Go East, young man. GO EAST!!!

[Commissar]

I realize that it is probably a bit early to be talking about CM2 when some of us haven't even gotten CM1 yet, but I was curious what the CM team will start on our next adventure through Mother Russia. Does the team even have a solid idea how CM2 will improve on CM1?

[marcusm]

I want to continue on the tiles subject. Does CM2 mean that the graphics for maps will be fused or will the old graphics be replaced? It would be cool if each CM added a bunc of new tiles and at CM5 we can do a battle on the moon if we want .

Marcus

[waffen]

never to early to talk about CM2 hope we can have trenchs that we can join to make a large trench system.i also think large and small damaged building would be exellent and add more weight to the game.half buildings .1 wall etc.and sniper verses sniper battles would be fun .just my ideas i can see it now. a destroyed city half buildings everywhere trenchs running the lengh of the city .a wall here, a sniper there .lots of fun everywhere : ) you get the idea

cheers

[Chris Jenkins]

I am sure the next version would be faster in the making if they kept the current engine. Let's hope for it. At any rate, it should be an incredible game.

WISH LIST:

Trenches, snipers, piles of rubble, three-story buildings, soldiers on rooftops, sewer movement, new OOBs, deep mud, new weather, new building art, advanced river settings, Commissars, human wave attacks, anti-panzer mines that have to be placed on the tank, penal units, bridge building, playing entire battles back, ski infantry, bunkers anyone can occupy, NKVD machinegun units, machineguns from downed aircraft used by infantry (Cholm pocket), The ability to see all the people if realistically scaled and during full game playback, guns that cannot reach upper building levels if they are too close, and operation-level bridge building.

------------------

"Rinky dinky stinky thinky"

[This message has been edited by Chris Jenkins (edited 06-25-2000).]

[Formerly Babra]

I'll throw in partial rubble to the wish list.

[Commissar]

There has been some talk of this already, but I think it would be appropriate. There is this old Avalon Hill game called MBT which models modern warfare in Germany. Of course, it models a future conflict between the WarPac and NATO. One of the interesting restrictions within the game for the Russians involved command and control. All seperate counters had to fight as a unit. You couldn't just break a platoon up into sections. You had to keep the unit together, move together, and fire together. While this is inflexible as hell, it brings a massive amount of firepower on NATO units. It would seem that Soviet units in CM2 should be forced or restricted in some way to remain under effectual command of their platoon or company commanders. Killed leaders would result in all units under his command to most likely break or just simply stand there in confusion.

[Phandaal]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Commissar:

It would seem that Soviet units in CM2 should be forced or restricted in some way to remain under effectual command of their platoon or company commanders. Killed leaders would result in all units under his command to most likely break or just simply stand there in confusion. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmm, that would assume that the average Russian soldier was an idiot and had no initiative at all. I think that the current system is adequate for modeling the different qualities of troops and commands that would be found on the eastern front. Granted the SS division in Russia seem to have been in a league of there own when compared to the Russian troopers. But head to head with the Wehrmacht(Sp?), they seemed to hold their own later in the war. And in fact became quite effective overall.

Early war -Russian Green, Germans Reg and Vet

Mid war- Russian Reg, Germans Vet/Crack/Elite

End of war -Russians Vet, Germans Green/Reg

Of course you would need to model some battles with the Germans outgunned 3 or 4 to 1. Hell, most of the battles were fought with the Germans outnumbered.

Phandaal

[This message has been edited by Phandaal (edited 06-25-2000).]

[Commissar]

In the book "My Loyalty is My Honor", William Gordonson conducts several interviews with former Waffen-SS veterans. When asked to rate their enemies, the British and the Russians are rated on top for toughness while the Americans are rated last. There are many accounts of Russian determination but not necessarily very smart determination. The Russians would continue to push bad positions or actions despite repeated failures. This pattern is quite present is even modern Soviet/Russian doctrine. Much lip service is given to intiative but the entire military system discourages it, even penalizes for it. The Russian definition of intiative is completely different from the Western concept of it. Maybe that has changed some since Afghanistan and the fall of the Soviet Union. Anyway, Russian fighters were very tough and determined but their officer corps just sucked (It doesn't help when most of your talented officers are purged a decade or two earlier). This of course changed as the Russians gained experience. The game has to treat some aspects of war and nationalities in abstractions and this is probably one of the areas.

The assertion of the Russians greatly overnumbering the Germans may have been greatly exaggerated by both historians and the German generals. While the Russians often outnumbered the Germans in large operations, they did not come close to always doing so in all or the gross majority of areas. The assertion of the Russians winning merely because of their greater numbers and steamroller tactics is certainly mistated. The Russians were very good at operational and strategical operations and often faked the Germans in this area(Hitler's influence may have also helped in this area).

[This message has been edited by Commissar (edited 06-26-2000).]

[Chris Jenkins]

The problem with the Russians was not the soldiers, but the commanders. The penchant for running into fire like it was WWI (like they had won that one) proved disasterous. Maybe changing the AI is the best way to represent this. The Russian AI could think that charging is acceptable in more situations than the normal AI. Add poor leadership ratings to officers and I think it would work. Also, letting the troops accept "suicidal" charge orders would make things realistic.

------------------

"Rinky dinky stinky thinky"

[This message has been edited by Chris Jenkins (edited 06-26-2000).]