The year to come - 2024 (Part 1)

[Centurian52]

Oh, for those of you who have a Nebula subscription, the upcoming release of Downfall means that now might be a good time to point out that Real Time History has done a series on the Allied fighting over the Rhine river in 1945. For those who don't have a Nebula subscription, unfortunately this series isn't available for free on youtube, but I seem to recall that Nebula was pretty cheap back when I signed up for it.

https://nebula.tv/videos/real-time-history-1-come-hell-or-high-water-i-rhineland-45

Edited January 7 by Centurian52

[Battlefront.com]

5 hours ago, Erwin said:

BF initially repeatedly promised that since CMBN was released.  But, has moved away from that promise, much to the dismay of many of us.

Not really.  We promised and we delivered with CMFI, which is a year earlier than CMBN.  But you are correct that we haven't gone backwards in time since then.  Instead we deemed more people wanted us to go forward, so we did that.  Here's all the going forward releases we made:

1. Market Garden
2. Gustav Line
3. Rome to Italy
4. Black Sea
5. Final Blitzkrieg
6. Fire and Rubble
7. Downfall

Additionally, we did go backwards 2 times:

1. Fortress Italy
2. Cold War

We also expanded the breadth of the games, which is also high up on people's list.  Some of those expansions were huge.

We have limited development time and we try to make the most amount of people happy as possible.  I think we've done that even if I wish we could have done more with the time we had.

Steve

 

[pintere]

On 1/4/2024 at 7:07 PM, Battlefront.com said:

ADDITIONAL NOTE - the planned expansion for CMBS has been permanently shelved due to the ongoing war.  This decision was our own, however Slitherine was 100% in agreement with us.  It is nice to work with people who don't value money over all else.

A totally valid decision, if a little disappointing. It would’ve been VERY satisfying to pit Leo 2s and Puma IFVs against the Russians in a rematch of the Eastern Front where the Germans are the good guys.

Ah well, I’m sure there’ll be a CW expansion that’ll satisfy that itch 

[Andrew Kulin]

6 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Instead we deemed more people wanted us to go forward, so we did that. 

So would it be easy for you guys to go forward again with a hypothetical Western Allies vs. Soviet Union in 1945-1946?  Seems like you have all the pieces in place now to be able to do that.

[chuckdyke]

10 minutes ago, Andrew Kulin said:

hypothetical

After Black Sea I have enough of anything hypothetical. The truth is always stranger as fiction. 

[Bubba883XL]

15 hours ago, Centurian52 said:

Oh, for those of you who have a Nebula subscription, the upcoming release of Downfall means that now might be a good time to point out that Real Time History has done a series on the Allied fighting over the Rhine river in 1945. For those who don't have a Nebula subscription, unfortunately this series isn't available for free on youtube, but I seem to recall that Nebula was pretty cheap back when I signed up for it.

https://nebula.tv/videos/real-time-history-1-come-hell-or-high-water-i-rhineland-45

i'll stick to reading my books..lol 

[user1000]

 Love small town maps with big rural areas. Getting past the beaches should be neat.

Edited January 8 by user1000

[Centurian52]

2 hours ago, Bubba883XL said:

i'll stick to reading my books..lol 

Why not both? I find the best learning comes from a variety of sources (in my case books, youtube, and simulations). The quality of the military history content on youtube has reached really spectacular levels. They usually have much higher research standards than traditional documentaries. Real Time History isn't even the best of it (as much as I enjoy their content, they tend to repeat common myths a bit more often than most of the other channels I go to, so their research standards seem to be a bit more on par with traditional documentaries). There is Eastory, Drachinifel, Military History Visualized, TIK, Military Aviation History, Usually Hapless, Battle Order, The Operations Room/Intel Report, Kings and Generals, Forgotten Weapons, The Chieftain, The Western Front Association, GI History Handbook, and so many more that I'm sure I'll remember in a few minutes.

No source is perfect, and I've caught all of these channels making the occasional mistake. There is just so much misinformation out there that it's impossible for even the best historian to filter out all of it. That goes for books as well. The format that the research is presented in has no effect on the quality of the research, so books will contain as many errors as videos. I was just reading James Holland's book on Normandy, in which he repeated the myth that the Bren was extremely accurate and the MG42 was extremely inaccurate (they actually seem to have roughly the same accuracy, about 4-5 MOA). I doubt anyone could say that James Holland isn't a good historian. There are simply so many myths out there that it's impossible for even the best historian to catch them all.

Edited January 8 by Centurian52

[A Canadian Cat]

12 hours ago, Andrew Kulin said:

hypothetical Western Allies vs. Soviet Union in 1945-1946

That would be so cool - take my upvote

[Lethaface]

1 hour ago, IanL said:

That would be so cool - take my upvote

Another one here. Also I'd say a good number of assets could be reused.

[Vacillator]

20 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Another one here.

A long time ago we did this in Talonsoft's (and then John Tiller's) East Front 2.  The remains of German forces joining with the US, British and other 'Western' allies to fight the 'refusing to stop' Soviets.  Great fun and LOTs of armour, even if I prefer history to fiction.

So I'd give it a +1 too.

[Centurian52]

I'd definitely buy Combat Mission: Operation Unthinkable. Though, seeing as I've already affirmed that I'd buy any Combat Mission game, that may not count for much.

[AtlasActual]

Just bought Cold War for BAOR,  I want bones!

[JoMac]

4 hours ago, Vacillator said:

A long time ago we did this in Talonsoft's (and then John Tiller's) East Front 2.  The remains of German forces joining with the US, British and other 'Western' allies to fight the 'refusing to stop' Soviets.  Great fun and LOTs of armour, even if I prefer history to fiction.

So I'd give it a +1 too.

Ahh Yes, good Ole Talonsoft East & West Fronts from back in the late 90's...Good memories for sure 

Edited January 8 by JoMac

[Ithikial_AU]

On 1/8/2024 at 8:54 PM, user1000 said:

 Love small town maps with big rural areas. Getting past the beaches should be neat.

Thanks. More than 70km2 of maps to fight over in this Battle Pack. I'm still creating two more smaller maps for two scenarios. Using a lot of BIGOT maps from 1944 and aerial photos for reference. Some master maps will have variants that will also be provided with the historical German Fortifications placed and ready to go. (<-- That took a while...)

As per last year's bones on the pack, geographically the fighting is focused on the Utah Beach area itself and the area heading south towards and beyond Carentan. All scenarios/campaigns occur between 00:05 hours on 6th of June through to the evening of the 13th of June. Don't expect all of them to be brutal slog fests, particularly the D-Day ones where the Allies at times had significant advantages. I'm going for more of a focus on narrative and experiencing that first week coming off Utah Beach rather than slug fests designed for competitive tournament play. (Master Maps are there if you want to create your own matches though). If you play the pack chronologically and come out the other end content and with a greater appreciation of the challenges the forces faced, then I've done my job.  

The content in this part of the Normandy theatre, though popular, couldn't be created by BF as part of the CMBN base game given the absence of Fallschirmjager and Waffen SS forces in the WW2 titles at the time.

Edited January 9 by Ithikial_AU

[Butschi]

On 1/7/2024 at 11:00 PM, Battlefront.com said:

Instead we deemed more people wanted us to go forward, so we did that. 

I guess you did an actual poll, market research or similar about that?

So maybe this works with a mostly US based audience. For me personally Downfall and also to a lesser degree Fire & Rubble feels like the Allies get an extension of timeline so they can play around with their shiney toys. But that really feels like the only reason for me because contrary to, say, the Bulge, historically the whole fighting by that point was totally pointless. And tactically I don't see what it reall adds.

This is very subjective on my side and it may be because I'm German. Don't get me wrong, this is not about me being butthurt here.

I'd much rather see France 1940, not because Germany won this time but because it would add so many new tactical challenges (armor and gun wise inferior German tanks but with better mobility for example, instead of unicorn tanks for late war battles).

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, Butschi said:

I guess you did an actual poll, market research or similar about that?

So maybe this works with a mostly US based audience. For me personally Downfall and also to a lesser degree Fire & Rubble feels like the Allies get an extension of timeline so they can play around with their shiney toys. But that really feels like the only reason for me because contrary to, say, the Bulge, historically the whole fighting by that point was totally pointless. And tactically I don't see what it reall adds.

This is very subjective on my side and it may be because I'm German. Don't get me wrong, this is not about me being butthurt here.

I'd much rather see France 1940, not because Germany won this time but because it would add so many new tactical challenges (armor and gun wise inferior German tanks but with better mobility for example, instead of unicorn tanks for late war battles).

I completely agree, and I'm not German.

[Butschi]

2 hours ago, Butschi said:

I guess you did an actual poll, market research or similar about that?

So maybe this works with a mostly US based audience. For me personally Downfall and also to a lesser degree Fire & Rubble feels like the Allies get an extension of timeline so they can play around with their shiney toys. But that really feels like the only reason for me because contrary to, say, the Bulge, historically the whole fighting by that point was totally pointless. And tactically I don't see what it reall adds.

This is very subjective on my side and it may be because I'm German. Don't get me wrong, this is not about me being butthurt here.

I'd much rather see France 1940, not because Germany won this time but because it would add so many new tactical challenges (armor and gun wise inferior German tanks but with better mobility for example, instead of unicorn tanks for late war battles).

@Battlefront.com I just Re-read my post... I hope it doesn't come over as snarky or complain-y. That's not my intention, I really assume you know your market and of course you guys yourselves have preferences in what you want to do.

[Thewood1]

24 minutes ago, Butschi said:

Battlefront.com I just Re-read my post... I hope it doesn't come over as snarky or complain-y. That's not my intention, I really assume you know your market and of course you guys yourselves have preferences in what you want to do.

I criticize parts of their business model and some of the decisions made around games vs modules.  But one thing I completely grant to the BFC crew is that they have been building wargames and making money on it for 25 years.  If they didn't know what sells and what doesn't sell, we wouldn't be here discussing it.

And yes, your comments came across as snarky and butt-hurt.

[Centurian52]

5 hours ago, Butschi said:

I'd much rather see France 1940

I'm right there with you. I can hardly wait for Battlefront to get around to covering the early-war period. In part because I find all military history fascinating, so I will always advocate for any period that I feel is underrepresented in wargaming. In part because I have a particular love for early-war tanks, such as the R-35 and Panzer 2. And in part because I believe that giving people an opportunity to experience this period for themselves will do much to bust the myth that these early campaigns were a complete walkover for the Germans at the tactical level. Despite the speed of the German advance on the operational level, the small scale fighting at the tactical level was much less one-sided than most people realize. For example, while the German army as a whole was basically unstoppable in Poland in 1939, there were no shortage of occasions in which individual tank attacks were stopped cold by Polish anti-tank guns. And there were even a handful of moderately successful Polish counterattacks.

But, they'll get there. Impatience does us no good. Battlefront made the call to finish up the late-war period first. And whether or not you think that was the optimal call, I don't think any reasonable person could argue that the late war period wasn't also worth covering. Now that they have finished up the late-war period we can be very confident that future work will start incrementally rolling the clock backwards until they reach the beginning of the war (there will probably be more Battle Packs covering certain late-war campaigns in greater detail, but future modules and base games will certainly be going backwards from here on out). I'm hopeful that they'll get back to the beginning of the war before the 1st of September 2039 (I definitely intend to start another chronological CM playthrough around this date).

[Anthony P.]

CM 1939-40 would be very fun, but I don't see any reason to doubt BFC's assessment that it's not the profitable option, so the debating feels fairly pointless: it's unlikely to change anything, the arguments against it have been repeated over and over and there's no reason to question them.

[thilio]

10 hours ago, Butschi said:

I'd much rather see France 1940, not because Germany won this time but because it would add so many new tactical challenges (armor and gun wise inferior German tanks but with better mobility for example, instead of unicorn tanks for late war battles).

+1

Stonne, Montcornet, ...

[McKay173]

with the module for CMBS shelved is there any possibility of the assets being moved to CMSF2 as a modernization module for something along the lines of post-invasion counter-insurgency and peacekeeping operations?

[Karp_K]

12 hours ago, McKay173 said:

with the module for CMBS shelved is there any possibility of the assets being moved to CMSF2 as a modernization module for something along the lines of post-invasion counter-insurgency and peacekeeping operations?

As someone who primarily plays and enjoys SF2, I love the idea of it but I feel like it falls into the same vein of effort & time weighed against profit in BFC's eyes. Granted, if all the assets were already made... Hate to say it, but that's in the realm of whatever is further beyond wishful thinking.

[Thewood1]

I would think vehicle packs, map packs, scenario packs, etc. could be a way to move content from CMBN to CMFB and CMBS's unpubbed module to CMSF.