PanzerMiller Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 For what it's worth out there in CM development-land...in order of my own preference: 1. Russia '41 2. France '40 3. North Africa 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WriterJWA Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I've been aching for a crack at the Pacific for years... specifically island hopping battles like Guadalcanal (how about a Edson's Raiders/Henderson field defense scenario?), the landing at Tarawa, even the larger island campaigns like Peleliu (oh man, the airfield!), Saipan/Tinian, Iwo, and Okinawa. There are some many possibilities and room to work with it's practically endless... and that's not including ANZAC and British troops. Every time I see something that can be adapted, like flamethrowers, flame tanks, and amphibious assault, I get more and more optimistic. We've even seen variations of the terrain in all the existing titles. Not that it's necessarily easy, but I think it's really a matter of retexturing, TO&E work, and some morale modification (troops would have to be a bit tougher, I think...). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggard Sketchy Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 France 40 is overlooked way too much and I MUST PLAY IT 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johansson66 Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I've been aching for a crack at the Pacific for years... specifically island hopping battles like Guadalcanal (how about a Edson's Raiders/Henderson field defense scenario?), the landing at Tarawa, even the larger island campaigns like Peleliu (oh man, the airfield!), Saipan/Tinian, Iwo, and Okinawa. There are some many possibilities and room to work with it's practically endless... and that's not including ANZAC and British troops. Every time I see something that can be adapted, like flamethrowers, flame tanks, and amphibious assault, I get more and more optimistic. We've even seen variations of the terrain in all the existing titles. Not that it's necessarily easy, but I think it's really a matter of retexturing, TO&E work, and some morale modification (troops would have to be a bit tougher, I think...). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johansson66 Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I'd love to see the PTO as well. I find this side of the conflict most interesting. If only if only Battlefront. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 acctingman1969, Welcome aboard! We have been trying since CMx1's CMBO came out in 2000 to get BFC to do the PTO, only to be resoundingly turned down then and every time since by Steve. He seems to be totally oipposed to doing the PTO. LongLeftFlank worked his butt off doing his amazing Makin CMSF mod, and there are things which could theoretically be done in the new games since. Unfortunately, we've got needed kit scattered all over the place. The proper mountains are in CMFI, as are the palm trees. Anyone wishing to play Kohima or Imphal will need CMFI, for it has the Grants and other goodies. The Allied flamethrower tanks (reasonable stand-in for the PTO varieties) are in the CMBN Vehicle Pack, as are the all-important manpack flamethrowers. There's supposed to be a second Vehicle Pack released so we can do Scheldt Estuary stuff, a pack which will have LVTs and some sort/s of landing craft. Needless to say, the CMFI (which could readily use much of the Vehicle Pack) and CMRT players would be quite vocal if CMBN got two Vehicle Packs while they had none. CMRT doesn't have so much as a Module yet, either. I wish BFC would provide us a way to port weapon files, not just skins, from one game to another. That would make many things doable we simply can't at present. Regards, John Kettler 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted April 8, 2015 Share Posted April 8, 2015 I would vote for 1st) France 1940 2nd) Russia 1941-42 3rd) Fulda Gap 1980-85 4th) North Africa And that's not because I wouldn't want to play North Africa, just that I'd rather see the other stuff first. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane's Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I'd really like to have a Cold War CM game. Like it was portrayed in Tom Clancy's Red Storm Book. NATO vs Warsaw Pact in Germany 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Lol nice handle, in the forum updates it looks like Jane's military is commenting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Not to bring down your idea, but what's so interesting about France in 1940? I'm no history expert, but wasn't that basically a walkover for the Germans? I guess if you just want to see the German war machine at the peak of its power, then ok, but I don't think it makes for a very interesting wargaming scenario watching the panzers roll over the hapless French. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletpoint Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 I think the Pacific would be a perfect match for the Combat Mission engine's strengths and limitations. Basically it would play like CMBN. Dug-in static enemies, with your role being to overcome layers of defense and take out strongpoint after strongpoint. I could see it work and also be interesting challenge, provided that the maps are well designed (no puzzle maps please). (and yes, I know BattleFront is against the PTO, I'm just musing a bit) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum15 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 (edited) Not to bring down your idea, but what's so interesting about France in 1940? I'm no history expert, but wasn't that basically a walkover for the Germans? I guess if you just want to see the German war machine at the peak of its power, then ok, but I don't think it makes for a very interesting wargaming scenario watching the panzers roll over the hapless French.Thats not really true, the french army (on paper) was at least as good as the german army, there were countless "CM scale" encounters during the 1940 campaign were both side met at equal terms and many which saw the French temporary defeating German troops.I would recommend you the book "Blitzkrieg-Legende" by Karl-Heinz Frieser if you are interested in this topic.Operational the French forces got crushed by the Wehrmacht but that does not mean much for the CM size of engagements. Edited April 11, 2015 by Wiggum15 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 1. Fulda Gap ~1983 2. Black Sea ~1946 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockinHarry Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Not to bring down your idea, but what's so interesting about France in 1940? I'm no history expert, but wasn't that basically a walkover for the Germans? I guess if you just want to see the German war machine at the peak of its power, then ok, but I don't think it makes for a very interesting wargaming scenario watching the panzers roll over the hapless French. If at all, it was rather an operational walkover, but on CM tactical scale, I could imagine many interesting engagements between 2 worthy opponents, that I wouldn´t suppose one sided. Not to forget dutch, belgian and BEF forces! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckman Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Like others have said, it was a lot more even tactically than operationally or strategically (not unlike Normandy or Bagration in 1944, you might say). Recent research, summarised by Steven Zaloga in his Osprey books, paints a somewhat better picture of the French army. The French armoured cavalry divisions fought a successful delaying action against the panzers in Belgium, for example. However it has somewhat understandably been overshadowed by the cataclysmic defeat at Sedan (which pitted Germany's best against French reserve troops) and the events that followed. The BEF had some tactical successes too, although it didn't matter in the end of course. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Yes the campaigns in Poland, France, etc were stunning successes, especially seen in the light of the times where four years and millions of dead did nothing essentially. That said walkover completely belies the truth of the matter. Poland alone cost the Wehrmacht around 50,000 KIA which is 8k short of total US dead for Vietnam and that campaign was a month long. Norway was a disaster for the German navy and German troops in the far north (Narvik iirc) were almost ordered to turn themselves in to Sweden for internment after allied landings in the area. Hitler was talked out of it by the general staff and the German regiment in question fought a skilled delaying action but only was saved by the victory in France. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Wehrmacht casualties in Poland were more along the lines of 20k Kia/Mia and 30k wia.. Still immense for one month of operations. Certainly there are many interesting actions to explore at the CM level. Los 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Wehrmacht casualties in Poland were more along the lines of 20k Kia/Mia and 30k wia.. Still immense for one month of operations. Certainly there are many interesting actions to explore at the CM level. Los From a scenario perspective it's just difficult to find actual information that's usable for those early campaigns. Heck, it's hard to find any information at all on some campaigns because they just don't sell enough books to make it worthwhile for someone to do all the research and publish one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggum15 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 (edited) Thats true ASL Veteran, if anyone knows a good book about the invasion of poland 1939 with a focus on the military side (no osprey stuff) that would be great, i cant find one. Edited April 11, 2015 by Wiggum15 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 Wehrmacht casualties in Poland were more along the lines of 20k Kia/Mia and 30k wia.. Still immense for one month of operations. Certainly there are many interesting actions to explore at the CM level. Los I must have misremembered a total figure of 50k casualties for the campaign then. Yes still very high for a month. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1812 Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 My Preference, 1. Spanish Civil War 1936-1939 2. Patton Rolls East 1946- 3. Angolan Civil War 1980-1985 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 I must have misremembered a total figure of 50k casualties for the campaign then. Yes still very high for a month. Nah (assuming Los has the right numbers) you just tagged the "casualties" as "KIA". Might even have just finger-farted in your post 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delliejonut Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Yes the campaigns in Poland, France, etc were stunning successes, especially seen in the light of the times where four years and millions of dead did nothing essentially. That said walkover completely belies the truth of the matter. Poland alone cost the Wehrmacht around 50,000 KIA which is 8k short of total US dead for Vietnam and that campaign was a month long. Norway was a disaster for the German navy and German troops in the far north (Narvik iirc) were almost ordered to turn themselves in to Sweden for internment after allied landings in the area. Hitler was talked out of it by the general staff and the German regiment in question fought a skilled delaying action but only was saved by the victory in France. Wehrmacht casualties in Poland were more along the lines of 20k Kia/Mia and 30k wia.. Still immense for one month of operations. Certainly there are many interesting actions to explore at the CM level. Los Why did I think that Germany took Poland without firing a shot? I swear I'd heard that before. I only have a high school education of WW2, besides what I've personally researched, and there's still plenty I don't know. Has anyone else been misinformed of this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLSTK Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 You might have been thinking of the Germans' annexing of Austria and The Sudetenland, where they were welcomed with open arms. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delliejonut Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 You might have been thinking of the Germans' annexing of Austria and The Sudetenland, where they were welcomed with open arms. Ah... yes. This. Still though I had no idea the invasion of Poland was so costly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.