They do not allow independent oversight to examine their oil fields. Some estimates put their reserves as much lower than they say officially. I will say this much in Texas oil has a been a boon for the economy. Many of my friends are looking at starting salaries 5-10k higher than they would have otherwise just because of the competition. Those in the oil industry are much higher than that (15-25k higher). Overall, I am looking forward to 5-10 years when engines and compressors are efficient enough for drastically reduced oil consumption.

Sorry I found an article from 1945 from the NYT I also found this from the Saturday Evening Post January 26, 1946 How We Botched the German Occupation By Demaree Bess Regardless we view being in Germany, Italy and Japan for the last 60 years as ok even though the Cold War is over. Even Korea is capable of defending itself, but we stay. The difference between Iraq and those places if we made a commitment and stuck by it. Germany still has 57000 troops, Korea 23000, Japan 32000. My view towards Iraq is we broke it we need to fix it. No more Somalia's and Haiti's where we kick over the ant hill, declare victory and leave it just as bad as we found it. I honestly think almost everyone wants soldiers out of Iraq. I also believe most people want the Iraqi's to live in peace and security.

Could we see horse limbered artillery in the early days of WW2. I don't expect charging or anything silly like that, but I was reading Soldat and he mentioned being part of horse limbered artillery.