Status update on "Black Sea"

[Buzz]

A lot of us following this thread are ready for the new modern CMBS release party. I figured George MC would be designing scenarios but it is great to hear it from George himself. Thanks for the update.

Looking forward to more Black Sea shown in Chris's live streams.

Sequoia's "Black Sea" release prediction Oct 15th.... based on CMx2 dates and averages. That is only 2 more months!

[emccabe]

2 months feels like forever when waiting for the next combat mission game

[Sequoia]

A lot of us following this thread are ready for the new modern CMBS release party. I figured George MC would be designing scenarios but it is great to hear it from George himself. Thanks for the update.

Looking forward to more Black Sea shown in Chris's live streams.

Sequoia's "Black Sea" release prediction Oct 15th.... based on CMx2 dates and averages. That is only 2 more months!

Well I think they would have announced it by now if it was going to be released exactly on the "average" interval. I think this being an entirely new Family with probably very little if any carry over from Shock Force it will take them longer than an average release time.

[Buzz]

Well I think they would have announced it by now if it was going to be released exactly on the "average" interval. I think this being an entirely new Family with probably very little if any carry over from Shock Force it will take them longer than an average release time.

You are in all likelihood correct Sequoia.

With CMBN & CMFI v3.0 Mac upgrades soon to be delivered and the CMRT patch I will have plenty to keep me engaged for a couple + months.

I will keep telling myself "Black Sea" release mid October as a placeholder

[The Teacher]

Lots of goodies to play and to look forward to in the months ahead.

I've been planning a number of scenario's which will have lots of time and space to view the pleasant countryside just before a missile makes you upset.

The modern battlefield is going to test a lot of players.

Cheers

Stephen

[emccabe]

https://news.vice.com/article/ukraine-announces-that-the-russian-invasion-has-begun?utm_source=vicenewsfb

things escalated

and does the events going on in the black sea area have any effect on the release on the release of combat mission black sea

[JRMC1879]

https://news.vice.com/article/ukraine-announces-that-the-russian-invasion-has-begun?utm_source=vicenewsfb

things escalated

and does the events going on in the black sea area have any effect on the release on the release of combat mission black sea

Well - my view - Of course it does. I fail to see how BF can release a game about this whilst it is an active conflict - and one that seems to be getting worse.

I believe they have to change the venue - releasing with this subject may bring more publicity to them and our hobby than we want - and all of the wrong kind.

There was a reason CMSF was about a then hypothetical conflict in Syria rather than a real one on Iraq or Afghanistan.

I should add - I don't want this game to be delayed but I believe BF are not insensitive to bringing out a game about a live conflict in which people are dying today and I wish they would just state their position on it so we all know.

[Kieme(ITA)]

I don't see any reason this game release should be tied up with world events.

First of all BFC already stated that this game development goes far back to 2012, if I am not mistaken, and this was advertised in various "heads up" articles and such on specialized internet sites.

Second, I see a list of reasons why this game release should not be influenced by current events:

-CMBS is not a picture of the actual conflict in ukraine, it's based on a different, yet similar, situation drawn by realistic and plausible geopolitical elements of that world area, involving necessarily the same countries. As a proof of this: there are no irregular units in CMBS, quite a note since, during these months and especially in the starting phases of the conflict, irregular units were and are a common sight on both sides.

-a conflict in that part of the world was not so impossible to foresee, and games dedicated to modern conflicts have a well defined and knowledge set of potential theaters to use, you can read a worldwide newspaper and pick them every day. So, given the proability of a conflict to happen in such stated regions plus the need of a modern setting tactical combat game to be plausible there's no way you can't untie the two things. You couldn't possibly belive a combat mission shock force depicting a conflict on Saudi Arabia being invaded by the USA, and for the same reasons you would belive a conflict like that brought by CMBS.

-parallel example: armed robbery is a common crime, people get hurt and die to it all over the world every day, but this doesn't stop a game about bank robbery, for example, to be developed and released. yes it's generic, but an open conflict is the same generic event in geopolitical terms.

There are games out there that let you steal a car and run on top of people, that's surely less morally correct than any CM game. There are books out there, written by geopolitical masterminds, who forsee every kind of potential conflict, among them something is bound to be proven right in the next few years, just because they take real events, real data and get to impossible to discard results, that doesn't make those Writers responsible for the conflict itself or lightly harted for what happened.

-you can pick either force to control. Given the real conflict in ukraine you can simpathize with any side but that doesn't reflect in any way on the game itself, so to speak you can control german units in a ww2 game but that doesn't make you evil or the game not politically correct because of nazi war crimes, which of course you cannot replicate within the game boundaries. CM game is just outside any of that scope.

-finally I'd like to stress that combat mission series game is more dedicated to tactical simulation rather than geopolitical/economical/strategic layers, this gives the game a sort of benefit when it comes to depicting actual situations. You can't kill civilians in a combat mission game since civilians are not part of the picture. Of course civilian casualties, mass murder, violence on p.o.w.s, are all real parts of any conflict but combat mission is not about that, despite being a combat simulation. I'd say a CM game is more of a game, indeed, an instrument to see how real assets would behave in a very confined and limited situation, much more "impersonal" than you could say. The "larger picture" such as the setting (Syrian conflict in CMSF, ukraine conflict in CMBS) is necessary to make the game plausible and verged to realism rather than just being crazy by depicting impossible situations.

All in all the fact that the next CM game and the next one again that will be dedicated to modern warfare take place in a hot zone of the world is something you just can't avoid.

After 3 years of development a real crysis escalates in the same region your game is set, what can you do? Trash everything and set something completely different? I don't want a combat mission modern title depicting a conflict between france and germany, I wouldn't just buy it, in all senses.

[Erwin]

You may be perfectly correct re CMBS. However, unfortunately real life issues like this can have an effect. eg: Why no Arab-Israeli war CMSF modules?

[Kieme(ITA)]

Well, I belive that arab-israeli wars would require a Whole new dedicated game, not sure they would fit as a CMSF module...

I'd surely like to see such a game, from 1970s on, maybe it will come someday, but given the great amount of stuff I'd say it should be a stand alone game, with its own modules.

But it's up to BFC to clarify officially if they didn't work on arab israeli wars for any specific reason if they want to..

[JRMC1879]

I don't see any reason this game release should be tied up with world events.

First of all BFC already stated that this game development goes far back to 2012, if I am not mistaken, and this was advertised in various "heads up" articles and such on specialized internet sites.

Second, I see a list of reasons why this game release should not be influenced by current events:

-CMBS is not a picture of the actual conflict in ukraine, it's based on a different, yet similar, situation drawn by realistic and plausible geopolitical elements of that world area, involving necessarily the same countries. As a proof of this: there are no irregular units in CMBS, quite a note since, during these months and especially in the starting phases of the conflict, irregular units were and are a common sight on both sides.

-a conflict in that part of the world was not so impossible to foresee, and games dedicated to modern conflicts have a well defined and knowledge set of potential theaters to use, you can read a worldwide newspaper and pick them every day. So, given the proability of a conflict to happen in such stated regions plus the need of a modern setting tactical combat game to be plausible there's no way you can't untie the two things. You couldn't possibly belive a combat mission shock force depicting a conflict on Saudi Arabia being invaded by the USA, and for the same reasons you would belive a conflict like that brought by CMBS.

-parallel example: armed robbery is a common crime, people get hurt and die to it all over the world every day, but this doesn't stop a game about bank robbery, for example, to be developed and released. yes it's generic, but an open conflict is the same generic event in geopolitical terms.

There are games out there that let you steal a car and run on top of people, that's surely less morally correct than any CM game. There are books out there, written by geopolitical masterminds, who forsee every kind of potential conflict, among them something is bound to be proven right in the next few years, just because they take real events, real data and get to impossible to discard results, that doesn't make those Writers responsible for the conflict itself or lightly harted for what happened.

-you can pick either force to control. Given the real conflict in ukraine you can simpathize with any side but that doesn't reflect in any way on the game itself, so to speak you can control german units in a ww2 game but that doesn't make you evil or the game not politically correct because of nazi war crimes, which of course you cannot replicate within the game boundaries. CM game is just outside any of that scope.

-finally I'd like to stress that combat mission series game is more dedicated to tactical simulation rather than geopolitical/economical/strategic layers, this gives the game a sort of benefit when it comes to depicting actual situations. You can't kill civilians in a combat mission game since civilians are not part of the picture. Of course civilian casualties, mass murder, violence on p.o.w.s, are all real parts of any conflict but combat mission is not about that, despite being a combat simulation. I'd say a CM game is more of a game, indeed, an instrument to see how real assets would behave in a very confined and limited situation, much more "impersonal" than you could say. The "larger picture" such as the setting (Syrian conflict in CMSF, ukraine conflict in CMBS) is necessary to make the game plausible and verged to realism rather than just being crazy by depicting impossible situations.

All in all the fact that the next CM game and the next one again that will be dedicated to modern warfare take place in a hot zone of the world is something you just can't avoid.

After 3 years of development a real crysis escalates in the same region your game is set, what can you do? Trash everything and set something completely different? I don't want a combat mission modern title depicting a conflict between france and germany, I wouldn't just buy it, in all senses.

I completely agree with what you say - but I am a wargamer and therefore understand the hobby. Everything you just said of course would be completely lost on someone outside the hobby which is my point.

I don't see the difference between BF brining out a game on the Ukraine crisis and bringing one out on the recent Israeli assault on Gaza - and I don't think they would even contemplate that.

And my original point still stands - we were in the middle of a conflict with Iraq when CMSF was released - but BF picked on a hypothetical conflict for a reason - I am not sure I see the difference between not wanting to do a game on an active conflict in which people were dying because it was reality at the time and bringing one out in the same way because you were a little too accurate in your choice of scenario.

All I am saying is a release of CMBS may go completely unnoticed but then again it may get spotted and someone with no knowledge of the hobby picks it and BF and the hobby draws a lot of flak.

I don't think I am saying anything BF haven't discussed internally - just saying it would be nice to know their position.

Not saying I have an objection and I would buy the game - am really looking forward to it . Not sure on my own moral stance on playing a "game" depicting a live conflict where people are dying - but I guess I have played scenarios in CMSF that are pretty close to live action such as Libya helmand etc.

[sburke]

Well - my view - Of course it does. I fail to see how BF can release a game about this whilst it is an active conflict - and one that seems to be getting worse.

I believe they have to change the venue - releasing with this subject may bring more publicity to them and our hobby than we want - and all of the wrong kind.

There was a reason CMSF was about a then hypothetical conflict in Syria rather than a real one on Iraq or Afghanistan.

I should add - I don't want this game to be delayed but I believe BF are not insensitive to bringing out a game about a live conflict in which people are dying today and I wish they would just state their position on it so we all know.

I am pretty certain that I am not violating NDA to say that they have no intention of not releasing the game at least not as far as I can tell. The theoretical conflict in CMBS is quite drastically different than what is actually occurring. That this area would be a potential powder keg is one of the reasons for deciding on the venue. That it has actually occurred just shows how predictable Russian action would be. I am personally hoping that the expansion modules allow for simulating Polish confrontation with Russia which frankly right now is not that far fetched either. Gamers game conflicts, it is what we do.

edit- hell I just opened up LLF's Ramadi scenario as I am reading Thunder Run and felt the urge to go back to CMSF.

And incidentally, I really wsh BF would do an Israeli expansion when they get around to CMSF 2. You don't have to assume a political position to create a military simulation.

[Vanir Ausf B]

All I am saying is a release of CMBS may go completely unnoticed but then again it may get spotted and someone with no knowledge of the hobby picks it and BF and the hobby draws a lot of flak.

The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.

-- Oscar Wilde

Changing the setting would require throwing out a lot of work, even if the same combatants were used. Most (all?) of the scenario maps are based on real world locations.

[LUCASWILLEN05]

I don't thin the game is likely to be released for a cuple of months yet. Certaily I would not want to change the setting from Ukrainw which is very plausible. Hwever, if the game were just about to be rerleased I would hold off for a month or two give n the current conditions.

However, I would definately be using this time to change the back story to reflect the global realities. I would also make it clear that this game is about what might have been or what might be depending on the outcome of current develpments. This would show outsiders that we, as wargamers are in fact very much aware of the geopolitical realities and, far from glorifying or desiring war are actuallly wargaming to understand the situation as well as for the intellectual challenge.

[emccabe]

my only fear is that somebody or some news station who knows nothing about the combat mission games will jump on it and blame it for problems even if they have never played one of the games like the news jumped on the whole video games causes people to be violent argument

[sburke]

my only fear is that somebody or some news station who knows nothing about the combat mission games will jump on it and blame it for problems even if they have never played one of the games like the news jumped on the whole video games causes people to be violent argument

ha you can almost be guaranteed there is such a flake out there, but you can't make your decisions in life based on flakes or lack thereof. I doubt a news station will though, CM would have to actually be known well enough for that.

[Pelican Pal]

There are swaths of wargamers who don't know about CM. I am not the least bit worried about anyone else finding it.

CM also doesn't look the best so getting any potential video that looks interesting would be hard.

And finally. Even if it did occur what would be the result? People who were never going to buy CM decide to continue not buying CM?

[emccabe]

well my reason for saying that is if you google something like Ukraine or black sea you get the most recent news and black sea might pop up there but then again combat mission is not very well known so I dont think that will happen

[Tempestzzzz]

If I were BF I would refocus on a new adversary.

Oh the blood split here.

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Chernarus

[Kieme(ITA)]

I can't really see a CM title with a made up country, it would be silly.

[Sergei]

I can't really see a CM title with a made up country, it would be silly.

"CM Gray Sea covers a speculative war between Notrossiya and Notukraina." Yeah, doesn't sound too good. Arma 2 took place in Chernorus (Black Rus), which of course was in no way taken as a reference to Belarus (White Rus).

Now I would be offended if BFC made CMSF a Syria based game after the Syrian civil war started or CMBS a Ukraine based game after the Ukrainian civil war started. But this isn't the case, obviously. CMSF gave us a Syrian pro-Assad troll. CMBS is bound to give us Russian pro-Putin trolls, but that is probably unavoidable. BFC can reduce this by making it clear that they are not making political statements through the game, anymore than MicroProse's old fighter simulators were political statements in favour of invading Iran, Iraq, Cuba or Soviet Union.

Fears of general public's backlash in this genre are not based on any precedent. This isn't GTA, nobody really cares from a moral point of view as long as you can't murder hookers or anything like that. Here in Finland a C-64 game Raid over Moscow caused a parliamentary discussion in 1985 when a communist MP asked in parliament how such anti-Soviet propaganda can be fed to our kids, but it just made the game a best seller. We've come a long way since then.

[Talespin Jim]

Sergei's last point accentuates what I was going to say. Being a marketer by trade, getting a very public lashing about the game would only be a bonanza for BF, helping them attract new gamers through free publicity, that otherwise would never have heard about this wonderful game.

On a moral level, it may seem odd, but I feel greater respect and admiration for those who fight in the wars these games are about, so I feel that playing such a game while the war in progress will actually help me to understand what is going on better and revere, appreciate and be more generous to those who have needs created by the conflicts. I would appreciate timely games for such a reason, even if I might feel a little weird about playing it.

[Erwin]

It's purely a psychological phenomenon that we can happily play wargames about ghastly situations that happened "x+" years ago. But, there is squeamishness if the war depicted is "x-" years ago.

I don't understand it personally - especially when it doesn't affect our families (in the west and southern hemisphere at least).

Yes, I understand it would be upsetting if you were in Ukraine right now. However, there are genocides and massacres being carried out in many parts of the world ALL THE TIME.

If we are to stop having games depicting violence because it may be happening right now or in the recent past, we would never have any wargames made at all.

[antaress73]

Hello everyone,

I havent been on these forums for quite a few years because of family and such. This new upcoming game featuring modern russians sure ticks all my boxes ! I have a question: Will the US use the M829A4 AKE round that's supposed to be operationnaly fielded in 2016 ? It supposedly defeats the Relikt armor (precursor round) on the T-90, T-72B3 . That would unbalance the game I think unless the russians come up with a countermeasure. (they did upgrade the Kontakt-5 when NATO rounds able to defeat it came up).

[Stagler]

Hello everyone,

I havent been on these forums for quite a few years because of family and such. This new upcoming game featuring modern russians sure ticks all my boxes ! I have a question: Will the US use the M829A4 AKE round that's supposed to be operationnaly fielded in 2016 ? It supposedly defeats the Relikt armor (precursor round) on the T-90, T-72B3 . That would unbalance the game I think unless the russians come up with a countermeasure. (they did upgrade the Kontakt-5 when NATO rounds able to defeat it came up).

I would say its probably unlikely, but then again from what we have seen already I dont think any Russian vehicles ingame will be fielding RELIKT, except maybe the theoretical T-90MS "Russian version" to be included.

I believe the T-72B3 has KONTAKT-5.