Jump to content

What Subject For The First CMCW Module?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Aragorn2002 said:

Imagine fighting battles with a mix of British and Dutch units, or German and Dutch, or Belgian and Dutch, or German and British, or German and US...

Brothers in arms at last. 

Bring in the French and we have 1812 Redux!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/31/2021 at 3:26 AM, Artkin said:

IF they were to invade the US, would Long Island make a good staging point?

I know Cuba would have been a staging point, but I feel like that part of the US would have been really tough to invade. Moving hard and fast into the dense NY environment seems like the better way to fight

The discussion is moot - @Bil Hardenberger has just said I can bet more than both of my pensions on Invasion America not happening as an official module; however, I'll play the game ...

How much water between Soviet Union and Cuba?  How big was the USN and its NATO allies at this time vs the Soviet navy?  Why did Krushchev cave in over the Cuba missile crisis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Combatintman. The idea was based I think on a old 1970s board wargame Invasion America that had an alt history from the 1980s to roughly 2000 when the invasions took place and was not supposed to be a serious prediction of the future. To be fair the same company, SPI, has another game Objective Moscow of the whole world ganging up to invade the Soviet Union in the late '90s.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, Sequoia said:

@Combatintman. The idea was based I think on a old 1970s board wargame Invasion America that had an alt history from the 1980s to roughly 2000 when the invasions took place and was not supposed to be a serious prediction of the future. To be fair the same company, SPI, has another game Objective Moscow of the whole world ganging up to invade the Soviet Union in the late '90s.  

Oh I know, and I'm sure it was popular - but best to restate the 'not going to happen' argument early I think.  Particularly given what @Bil Hardenbergerwho was one of the main movers and shakers in this project has said.

Edited by Combatintman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sequoia said:

@Combatintman. The idea was based I think on a old 1970s board wargame Invasion America that had an alt history from the 1980s to roughly 2000 when the invasions took place and was not supposed to be a serious prediction of the future. To be fair the same company, SPI, has another game Objective Moscow of the whole world ganging up to invade the Soviet Union in the late '90s.  

Take a look at the prices of those games on EBay , when they come up, compared to other games in the genre 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be sure ...... I think ........... most ( including myself ) hope , maybe pray, that a first module would include - the entire NATO forces in the theatre ( Germany) and the ...............likely Warsaw Pact forces in theater,  . With the possibility of conquest of Germany , and dare I mention an excursion into a possibly secondary nation or three. .....that may be a battle pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also love an expansion of the game into the full year of 1983. Not so much because of the equipment, but because of the rising political tensions between east and west in that year. Late October, early November 1983 might be the most believable point for a "what if" scenario.

The time before was already a time of rising tension.
There was a shift in equipment and doctrine for important Nato countries in the late 70s to early 80s, Leopard2, Abrams, Bradley, Marder with AT-ability. The F14 Tomcat and the F15 Strike Eagle were relatively new planes, getting in service in the mid 70s.
Tension was especially rising, with the NATO Double-Track Decision from December 1979.
In May 1981 the Soviets started Operation RYAN the biggest intelligence operation of the cold war, to find out, when the nuclear attack of the Nato against the Soviets would happen, to be prepared and to act first!
From 1981 to 1983 the US had a series of naval operations to demonstrate their ablity to come close to important Soviet naval bases.
In March 1983 President Ronald Regan had his "Evil Empire Speech" attacking the Soviet Union.
In May 1983 there was FleetEx '83-1, the biggest navel exersice since WWII executed in the north Pacific within fighting range to the Soviet Union.
On 1st of September 1983, the concerned Soviet Air Force interecepted and shot down Korean Air Lines Flight 007, as they were convinced it was a spy plane. Leading to further tensions between the US and the Soviet Union.
later in September 1983 was the annual Reforger Exersise in Germany (Confident Enterprise). While this was an annual event, it still is concerning one for the Soviets, as it could be used as a disguise to mobilise troops secretely for war preperations.
During this Exersise in September 1983 was the Soviet nuclear false alarm incident, in which the early-warning system of the Soviet union got a false first strike alarm of US nuclear ballistic missiles. Only because Stanislav Petrov, the officer on duty decided it was probably a false alarm, the Soviet Union did not respond with a scheduled nuclear counter attack.
This already could have lead easily to war, most likely to nuclear war.
In October 1983 Operation Urgent Fury happend, the US invasion of Grenada. In preperation of this Operation, Nato communication multiplied, while for Operation Able Archer in early November 1983, Nato switched to new encription methods, never seen before by the Soviet Union to simulate nuclear war on HQ-level.
This lead to mobilisation and immediate war preperations in the Soviet Union.
During Able Archer 83 it was the first time, that a move through the DEFCON stages was simulated.
This now could have lead to the believe in the Soviet Union that a Nato attack is imminent. In Soviet doctrine, the war was not to be fought as a defensive war on Soviet territory, but active, to turn the fight into the land of the enemy as soon and fast as possible.
For this reason, I think a late October, early November 1983 campaign would be the most believable. As all the political background already happened, and just the final order to attack in defense by the Soviet Union was not given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doctor, I won't argue with your rationale, but the backstory just isn't very important in the 3 hypothetical families. I for one would rather see other armies and 1979 and 1982 TO&Es rather than extend the timeframe on the existing units by one year. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sequoia said:

Doctor, I won't argue with your rationale, but the backstory just isn't very important in the 3 hypothetical families. I for one would rather see other armies and 1979 and 1982 TO&Es rather than extend the timeframe on the existing units by one year. Just my opinion.

Yes, this. 
 

H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Sequoia said:

Doctor, I won't argue with your rationale, but the backstory just isn't very important in the 3 hypothetical families. I for one would rather see other armies and 1979 and 1982 TO&Es rather than extend the timeframe on the existing units by one year. Just my opinion.

Yes, that is true, I just have to agree. There wasn't probably that much change in the TO&E, the rarities are probably changing more than the equipment itself. Raritiy points are not relevant for campaigns or scenarios, but only for quickbattles. On the other hand, there is no backstory on quickbattles. So no need for an 1983 extension here.

Just checked a few systems:
The M1a1 Abrams for example was only introduced in 1985. There was an M1IP in 1984, but even that is out of the scope of my idea.
The Bradley M2a1 was introduced in 1986, as well outside of the scope.
The BGM-71C TOW is in the game already and the BGM-71D TOW was introduced in 1987.
Dragon II is 1988.
On the Soviet side, the T80BV was introduced in 1985.
The SU25 might have become of higher significance, but that plane is already part of the game.
I can not find any new ATGMs in the scope of CM for a 1983 scenario on the soviet side.
Even on equipment outside of the game as it is, this seems to be the case. Marder 1A1 is from 1979, Marder 1A2 from 1984
The Leopard 2A1 already existed in march 1982, and might become a part of a possible DLC. But even if not, this would not be of significance. The Leopard 2A2 would not exist, even if the game was extended to 1983.

It seems the significant change in TO&E and equipment indeed happened between the years 1979 and 1982.
If there is any change in equipment between 1982 and 1983, it seems to be just insignificant.
I was not able to find any so far.


I also just noticed, that the year is stated nowhere in the Scenario. Not in the conditions or anywhere else. So it would be easy to just create a campaign and explain the briefing that it is in fact the year 1983. You are right, everything is already there, no change needed at all to get the full 1983 experience. You could even set the date to late October and state it is November or December.

So yep, I happily take my wish back :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

As you noticed, in 1983 there should be no new piece of kit around that did not already enter service by 1982. On the other hand, new improved ammunition models were introduced in 1983: TOW-2, M833, 3BM26 etc... these could make a difference, although "introduced" doesn't necessarily mean "in widespread use".

Edited by Amedeo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Dr.Fusselpulli said:


It seems the significant change in TO&E and equipment indeed happened between the years 1979 and 1982.
If there is any change in equipment between 1982 and 1983, it seems to be just insignificant.
I was not able to find any so far.

Almost like it was designed that way 😉.  We avoided 1983 not due to any real equipment issues (as noted there was some ammo introductions) but more to avoid the organizational changes that happen in the US military.  The J series Inf Bns (and a couple ‘interim’ structures) TO&E begins to emerge in the 83-84 timeframe and we frankly had enough on our hands trying to untie all that.  So 79-82 gave the best window but players can easily tinker a year or so on either side and still be completely accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a related note what would the Italian, Spanish and Portuguese armies supposed to do?  I understand their navies and air forces would be in use in the Atlantic and Med but with no borders on a Warsaw Pact country would they deploy to Germany?  While Italy borders Yugoslavia they were not part of Warsaw Pact so would they deploy around Austria and help  Germany?  Also, why not include Turkey on the Soviet border!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spain was not part of NATO at the time, though IIRC the US had an air wing there. Portugal's army was pretty small. Who's to tell who would do what? There are so many variables. 

For Turkey I just wish MikeyD would release that Turkish Leopard mod he was working on for Shock Force 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/4/2021 at 1:18 PM, Artkin said:

Has anyone thought of using the drones from cmbs and adding Kiowa and Mi-2 scout helicopters to the game?

No to the first - why would they be there in 1979-1982?  I can see a case for the helicopters but they wouldn't be overly high on my list of wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Combatintman said:

No to the first - why would they be there in 1979-1982?  I can see a case for the helicopters but they wouldn't be overly high on my list of wants.

"Using drones" as in using the code to simulate a scout helicopter viewing a particular area. AFAIK scout helicopters were abundant around this time period. 

The TOEs for V corps and VXIII corps call for lots of kiowas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

A Germany module seems the most important to me. The West Germans would have been the most numerous NATO force on the ground at the start of the war and would have carried the majority of the early fighting. So we desperately need to have them represented. Next most urgent after that is British forces. I've just got to take that Chieftain out for a spin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, sburke said:

Am I the only one that wants Canadians?  Where is Ian?

2 hours ago, Allan Wotherspoon said:

You're not alone.  I want the Canadians too!

Heck yeah I'm on board for adding the Canadians too!

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...