Scipio Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 Will we see a CM for the Pacific theatre? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rob/1 Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 BTS said not any time soon. check there have been a lot of topics about this. ------------------ Game master of Robs CMC Join Robs CMC2 today! Email me at RobsCMC@hotmail.com Rob -------------------------- For more info on Rob's CMC go to Robs CMC HQHome of Robs CMC Members of my CMC should join my CMC chat bord. Robs CMC Board BHQS Board for me and BHQS only! BHQS board Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Bates Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scipio Posted December 27, 2000 Author Share Posted December 27, 2000 Why not, M. Bates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 I think Matt wants the Pacific Theater and he is pushing for it, but I would think that it will have to wait its turn until all the other planned CM theaters are done, if ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scipio Posted December 27, 2000 Author Share Posted December 27, 2000 Oh, no problemo, I can wait til CM 4 or 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted December 27, 2000 Share Posted December 27, 2000 To quote Steve earlier this year. PTO is not currently on our list. If it were, it would be about 4 years out. It absolutely will not come before any of the other three games currently planned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AbnAirCav Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 As I understand it, the most likely order is:<ul>[*]CM2: Eastern Front [*]CM3: Med/North Africa [*]CM4: Early war years This pretty much mirrors my wishes but I, too, would then love to see CM5: Pacific/CBI. I would eagerly buy it, not just for the "island hopping", but more for taking on the capture of "The Rock" with the 503rd's surprise airborne assault on Corregidor, as well as running Operation 'Thursday', flying Wingate's Special Force 'Chindit' brigades (first class British, Gurkha, and West African [Nigerian] battalions) deep into the heart of Japanese-held Burma ... as well as taking on the capture of Myitkina Airfield, the only all-weather airfield in Burma, with Merrill's Marauders. (edited to fix HTML) [This message has been edited by AbnAirCav (edited 12-27-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchy Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 A Pacific theater version has been discussed many times on this thread. Unfortunately, if it gets a treatment it will be years down the road. BTS has their plan in place and we will have to wait until that plan is complete. ------------------ Webmaster http://www.trailblazersww2.org http://www.vmfa251.org Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BryanMan50 Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 God Pacific would be great. I don't want to play as the Russians anymore, after Close combat and all. I want the japs vs. the US marines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 Actually, PTO would ROCK. Even in ASL, it is a favorite over the ETO for many. One of those passions. I guess, after YEARS and YEARS of ETO, it is refreshing to a grognard like me. I would love to see PTO. ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gremlin Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 Another vote for the Pacific Theater. ------------------ War is cruel and you cannot refine it. --Sherman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Mayer Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 I suppose PTO games would be interesting for fans of infantry actions, and those wanting a change from Europe/Russia. Me, I don't have much interest in rummaging about jungles, or burning defiant sons of Nippon out of palm log bunkers. Given that the average CM map is a chunk of a much larger battle, it seems that any PTO battles would be very similar, except without as many tanks and with more palm trees Now, if a PTO version would cover actual beach landings in detail, that might be more interesting, but tactically such affairs might also just be more bloody than intriguing. I guess I'm just a sucker for armor/anti-armor stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 The Pacific War theatre will also not be as tactically interesting as one in Europe. There were only a few engagements in mid 1942 where both the Allies and the Japanese were on even footing. Before and after this period one side invariably had overwhelming numbers and quality, deciding virtually every tactical scenario before it started. There was no doubt wether or not the US would secure Tarawa, Iwo Jima or Okinawa. They were able to place more troops with better equipment and total support against poor numbers, equipment and virtually no external support. Imagine the Germans, without their good tanks, without any sort of effective AA defence, without a variety of squads (the Japanese relied primarily on Rifle squads), without any sort of heavy artillery, without air support, perpetually on the defence after 1942, and always against an enemy backed by 16" naval gunfire, air support, tanks and a variety of external equipment. Outside of a few engagements on New Guinea, Burma/India and Guadalcanal one side will be totally outclassed by the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 Major Tom, Some points are well taken, and for the most part, you are right. However, <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Major Tom: Before and after this period one side invariably had overwhelming numbers and quality, deciding virtually every tactical scenario before it started. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So were the Germans in 1944. It wasn't a question of "if." It was only a matter of "when." Moreover, don't forget, there are scenarios in CM, where a side that is overwhelmed (I forgot the name of it right now), can still WIN the scenario. In fact, most scenarios are one side defending, and getting BOOTED off a hill, or town. No different, don't you agree? Not every scenario is an "equal" meeting engagement. As you yourself said, one side had superiority. Nevertheless, that's the whole idea of warfare: to bring as much firepower to bear as possible on your enemy's weakest point. The same would hold true in PTO, as it does in ETO with CM right now. If you *think* about it, PTO scenarios would be no different. However, the tactical challenges WOULD be different. Jungle, Kunai, Palm Trees, Beaches, Coral Reefs, Land Craft, Naval Fire, the actual opportunity to use FT teams (good God man, this alone would be worth it). I for one, would welcome the opportunity to expand my tactical experience in PTO terrain. ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Mayer Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 Yeah, I think that's pretty much it. OTOH, I support any and all efforts to cover as much of WWII as possible . I'd still rather see France '40, the Balkans, and Norway before the Pacific though . Now, an operational-level system covering amphibious invasions...now, that I'd like.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 Major Tom, you forgot 'disease-ridden' and 'starving' for the Japanese troops in 1944-5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 I agree to an extent that the Pacific War would be an interesting addition to CM, but, I still hold that TACTICALLY the Japanese were vastly overwhelmed in just about every battle after 1943. The Germans were STRATEGICALLY overwhelmed, which isn't always reflected in CM. Yes, every one sided scenario isn't always destined to end with one side being the victor over the other, but, this is only one of a few. Primarily, these battles would be between isolated and static Japanese defenders vs. invading and totally supported US Army and Marine forces. Whereas, in Europe from 1944-1945 there were many more effective attacks and counterattacks by both sides throughout the campaign. The war in Europe was much more fluid and stable then the war in the Pacific. Remember, even by 1945 the Japanese still had a hard time knocking out Sherman tanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 Tom, I suggest you go read some detailed accounts of the actions on Iwo Jima or Okinawa. Then read some about the Burma campaign and the fighting in other exotic locales. Try reading about the Chindits. There are numerous examples of well spported and well supplied Japanese forces, in both defense and offense. Yes, There was no chance of the Japanese successfully defeating the invasion forces at Okinawa or Iwo Jima. But, at the same time, there was no chance that the Normandy invasion was going to fail. That does not mean there aren't numerous tactical examples of the USA being defeated in both of those fights. Numerous examples of attacks on held position that were repulsed. Numerous examples of the Marines getting bloodied. At okinawa, the Japanese had massive artillery support, and were generally well supplied. Then go read something about Guadacanal. Even in a strategic sense that battle was extremely questionable. It could have easily gone either way. Despite some misconceptions, the PTO was not an example of "Bomb and shell small tropical island with air/sea power. Send it Marines to flame inept Japanese. Rinse and repeat on the next island." The PTO was at least as tactically varied and challenging than the ETO, if not more so. I have never heard anyone make the claim that the PTO is boring who actually has spent any effort in learning something about it first. This is not meant as a slam on you, but I would be willing to bet my last dollar that you know relatively little about the PTO, at least compared to what you know about the ETO. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Major Tom: Remember, even by 1945 the Japanese still had a hard time knocking out Sherman tanks!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Good God man! This alone would make me want to play PTO. Where Shermans are the KING of the battlefield. ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 As mentioned in many earlier posts, I am one of the strongest advocates for a CM-Pacific-Asia Module. I will continue to push hard for this in the future, especially as the time draws near. The game engine is ideal for the Pacific-Asian battles of WW2! BTS would consider it. Their mind is not closed. But it must be an effort that has the support of enough CM faithfuls or it will not be done. So just keep in the back of your mind and when the time comes, we'll form a "banzai" charge of enthusiasm and storm the BTS bastion crying for our Pacific theater game. We can make it happen. Wild Bill ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild Bill Wilder Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 And if you are looking for something in the meantime to quench that "Pacific" thirst, give Steel Panthers World at War a try. And excellent updated Windows compatible "FREE" game, just for the downloading with dozens of Pacific scenarios, including Guadalcanal, New Georgia, Betio, Wake, Iwo Jima, Malaya-Burma, etc. And a great little Tulagi campaign, with more Pacific campaigns in the works. You'll get something to hold you with amphibious assaults, night banzai charges, jungle fighting at it's worst, etc. Check it out, till BTS brings us our CM-Pacific. http://spwaw.matrixgames.com Wild Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Michael emrys Posted December 28, 2000 Share Posted December 28, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Robert Mayer: Yeah, I think that's pretty much it. OTOH, I support any and all efforts to cover as much of WWII as possible . I'd still rather see France '40, the Balkans, and Norway before the Pacific though . Now, an operational-level system covering amphibious invasions...now, that I'd like....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree with all of the above. Although a tactical-level CM type game on the Asia/Pacific TO could be done that would have interest, operational is really the way to go. And not just the amphibious operations. Think of the carrier vs. carrier battles! Think of all the night time surface battles on Iron Bottom Sound and later up through the Solomons! Think of the extended land battles in China, Burma, Malaya, and the Philippines! Think of the Soviet blitz through Manchuria in the last days of the war! Think of all the exclamation points I'm using in this post! Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted December 29, 2000 Share Posted December 29, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Tom, I suggest you go read some detailed accounts of the actions on Iwo Jima or Okinawa. Then read some about the Burma campaign and the fighting in other exotic locales. Try reading about the Chindits. I have never heard anyone make the claim that the PTO is boring who actually has spent any effort in learning something about it first. This is not meant as a slam on you, but I would be willing to bet my last dollar that you know relatively little about the PTO, at least compared to what you know about the ETO. Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You seem to have misquoted me a few times. I never said that the theatre was boring. I find it quite interesting and have done a lot of research on it. HOWEVER, I do not see CM as the ultimate means of replicating a Pacific style game of the entire theatre. I am also interested in the Normandy landings, which I also believe aren't something that CM models well, or, is worth modelling at the tactical squad scale. Did I say that there were no possible actions of a CM type battle in the Pacific theatre? NO. I said that Burma/India, New Guinea and Guadalcanal made up for some interesting battles in CM, where forces on both sides were virtually equal. However, I do not see the Island Hopping campaign as something to be optimally modeled by CM. Since the majority of actions in the Pacific were island hopping or the Japanese form of Blitzkrieg where the defender was usually totally outclassed and outnumbered that modelling an entire tactical game off it, and keeping it close to historical, will result in many repetitions. And I have read many books on the Pacific theatre, and I consider myself very well versed. I have written many well received papers about the Pacific War, dealing with this subject that the war can be divided up into three basic parts. A Japanese happy time, a relative static period in the Solomans and New Guinea, and an American happy time. This may be general, but, it fits. Just because my opinion on the Pacific War differs from yours does not mean that I am not educated in it. Please, before you start hurling accusations of ignorance and making this debate personal, read my posts before you post. By the way, I was very involved in reworking the Matrix Games patch for the 1992 "Gary Grigsby's Pacific War". I don't claim to be an 100% expert, but I am definitely not a novice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Mayer Posted December 29, 2000 Share Posted December 29, 2000 I agree there are lots of operational situations in the Pacific that are fascinating. I also think that, for me, a PTO version of CM would not be as interesting, because I rather like 1) the terrain of Europe, and 2) the force mixes in Europe and the Med. Just a personal thing. I do think though that folks sometimes mix and match a little, by extrapolating the operational and strategically interesting aspects of the Pacific fighting into the tactical arena. Then again, I suppose the Pacific is a great arena for fans of infantry combat. And, too, there were indeed all sorts of battles you could come up with at various stages of the war that would make potentially interesting Combat Mission subjects. But to me, the prospect of company/battalion level battles in the PTO just doesn't do it. Gimme Italy or Tunisia, though....<G> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts