Ithikial_AU

Actually I was quite surprised how much effort went into the back story from the manual and some of the briefings I've read so far.

Loving Black Sea but just a small future feature request. On the scenario selection screen would it be possible to include a filter that sorts the scenario list by the date of the action? It's probably never really been a problem for the WW2 titles, but when you've got a fictional conflict it could make it a bit easier if players want to fight battles roughly in chronological order.

We-Go Elite, but the frenetic pace of modern combat I may follow my old CMSF pattern and start playing RT.

Amen Amen. Another day 1 purchase if CMx2 Africa became a reality.

I think gaming in general has by default always had to take the most 'extreme scenario' to make it something an audience wants to play. Hollywood effect? Releasing a wargame with 'no war' would be an interesting business decision. Saying that, I think it would be an adventurous developer to create a game about the break neck diplomatic work in the lead up to war. Player 'success' is determined by if they are able to avoid conflict or scale it down. 'This War of Mine' also looked at this content from a very different angle and tugged at the moral heart strings. Couldn't you argue that every conflict is in an essence that. A series of consquences leading to future causes? As for the casualty question I think it's interesting as you go through history the ability for man to cause greater amounts of death and destruction in wartime has occured at the same time as an inverse in the appetite for major and long term conflicts. I remeber the Ken Burns 'The Civil War' documentry from years ago where historian Shelby Foote Jr made the comment comparing the American Civil War and the Napoleonic Wars... (probably paraphrasing) "It was almost inconceivable that anything that horrendous could happen. [..] If we had ten percent casualties in a battle today it would be looked on as a blood bath. They had thirty percent, in several battles, and one after another. Shiloh had the same number of casualties as Waterloo, and yet when it was fought there were another twenty Waterloos to follow." In todays world (in partcualr for first world nations) it makes you wonder what cause would be strong enough to rally the people enough to accept a conventional war that had the casualty rate and scale of something like WW2.

Interesting reading but one thing that sticks out for my mind is the presence of a local sepratist force/militia in the first place. Strategically this would have to provide some level of support for Russian intervention in the first place - not to mention an excuse to enter the conflict. Was the modelling of Ukraine sepratist militia / irregular units ever considered as part of Black Sea or deemed out of scope? Just thinking of the scenario possibilities for Red Force if you could model militia fighting alongside Russian Army 'advisers.'

No problems. Be great to see the Moro River campaign get some love in the game.

Already in the folder.

Got your dropbox invite. Hope the files I've added are some help and/or save you some time with the map making. Keep us informed how this goes ahead.

Just an observation given your above post about the forces that will be involved. The path and fight you are taking to Ortana looks a bit different to the Van Doo's who were largely on the left flank 1st Canadian Division during the campaign. The closer fit for your campaign I think would be the Seaforth Highlanders of Canada and/or the Loyal Edmonton Regiment. IIRC these two regiments also bore the brunt of the fighting inside the city as well IIRC. Also for battles 1 and 2 (around San Leonardo) I already have a half finished map if you're interested.

Have you ever done an Allied small arms pack? I remember your Axis small arms release last year was it? Great work on the Shermans and looking forward to the CW versions.

kohlenklau - Were you still after the material regarding Ortana I had on file? Just need a dropbox set up and I'll transfer it to you. Cheers

+1 to this. Top of my own wish list for features for the game engine itself would have to be persistent battle damage carrying over between campaign missions, or like CMx1 days being able to import the state of a map from a save file. Fight over a map where the roads and buildings is more and more progressively being turned to rubble/craters. That or a tool in the editor to 'broad brush' maps to turn them into rubble/ruins. Save a lot of time for map makers making ruined maps.

FGM has a dedicated modern warfare forum section and our ladders are ready to accept Modern Era game results. (Including CMSF and CMA). I just think everybody is still WW2 focused until CMBS is released.

Brilliant Aris. Welcome back again.

Thanks for posting the manual. Had a read through of the backstory and up front disclaimer about the game vs real world events. Fingers crossed you guys don't pulled up regarding the content of the game by some alarmist media out for a story at all costs. As for the backstory, didn't expect the two diverging pathways/outcomes based on a Russian or NATO victory. It will be interesting to see how you guys develop this fictional conflict for future modules etc. Speaking about modules, with the talk about Marines landing around Odessa... safe to assume that's on the cards as a future focus area?

Brilliant news! Looking forward to it.

Wait until footage of gameplay gets pinged as some obscure rap artist you've never heard of. Either Combat Mission has a killer beat or the rap artist really needs to go back to music school if his tunes sound like an MG42.

Why do I get the feeling there's some BFC staff face palming right now if they're reading this. (Assuming it's not sarcasm ) I really hope they start going back into the mid->early war years once 1945 is done and dusted. Flipping it around to when the Germans had the overall stategic advantage to launch large offensives and the like would spice up the CM WW2 series with very different challengers for the players.

A bit belated but thanks to Chris for doing these vids. The 'promo' showcase videos of upcoming material is much appreciated. Given the timezones I'll never get the chance to watch it live, but it's good to sit back and watch it at a later date.

We do more than just that. FGM have a dedicated scenario design section now and there are a number of scenarios and campaigns that get pumped out with AI plans. Not all granted, but that's the same here on the BF Repository. We can't force our members to create AI plans if they don't want to - but granted some people still see the task as simply too difficult.

From someone who's been recording CM footage for a while, yeah it's not going to be easy like say a Total War game where you just boot up a previous battle in replay mode. As the above posters have stated you're going to have to get used to some video editing software at the same time.

Throws up another idea of allowing scenario designers to set an 'CAS' value to missions. Higher the CAS value the greater the chance of interceptions or distractions for aircraft doing successful bomb runs. Reflected in game by increases fly overs of aircraft over the battlefield? So far not so much an issue for WW2 eta due to Allied air superiority in the time period covered, but for modern titles like Black Sea where both sides would theoretically have a full air war operating at the same time?

Always been a supporter of CMx2 getting some kind of Op Layer incorporated but also agree with Erwin that KISS (Keep it simple stupid) needs be a guiding factor. Using the Close Combat style op layer would be brilliant in my book. Always thought they did that better than the tactical combat. No idea on the programing side but within the existing tactical battles I think the following two features would need to be added within CM to make an Op Layer an authentic option: - Terrain map transfer between battles. (Like what was introduced in CMBB in CMx1 days). - Player has the ability to reorganise their forces between engagements. ie. Merge those depleted 'two man squads' together before entering the next fight.

For the scenarios I've made and making I've always kept a record of the officers and other key personnel taking part for later incorporation into the editor. I think it's a nice little addition at the tail end of scenario design and adds a bit more to setting the feel. For the Operation Windsor (Carpiquet) campaign I'm making I've managed to source pretty much all of the officers from Company Command up that took part on both sides. Bit of an effort but worth it. You'll find the names scattered across the research sources you use. Organising them and saving the material is the tough bit.