Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I have all the WWII combat mission games except for Red Thunder because I am more interested in the eastern front from 1941 to 1943.  Are there any plans to add modules covering that time period?  Secondly is the base game now game engine 4 or would I have to purchase that as well?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

The upcoming (soon hopefully) Fire and Rubble module covers the late war period.  I imagine any earlier one is a long way off if it's even on the drawing board, but that's for BFC to comment on really, not me.

RT is already engine 4 but was not patched with the latest patch so version number is 2.02 - the latest patch which other titles got was said to be planned to be part of the Fire and Rubble release.

Perhaps I should mention that I have RT and I'm a big fan 😉.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like you i would prefer 41-43 but if you're intrested in the eastern front...it's a very good investment anyway 😁

Atleast you get to play around in 'the right' theatre...and there are a decent amount of comunity campaigns and scenarios to download...i doubt you will be dissapointed 😎...

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I thought I remembered seeing a comment showing that BFC did indeed intend to eventually release the early war, but working backwards after F & R, so '43, then '42, then '41. At the current rate though of one every six years, that's 18 years down the road :D

Of course I may mis-remember and things may have changed too.

Seriously though, I would also jump on a Barbarossa module. Not too interested in F & R to be honest. But 1941-1942 especially has great appeal for me.

Red Thunder is a good module and I recommend it, and especially the excellent Blunting the Spear campaign. Relatively speaking there is not much campaign content for RT, but enough to justify the purchase. I absolutely loved CMBB when it came out, with the command delays, Operations and getting overrun by Russian submachine squads in the dense evergreen forests. Over the past year or so I revisited CMBB and played through many of these scenarios and campaigns/operations which made me long for it to be covered in a newer engine and at the same time showing me how much better Combat Mission is now compared to then, with so many features and QoL improvements that become starkly evident when you play the CMx1 games today.

Edited by landser
Link to post
Share on other sites

Early war CM will be basically the same as late war. Tanks, infantry, AT guns. Everything just dialled down a bit. Now you're playing with small tanks* and small guns. The end result is the same.

And if you dream of finally steamrolling those pesky Russians, forget about it. The scenario designers will of course make sure the campaigns will be difficult as always.

What would make me interested would be a Stalingrad game - if and only if it came with substantial upgrades to the way the engine handles city fighting, rubble, and fortifications.

 

*yes I know there was a big but useless French tank.

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to post
Share on other sites

I find myself nodding along to many of the posts you make Bulletpoint, but here I must disagree. By this logic, all we need is a single Combat Mission title since it's all basically the same.

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

 

And if you dream of finally steamrolling those pesky Russians, forget about it.

Speaking for myself, that's certainly not what I am looking to do, though it would be nice haha. It's more down to the equipment and especially the armored vehicles. Panzer Is and IIs, BT-7s, T-26s, short-gunned Pz IIIs against T-34s and KVs, doorknocker AT guns, maybe the return of command delay? Far less lethal, far more interesting, for me anyway. The heavy armor and big guns of the 1944-45 period we have, or are getting, is less compelling than the brand of combat that 1941-42 would serve up.  Duels are more asymmetric, which is appealing to me in any wargaming scenario.

Edited by landser
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

Early war CM will be basically the same as late war. Tanks, infantry, AT guns. Everything just dialled down a bit. Now you're playing with small tanks* and small guns. The end result is the same.

Really disagree.  Early war was a testing period for what we now consider modern weapons.  The Germans had to learn tactics to overcome the (on paper) much better French tanks and the Soviet tanks like KV's and T-34's.  It wasn't one shot one kill as it generally is in late war.  If you ever played CMBB from 1941 to late war the difference in challenges and gameplay experience was clear.  Currently, all the late war WW2 titles play about the same and are getting boring if one has been playing them heavily for 9 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

With how many years we are into the second game engine and its multiple upgrades.

I am sure if we ever see a earlier Russian Front game it will be on a new 3rd generation game engine with all sorts of new features.

I would love to see it, but who knows when that day will ever happen.

The one thing that has not changed over the years BF's pace is not ever quick since its just a small operation.

So I know its not in the near future, that is the only sure thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, landser said:

It's more down to the equipment and especially the armored vehicles. Panzer Is and IIs, BT-7s, T-26s, short-gunned Pz IIIs against T-34s and KVs, doorknocker AT guns, maybe the return of command delay? Far less lethal, far more interesting, for me anyway. The heavy armor and big guns of the 1944-45 period we have, or are getting, is less compelling than the brand of combat that 1941-42 would serve up.  Duels are more asymmetric, which is appealing to me in any wargaming scenario.

I understand what you are saying from a historical perspective, but I just think using a short-barrel Pz III against a T-34 would be very similar gameplay experience to using a Sherman against a Panther.

It's possible I'm wrong of course.

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

I understand what you are saying from a historical perspective, but I just think using a short-barrel Pz III against a T-34 would be very similar gameplay experience to using a Sherman against a Panther.

Like saying that CMSF gives the same game experience as CMBS, (lots of ATGM's, artillery and super-powerful tanks running around) so why bother...?

FWIW The most recent WeBOB tournament battles we fought were all using early war AFV's as everyone had gotten bored with late war and early war was a refreshing change.

Edited by Erwin
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

:o  Check out the kill rings on the barrel!  :o  

It was bit of a monster.....128mm gun, allegedly it could take out a contemporary T-34 at over 4km!  Lucky there were only two.  ;)

Don't waste your time with the Wiki article, it's just plain wrong!

PS - One of them (Emil, I believe) is still intact, at Kubinka:

 

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...