CMSF2: the bigger chessboard

[LongLeftFlank]

Interesting piece here (linked from ZeroHedge but I figured I'd lose the 'deplorable' / basement n*zi commentary that inevitably follows):

http://www.mauldineconomics.com/this-week-in-geopolitics/medieval-times-in-the-modern-middle-east

Islamic State, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey scrambled to take ownership of the Sunni rebellion in Syria (and Iraqi 'Sunnistan').... Identities based solely on sectarianism now stand in the place of nationalism....The Sunni bloc is in disrepair; the Shiite bloc is on the rise. 

Interesting analysis, though incomplete, as it omits 2 key players: Jordan (US and Israeli client) and (populous and EU-linked) Algeria.

Edited July 2, 2017 by LongLeftFlank

[Erwin]

Those are wonderful visual aids.  Thank you...

(So glad Oman is out of it.  I love Muscat.)

Edited July 2, 2017 by Erwin

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I reckon they've misaligned Qatar.....Right now they are anything but Saudi-led. 

[LongLeftFlank]

:Also, while this article from a US CAT team operator in the Phils is a bit of a civil servant's whinge (wahh, they cut my wonderful program, and doom resulted), the below observation was interesting:

https://warontherocks.com/2017/07/a-cultural-failure-u-s-special-operations-in-the-philippines-and-the-rise-of-the-islamic-state/

During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the roles of Special Forces and conventional forces practically reversed: Conventional became primarily responsible for the training and advising of Iraqi and Afghan security forces while Special Forces largely focused on finding and then either killing or capturing the enemy and its commanders. 

And this author is one of many .mil commentators noting that tour of duty rotations promote short term thinking, reinventing of wheels, and above all, loss of confidence of local clients in any US commitment, as newcomers feel free to slag on and discard the relationships and commitments of their predecessors.

Not so different from corp life though, where 'exec track' MBA types toss away tribal knowledge and experience in vain bids to distinguish themselves by 'reinventing' their organizations in a short time.

Edited July 6, 2017 by LongLeftFlank

[LUCASWILLEN05]

If BF go  the Middle East again I would love to see them include Israelis, Turks. Egyptians, Iranians and others. The could even include Russian expedtionary forcesThat however would mean a great many expansions - for which no  doubt many of us would be happy to pay

However I would be even more interested in a Far East game. Although maybe India and Pakistan might be included in a Middle East scenario depending on how loosely you wish to define the Middle East

Edited August 11, 2017 by LUCASWILLEN05

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I have to say Lucas that your Far East scenario is looking increasingly plausible right now and IMHO it would be great to get Chinese & Korean units into the CMx Engine.....If I were BF (and I had the required manpower/resources) I would probably pick that one up and run with it as a third modern setting. 

Edited August 11, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[MikeyD]

If you Google Earth fly over those areas labeled 'Islamic State' (I did that a lot while working on the original CMSF) over most of it you will find a lot of nothing. No roads, no trees, no houses, no farms, no inhabitants no water. Nothin'. They basically control (or don't control) a single ribbon of asphalt running through a barren wilderness. Iraq says most of the ISIS fighters killed in Mosul were Russian nationals. ISIS is the rabid raccoon holed-up in your garden shed that you can't figure out how to safely get rid of.

CMSF2, I believe, is going to be a V4 engine upgrade of the *standing title* like the CMBS and CMBN was, not a new game under the CMSF banner. The standing scenarios will (hopefully) all continue to work. The timeframe is still 2007 with the same CMSF manual backstory. Of course you can do any make-your-own scenario you want. I once did an Army vs Marines scenario set in a Texas shopping plaza on the 4th of July. So doing an ISIS vs Kurds tactical scenario would be just as easy.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Yup, it's just a case of tinkering to get the TOEs, but the more units & the more freedom in the editor the better (the ability to fully rename units would be splendid).....I'm excited to see what we get, if all the modules get the upgrade too and the UnCons get some minor tweaks (access to demo-charges etc.) it will be an astoundingly flexible game (personally I hope there's some way to sneak the CM:A vehicles not already covered into the game too, but expectations aren't high based on Steve's earlier comments).

10 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

So doing an ISIS vs Kurds tactical scenario would be just as easy.

You can even do the Turks to some extent (I am tinkering with this at the moment using tweaked maps from the NATO module with German & Canadian units, with a few mods it might be reasonably convincing).

Edited August 11, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead

[LongLeftFlank]

Interesting piece on the Syrian conflict here. Don't buy it entirely, but worth a read:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/syria-civil-war-rebellion-isis-assad-western-intervention-arms-a7921526.html"Ignorance and stupidity governed the reflexes of Western politicians who preferred moral correctness to the realities of finding a solution: they sent weapons instead."

[Erwin]

My hope is that the reason BF has been so quiet for the past few months is that they have switched resources to doing CMSF2 asap since that is  going to be a much bigger seller given current events.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Superb article about ISIS' use of armour in Syria (& to a lesser extent Iraq), here:  http://spioenkop.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/armour-in-islamic-state-story-of.html

Not entirely convinced by the comments about 'multi-spectral' camouflage though, I think it's more likely a case of disguising the profile TBH.

Edited September 1, 2017 by Sgt.Squarehead