Malaspina

Hello fellow CMFIers,
I’ve just finished compiling my second campaign (battle series) called “The Buffalo Soldiers’ Ordeal” (all modules needed). It is a battle series that includes a prologue and 8 scenarios aiming to reproduce some of the events that took place on the western edge of the Gothic Line from 8 to 10 February 1945, during Operation Fourth Term.
The nine battles (to be used in conjunction with @kohlenklau's Buffalo mod) are:
0.    Prologue (Sommocolonia)
1.    Raiders on Highway One
2.    Strettoia
3.    Ordeal on the Plains
4.    Kesselring’s Ghosts
5.    Assault on Monte Folgorito
6.    Pushing to the Top
7.    Georgia on My Mind
8.    Castel Aghinolfi
Here are some pics to whet your appetite.

 

 

 
It is currently in a “pre-alpha” state and I’ll be soon testing it myself for the first time. It would be great if a couple of other players could test it as well. I’d just need to know some very general things, such as:
-    Is the battle too  short / too long? Map too big / too small?
-    Too many / too few troops?
-    Too easy / too difficult?
-    Any obvious mistakes?
-    General impressions / improvements suggested?
-    Etc.
It is a historical campaign but I'd still like it to be as enjoyable as possible. Drop me a line if interested.
Thanks in advance!
 

Hello fellow CMFIers,
I’ve just finished compiling my second campaign (battle series) called “The Buffalo Soldiers’ Ordeal” (all modules needed). It is a battle series that includes a prologue and 8 scenarios aiming to reproduce some of the events that took place on the western edge of the Gothic Line from 8 to 10 February 1945, during Operation Fourth Term.
The nine battles (to be used in conjunction with @kohlenklau's Buffalo mod) are:
0.    Prologue (Sommocolonia)
1.    Raiders on Highway One
2.    Strettoia
3.    Ordeal on the Plains
4.    Kesselring’s Ghosts
5.    Assault on Monte Folgorito
6.    Pushing to the Top
7.    Georgia on My Mind
8.    Castel Aghinolfi
Here are some pics to whet your appetite.

 

 

 
It is currently in a “pre-alpha” state and I’ll be soon testing it myself for the first time. It would be great if a couple of other players could test it as well. I’d just need to know some very general things, such as:
-    Is the battle too  short / too long? Map too big / too small?
-    Too many / too few troops?
-    Too easy / too difficult?
-    Any obvious mistakes?
-    General impressions / improvements suggested?
-    Etc.
It is a historical campaign but I'd still like it to be as enjoyable as possible. Drop me a line if interested.
Thanks in advance!
 

Yes, of course! And light up their pipes while they're at it
No. but I did have a couple of instances where a tank exhausted its ammo pounding the enemy while another fellow tank with a disabled main gun just sat there in the back doing nothing. It would be cool to somehow be able to transfer that ammo to the fully operational vehicle (in safe conditions ;).

Exactly one year after the first announcement, the project is now finished. In order to avoid
misunderstandings on the part of the company Battlefront.com, I chose the name CampaignPack 😎.
The pack (as described in former threads) consists of 5 campaigns in which the player is thrown
into the events of the summer of 1944 in the sector of the German Army Group Center.
In total you will play minium 52 single missions, maximum 55 single missions (depending on one
branch). To avoid technical problems, I didn't add any mods to the campaigns. But I can, for example,
highly recommend the excellent work of @JM Stuff, especially his extraordinary mod collection of vehicles
and wrecks 👍
I recently visited the forum regularly to stay in touch with people who wanted to register. However, I have
asked the people at Battlefront.com several times to delete my profile.  This request has not yet been
granted to me, so as a quasi "undead" I will always stop by - but I will no longer take part in any discussions
or answer any questions in the forum. To get in touch with me, please write to me at:
E-Mail: f-s-zbg@web.de.😎
Of course, I can still send the campaign pack to anyone interested.
 
So all I can say is:
It was a great pleasure for me to finish this project and share it with many people.
I hope you have as much fun playing as I did creating it 🙏
 
Best regards
Mr.X 

CM: South Pole, battles set between penguins and explorers/scientists.

Here's my guess: CM Pacific Theater!
I know, I know, Steve has repeatedly stated they have no interest in it but, hey, 979 guesses to go...

You can always rely upon a forum of gamers to create more drama than at an Alabama Sweet 16 party.
If you've made a decent Battlepack off your own back, that is admirable and we'd all love to play it. You seem to have taken what looked to me as a 'jokey' remark way out of context.
I can't imagine a first responder having such a thin skin. Please take a while to calm down and come back afresh.

Yes, of course! And light up their pipes while they're at it
No. but I did have a couple of instances where a tank exhausted its ammo pounding the enemy while another fellow tank with a disabled main gun just sat there in the back doing nothing. It would be cool to somehow be able to transfer that ammo to the fully operational vehicle (in safe conditions ;).

Back to the topic:
- ability to swap crews between vehicles, tanks especially
- ability to acquire ammo from another (disabled) tank
- ability to (re)man guns after they've been abandoned by the same or another crew
 

Raise your hand . . . if you've genuinely been waiting two decades to field a M26 Pershing in Combat Mission!!!
🤩

Preorder  completed. First chance to play with Comets and Pershings again since CMBO can't wait.

CM is unique and awesome.
That said, I think we all want better performance, cleaner UI, more fronts, era's and more.
I am happy that Battlefront has managed to stay in business selling Combat Mission games, and I choose to see the glass half full and enjoy what we have.

The_Capt is one of the CMCW development team, so if he says that CM3 is a thing, then thats good enough for me. Hopefully we will get confirmation in part.2 of the '2024 year ahead ' thread soon.

You also are accepting zero actual risk in all this.  This entire issue comes down to risk/opportunity for BFC.  While for you it is entertainment and convenience.  Those are entirely different frameworks.
The opportunity for BFC is modest - DLCs do not make as much money as main title releases so ROI is limited.  They also have multiple lines of product, so they can offset any losses by shifting focus to offset lost investment in development.  The risk for BFC, in this environment, is significant.  Beyond the fact that releasing a wargame set in an active war zone (there are actual game maps that overlap RL) while people are dying, is going to be considered “bad taste” by most and “a social crime” by some - companies have been cancelled for less.  The risk of significant loss due to perceived exploitation of human suffering is high.
This is existential for BFC.  It is their livelihood.  Are you willing to personally pay for the financial damage this move could do to the company?  Are you willing to put your job on the line for a CMBS DLC?  Because that is what you would be asking BFC to do.  BFCs job is not to make you happy.  Their job is to sustain the business that makes you happy.  Right now risking everything on a single DLC does not make business sense. 

Lets face it, CMSF was the Iraq War.  Yes it was set in a hypothetical invasion of Syria, and the campaigns/scenarios did not represent the actual battles taking place.  However, the reality is that the OOB, unconventional forces, etc. were all taken from the realities being experienced in Iraq.  Basically, it was the Iraq War but not in Iraq.  If there is sensitivity about Ukraine, why do the same thing?  Just change the setting to Poland, the Baltics, or whatever eastern part of Europe you want?  You end up with the same result with a fictional Russian invasion of (fill in the blank).  This way we get to keep our modern forces and grow the core game.

This is right on the money. BF is in a very mature phase of its creative arc. Their greatest effort was made thirty years ago with the CMx1 engine, and then again fifteen years ago with the CMx2 engine. Is the CMx3 engine still in the works? I'm not holding my breath...
Rather than "look ahead" threads, WW2 CM fans (including me) should start reminiscing in "a-fond-look-back" threads.  The last WW2 title came out in 2016. There are no indications that any new title will be coming out in the next few years (i.e. next decade). We might get a couple of modules and some battle packs but nothing more.
After that it's retirement age for all of us thank God, but we will still have four great WW2 titles whose replayability is infinite.
 

Here's screenshots #2 and 3. Maybe they'll eventually show up on an official screenshots site, maybe not. Late war M4A1 Sherman 76 and Pershing during some QB city fighting. Battling Jagdtigers
 

Why not both? I find the best learning comes from a variety of sources (in my case books, youtube, and simulations). The quality of the military history content on youtube has reached really spectacular levels. They usually have much higher research standards than traditional documentaries. Real Time History isn't even the best of it (as much as I enjoy their content, they tend to repeat common myths a bit more often than most of the other channels I go to, so their research standards seem to be a bit more on par with traditional documentaries). There is Eastory, Drachinifel, Military History Visualized, TIK, Military Aviation History, Usually Hapless, Battle Order, The Operations Room/Intel Report, Kings and Generals, Forgotten Weapons, The Chieftain, The Western Front Association, GI History Handbook, and so many more that I'm sure I'll remember in a few minutes.
No source is perfect, and I've caught all of these channels making the occasional mistake. There is just so much misinformation out there that it's impossible for even the best historian to filter out all of it. That goes for books as well. The format that the research is presented in has no effect on the quality of the research, so books will contain as many errors as videos. I was just reading James Holland's book on Normandy, in which he repeated the myth that the Bren was extremely accurate and the MG42 was extremely inaccurate (they actually seem to have roughly the same accuracy, about 4-5 MOA). I doubt anyone could say that James Holland isn't a good historian. There are simply so many myths out there that it's impossible for even the best historian to catch them all.

I fell down this rabbit hole when doing some research on panzer crew training for my panzer tactics series.
Its interesting this approach still resonates in more modern military manuals, guess attention spans of teens has not changed that much in 80 odd years...! 

This is right on the money. BF is in a very mature phase of its creative arc. Their greatest effort was made thirty years ago with the CMx1 engine, and then again fifteen years ago with the CMx2 engine. Is the CMx3 engine still in the works? I'm not holding my breath...
Rather than "look ahead" threads, WW2 CM fans (including me) should start reminiscing in "a-fond-look-back" threads.  The last WW2 title came out in 2016. There are no indications that any new title will be coming out in the next few years (i.e. next decade). We might get a couple of modules and some battle packs but nothing more.
After that it's retirement age for all of us thank God, but we will still have four great WW2 titles whose replayability is infinite.
 

This is right on the money. BF is in a very mature phase of its creative arc. Their greatest effort was made thirty years ago with the CMx1 engine, and then again fifteen years ago with the CMx2 engine. Is the CMx3 engine still in the works? I'm not holding my breath...
Rather than "look ahead" threads, WW2 CM fans (including me) should start reminiscing in "a-fond-look-back" threads.  The last WW2 title came out in 2016. There are no indications that any new title will be coming out in the next few years (i.e. next decade). We might get a couple of modules and some battle packs but nothing more.
After that it's retirement age for all of us thank God, but we will still have four great WW2 titles whose replayability is infinite.
 

Hi! Shameless plug here. Try CMFB and then use my quick campaign generator with it. You'll find it in my sig. You can easily make a 10-battle campaign in 1 hour's time after you get the hang of it. (Yeah, you need to RTFM ). I've made about 10 campaigns so far myself. That means 100 battles.
The battles will be kind of crazy, but certainly fun and certainly better than anything the QB can generate. Plus, you will play a more meaningful campaign where you have to look after your core units. And I also added a cool spreadsheet to keep track of it all. You're even awarded medals! What else do you need?! 
 

Hello fellow CMFIers,
I’ve just finished compiling my second campaign (battle series) called “The Buffalo Soldiers’ Ordeal” (all modules needed). It is a battle series that includes a prologue and 8 scenarios aiming to reproduce some of the events that took place on the western edge of the Gothic Line from 8 to 10 February 1945, during Operation Fourth Term.
The nine battles (to be used in conjunction with @kohlenklau's Buffalo mod) are:
0.    Prologue (Sommocolonia)
1.    Raiders on Highway One
2.    Strettoia
3.    Ordeal on the Plains
4.    Kesselring’s Ghosts
5.    Assault on Monte Folgorito
6.    Pushing to the Top
7.    Georgia on My Mind
8.    Castel Aghinolfi
Here are some pics to whet your appetite.

 

 

 
It is currently in a “pre-alpha” state and I’ll be soon testing it myself for the first time. It would be great if a couple of other players could test it as well. I’d just need to know some very general things, such as:
-    Is the battle too  short / too long? Map too big / too small?
-    Too many / too few troops?
-    Too easy / too difficult?
-    Any obvious mistakes?
-    General impressions / improvements suggested?
-    Etc.
It is a historical campaign but I'd still like it to be as enjoyable as possible. Drop me a line if interested.
Thanks in advance!
 

Hey @kohlenklau@Vacillator. You're the best. You already have a million things to do...
I'll send you a PM. Thanks!

Hello fellow CMFIers,
I’ve just finished compiling my second campaign (battle series) called “The Buffalo Soldiers’ Ordeal” (all modules needed). It is a battle series that includes a prologue and 8 scenarios aiming to reproduce some of the events that took place on the western edge of the Gothic Line from 8 to 10 February 1945, during Operation Fourth Term.
The nine battles (to be used in conjunction with @kohlenklau's Buffalo mod) are:
0.    Prologue (Sommocolonia)
1.    Raiders on Highway One
2.    Strettoia
3.    Ordeal on the Plains
4.    Kesselring’s Ghosts
5.    Assault on Monte Folgorito
6.    Pushing to the Top
7.    Georgia on My Mind
8.    Castel Aghinolfi
Here are some pics to whet your appetite.

 

 

 
It is currently in a “pre-alpha” state and I’ll be soon testing it myself for the first time. It would be great if a couple of other players could test it as well. I’d just need to know some very general things, such as:
-    Is the battle too  short / too long? Map too big / too small?
-    Too many / too few troops?
-    Too easy / too difficult?
-    Any obvious mistakes?
-    General impressions / improvements suggested?
-    Etc.
It is a historical campaign but I'd still like it to be as enjoyable as possible. Drop me a line if interested.
Thanks in advance!