Just an Idle thought about perhaps 'revamping' some CM:BS elements

[chuckdyke]

1 hour ago, Brille said:

CMBS may be the weakest game in the series for me too but that's mostly about the lethality of things.

A Battle Pack to update the game is for understandable reasons not considered. In view of this I am puzzled by the purpose of this thread. Is it to design a Battle Pack or even a new game. For myself I went back to WW2 games. I was disappointed with Black Sea to put it mildly.

[Howler]

In a generation from now an historical game based on this war may make sense.

In the meantime, once this war ends, I'd like fixes, modules and map/battle packs on a fictional near peer conflict set in 2017.

We'll have the best of both worlds.

[NiceBoat]

6 hours ago, Brille said:

If you haven't informed yourself beforehand, you are the one to blame. 

Its like going into a fish restaurant and being disappointed about getting a fish for your meal while you would have liked a steak instead. 

I don't understand why this argument keeps coming back. I bought the game well before the war. Then the war made me realize how inadequate the simulation was for the era the game was trying to portray. So, back to your comparison, that's like ordering a juicy burger and then learning it was only 50% meat several weeks later. And, just for clarity - yes, it was somewhat enjoyable at the time, but I couldn't shake off the impression that the taste was a bit weird.

Now, I do realize that BFC dropped this game like a hot potato because of the war, but unfortunately this means that they left it in a somewhat disappointing state. I still hope it gets updated at some point later, because it has the potential to be for late 2010s what CMSF was for late 2000s. That's really all there is to it. I understand that the real war is beyond the scope of the game and in fact I think the decision to exclude it from official content is both reasonable and perfectly justified.

 

I think one of the biggest problems with CMBS is the fact that drone-corrected artillery became so prolific in the real world in response to the 2014-2015 fighting, at least to an extent. Obviously, this couldn't be anticipated when the game was designed, so there's a big discrepancy here. This discrepancy became really glaring in 2022. I guess you could argue that in the CMBS timeline drones aren't as prolific as they are in the real world because 2014 never happened in CMBS and thus my argument is mostly moot, but I think this makes the game two steps detached from reality and that's just one step too far.

[db_zero]

I’d like to see existing problems fixed. Using latest version and playing a h2h game and the tank rotation problem is still present.

Gave explicit orders to move and shoot smoke. Tank ignored order and rotated in direction of enemy tank nearly halfway across the map and wasn’t visible. Ended up with smokescreen in direction that was useless.

as for updating to current situation, that would be welcome.

Another hard core simulator Steel Beasts has already added drones  to the mix that reflect what’s going on in Ukraine.

Edited July 11, 2023 by db_zero

[Simcoe]

23 hours ago, Vergeltungswaffe said:

Don't hold your breath.

Haha that's the joke. 

[Lethaface]

I think CMBS is/was a great game, without the 2022 war we would have already seen a module (and without the war we wouldn't have known about what things are off; there used to be discussions about how Russian forces are under modeled in CMBS). It can do a decent job of modelling 2022+ scenario's but there's certainly things that are off compared to 'reality'. I too hope for either a module/upgrade for CMBS and or a new game portraying the 2022 war. BFC has said CMBS will never be about the 2022 war, so there's that. But maybe some alterations regarding artillery effectiveness against AFVs and availability of drones could be improved for the CMBS module. Perhaps some tools which had came up by 2017? 
All in all given that CMBS features drone directed artillery and other things, I think it's rather decent for a game that came out almost a decade ago. And for all it's features and constraints it's perfectly playable both SP and MP.

Edited July 15, 2023 by Lethaface

[MikeyD]

A lot of CMBS's 'faults' lie not in the game engine but in what the scenario designer thinks would be a fun scenario to play. If you want a minefield scenario, or a scenario with green troops with no command links, or an artillery dominant scenario, or a scenario with static defensive lines separated by a no-man's-land go ahead and make one. But  most players are accustomed to scenarios amenable to sneaking about and surprising enemy units, to employing 'clever' tactics over an hour's play time. The usual CM gameplay stuff. The real world is not often so amenable to 'having fun'.

[Traitor]

I agree with @NiceBoat that even according to a fictional 2017 timeline, there would be more extensive usage of drones.

A fictional 2017 timeline would also see more usage of Russian company level ground radar for spotting (Fara) and PMC formations (Wagner) as all of these were already in use post 2014 in the real world and would not be out of place in the 2017 setting.

I don't think these are huge changes, ground radar is already coded with the BRM-3K and that ability can be given to company recon infantry units, drones are already coded and can easily be tweaked and given to Ukraine since there is no in-game model needed, and Russian PMCs is just a matter of creating a new formation with a different TO&E and training/motivation levels and can be done with existing assets.

I think small tweaks like these would make CMBS a better simulation of both 2022 and the fictional 2017 timeline, I don't see any downsides to this.

Edited August 4, 2023 by Traitor