Jump to content

Black Sea II


Kinophile

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Gazmaps said:

When has that stopped the west from trying Iraq, Libya, Syria.......democracy is just a contemporary motivational tool - like religion was in the crusades

Ahem, I call B*** S***. At no time did the west try to impose a democracy on Libya or Syria. Some part of me wishes they would but that is not in the cards. Operations in Libya were to prevent Gaddafi from slaughtering people whole sale. Sure there are groups trying to help Libyans to have a functioning government but no one is even close to trying to impose anything on them. As for Syria that's just a huge mess with US and a few other's forces just trying to keep the worlds worst from taking over from one of the worlds worst dictators. Also a very far cry from trying to fix a country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another possible scenario for the game: After nuclear exchange NATO forces are invading russia to secure those remaining nukes and then separating russia on different zones of control, where European part of russia goes under control of the WEST and Syberia and everything else goes under control of China. 

xM0C2GR.jpg

And then new scenario for new new game: war between West what is exhausted by nuclear exchange with russia and China what feels that it is her chance to make a step forward as a somewhat superpower. 

qm6ZyFY.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IanL said:

No NATO force will ever attack / invade Russia. It was never designed for that, there was never an appetite for that. It will never happen. The Russian government can go on and on about the NATO threat but NATO forces are only a threat to Russians who are in someone else's country - specifically only other NATO members.

First of all never say never. Second of all we talking about game world where US is already fighting Russia, so obviusly its all fictional. We just brainstorming what to play after 3 or 4 modules for the current game will came out. We foght in Ukraine it would be cool to take some fighting to russia or Belarus. Afterall nuclear war will not destroy everything it will wipe out few billions of people but armies will still operate and wars will still take place. So I mean these are ideas for a fictional world of a fictional game. No need to take entertainment that serious) Invading russia in the game would be cool, especially in winter. Could be a great sandbox game with all seasons and all the hardware - people will play it for years)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another idea for the game but not for the black sea game. 

It would be cool to have a complete sandbox game. Meaning the game without any story line but with all seasons unlocked. The game what will provide players with ability to make their own campigns and scenarios as it is right now but without any specific story line. 

So what I mean pure quick battle/multiplayer game - where at first few armies will be represented and then with upcoming module additional armies will be added. So that players will be able to make their own battles like China vs Russia or Russia vs USA or whatever. You know what I mean? The game without any historical background or something, simply armies modules constantly coming out, all terrain avaliable from desert to snow and then simply modules man. 

Because we are taking too much in consideration while thinking about new game. Lets  face it we just want armies batteling each other with different kinds of hardware. Who cares  that that would never happen or would happen? We just want to see leopards going against type 99, and Tunguskas trying to take down F22 raptor lol you know? 

We are way too serious about this story line thing. In this game tanks are surviving direct hits from 203mm arty shells lol So i mean this game its not even that accurate in terms of simulation. 

So in many ways this game got certain arcade elements in it. So let it be what it is - army going against army. Who cares about story? Modify scenario editor and players will give you stories themselves. 

All I want from new games in CM world is more content, more vehicles, more new stuff and bigger and bigger maps for battles. 

We got historical wing of CM for WW2 and we got fictional wing for modern days combat. So I mean I dont care about details of those stories behind these games. I just want to play the game lol. I think it should be sandbox where all the armies will be mixed and avaliable - where you can play syrian scenario or where you can play Ukrainian scenario. 

The story itself is just a setting for the game - in reality its one force trying to adopt its tactics to tactics of its enemy. 

Its just a game guys. 

And you know what? We already got all main theatres opened - we got ww2, we got syria, we got afghanistan, we got europe and so on - now its just additional content and polishing what is worth waiting. 

At this point Ive did more than 40 mods myself and I'm simply interested in having more stuff to mod and to play with. NATO wasnt designed - who cares?) We got 203 mm shells hitting vehicles and they moving afterwords lol - thats whats fantastic lol 

I just want a modern war simulator where people will be able to fight each other with different armies and different tactics. Who cares about story lines? 

I would do like Arma series - create a fictional country where all the countries would battle each other lol That would be cool. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, HerrTom said:

Honestly, jingoism like this is disturbing to me.  I dunno. I read things like this all in one spot and I get this uneasy feeling in my gut.

My read was that Squarehead was cutting along the lines of "You're gonna be our democracy" by force as opposed to "Oh darn, we just annihilated a country.  Wanna vote who's boss now?" kind of thinking.  I mean, I can give counter examples in the democracies in Eastern Europe in the late 40s - they had elections after all, and the Right Party ended up winning, too!

Man you need to relax. We discussing fictional scenarios for a fictional world where the United States are already fighting russia for quite some time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys dont put to much sense into the story line - in Black Sea game world russia is already at war with America, but it is on a tactical level. In Black Sea 2 it will obviusly escalade to a full scale war. But who cares?) lol The only reason why we talking about Black Sea 2 is because we want to see more content - more units what werent represented yet. 

You guys are seriously discussing concepts of democracy - this threat is just to show the developing team that we want more toys to play with. Lol 

"its not a democracy" "we have to do what is right" 

I'll tell you what is right - having more variants of tanks and apc's along with IFV's and so on in your fictional battle lol 

Its not a political discussion here. Its just looking for a reason for developers to provide us with more stuff lol

And in this particular game russia is an agressor lol So obviusly Black Sea 2 will do no good to ingame russia lol It will be something about fighting it even harder than in original game lol 

And you all like - this possible - this is not possible. 

It is a pc game - give us more units please and find a story line what will be worth of giving us those units and maps lol thats all) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They cannot get the games they already have out and added onto and updated fast enough.

So why in the world would you think they would ever get to such a  un-logical game concept.

If anything has ever been proven, BF stays in the realm of realistic and non - fantasy.

I like the sandbox concept, but again logic tells us that would never happen.

 

If they do ever get to a point where all the present titles are not keeping them busy. I am sure they will delve into something that interest them and that follows logical paths and present capabilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, slysniper said:

They cannot get the games they already have out and added onto and updated fast enough.

So why in the world would you think they would ever get to such a  un-logical game concept.

If anything has ever been proven, BF stays in the realm of realistic and non - fantasy.

I like the sandbox concept, but again logic tells us that would never happen.

 

If they do ever get to a point where all the present titles are not keeping them busy. I am sure they will delve into something that interest them and that follows logical paths and present capabilities.

yup its been like a year since last time update activity 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, kinophile said:

Sigh. What is it about NATO that people don't get? 

The  basic organizing principle is DEFENSIVE. It's not even organized correctly to launch a strategic offense. 

I'm Not military and even I can see that. 

its not about real nato its about nato in game what is protecting Ukraine and crushing russia. So if in black sea russia was stopped then in black sea 2 it will be destroyed. The way it will be destroyed is a subject for discussion here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Black Sea game is about start of a world war. So the Black Sea 2 should be about how West is going to win in that world war. I mean as far as I see it. But whatever. I dont think we will see Black Sea 2 anytime soon. I would like to see Belorusian forces module and Baltic countries module. That would be cool. But lets see what developers will do for us. Afterall this topic is hot - maybe thats why developers are not rushing with addons to it. Personally I dream about CM sandbox game. Anyhow - it was nice talking to you guys - hit me in DM if you will came out with some info about future CM projects. Good Luck!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, BS ends with both sides backing off. So it's literally about WW3 NOT starting, and the Ukrainian War remains regional. It's also about NATO reacting and very specifically NOT crossing the border. Because auto-nuke. 

Of course, that could also be read as simply the opening stage of a far broader and very muddled war, possibly consisting of multiple regional conflicts gradually combining into a general state of confused conflict across theaters/continents. 

Edited by kinophile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kinophile said:

Actually, BS ends with both sides backing off. So it's literally about WW3 NOT starting, and the Ukrainian War remains regional. It's also about NATO reacting and very specifically NOT crossing the border. Because auto-nuke. 

Of course, that could also be read as simply the opening stage of a far broader and very muddled war, possibly consisting of multiple regional conflicts gradually combining into a general state of confused conflict across theaters/continents. 

Oh ok well man thank you for your info i never played campaign - Ive only saw missions and talked to a person or two. Im glad war didnt started. well if it wasnt there then... i mean... then there will be no Black Sea 2 right? why would they back off to fight each other in a same region but in a different country? hm i dont know

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Essentially, and Im sure I have some aspects wrong, NATO and RUS both give each other a severe bloody nose, in the initial Rus attack and then the overwhelming NATO counter attack.

However the air remains contested (primarily through RUS AD/AA,) and NATO has zero intention of crossing the border. Basically Russia's only option other than complete regional defeat is to go nuclear, even just tactical. But NATO holds back enough that it doesnt go there.

It's not quite said, but my impression is that Ukraine suffers severe losses and yet, by simply still existing as an independent state (and also part of NATO) that the end state counts as NATO win.

Edited by kinophile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned sandbox - that'd be a big plus in my book.  One of the things that I'd love is to have all the games wrapped up as add-ons to a main engine.  Plug in CM:RT and CM:FB into a single game, and grab formations from either.

I had a hell of a time in Graviteam Tactics Operation Star pitting Tigers against T-55s.  I lost, but I gave the Soviets a bloody nose!

oxv91Hi.jpg

An Mi-24 flies over a knocked out Tiger over the Steppes.

 

9 hours ago, Oleksandr said:

Man you need to relax. We discussing fictional scenarios for a fictional world where the United States are already fighting russia for quite some time. 

I'm sorry man - call it a bad day and I was unaware that you didn't know the story line.  Seemed almost like revenge fantasy lol ;)

Edited by HerrTom
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, HerrTom said:

One of the things that I'd love is to have all the games wrapped up as add-ons to a main engine.  Plug in CM:RT and CM:FB into a single game, and grab formations from either.

+1  This is what was great about BF's original CM1 concept.  You could fight the entire "War in the East", or in North Africa or everything after Normandy '44 in one game (for each theatre).  Mods made it possible even to fight a pretty good approximation of Sealion and Poland '39 - even Italy's adventures in NA b4 the big show started.

It's easy to understand why for economic reasons CM2 breaks everything down into a few months here and there.  But yes, wouldn't it be wonderful to just have to load up one game and have the entire theatre available from start to end.  That's another reason am hoping that the ability to combine all games in a theatre into one will be possible eventually - another reason to hope for that in CM3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, IanL said:

Ahem, I call B*** S***. At no time did the west try to impose a democracy on Libya or Syria. Some part of me wishes they would but that is not in the cards. Operations in Libya were to prevent Gaddafi from slaughtering people whole sale. Sure there are groups trying to help Libyans to have a functioning government but no one is even close to trying to impose anything on them. As for Syria that's just a huge mess with US and a few other's forces just trying to keep the worlds worst from taking over from one of the worlds worst dictators. Also a very far cry from trying to fix a country.

BS eh?

Syrian Democratic Forces - Syria

Democratic Party /  Libyan Freedom and Democracy Campaign - Libya

Iraq - well should be evident enough....

Look into those groups and who's funding / supporting them - particularly the SDF

Its that sort of ignorant opinion and dismissal that's seen hundreds of thousands if not millions of people killed since 1991 in the name of democracy without any push back whatsoever.

Far more people have been "slaughtered" as you put it since Ghaddafi / Saddam were deposed than ever under their regimes. 

That Arab spring in Libya was anything but a spontaneous revolt.

The UK I know for certain and I'm guessing by association the US and France where actively engaged with intelligence collection operations 6 months prior - well above the normal level including covert reconnaissance and I suspect co-ordination of various anti establishment groups.

The same sort of ignorant dismissal is found amongst the Islamic Fundamentalists - its questionable which is more dangerous and damaging.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...