BTS, Are you considering doing a Pacific Front Theater with the CM engine?

[Guest Big Time Software]

Well, the PTO folks are also showing their ignorance on the ETO stuff, so I guess we can call it even Anybody that calls a 4 year clash of some 20 million men, on a 1000 mile front, involving tens of thousands of evolving AFVs, from Arctic to desert conditions (and everything else inbetween), "boring" doesn't have any right to be critical of my feeling that the PTO would be less than exciting. The Eastern Front is probably the most balanced and varried theater in the entire war. If other games have lead you to think otherwise, question the games, not the reality they supposedly simulate. Which brings me to my point...

The bottom line is that although the ETO has been done a couple of times at roughly CM's level, it has never been done RIGHT in our opinion. If we were simply making yet another "chit" and "CRT" style wargame, then the criticism for our decision to stay in the ETO vs. the under done PTO holds some water. But we are doing something so different that it is almost our DUTY to redo the ETO. In our minds the ETO has never been done at all, so we are breaking as much ground in the ETO as we would in the PTO.

Los, sorry to say that "mods" are not possible with CM. There are no Japanese vehicles, wepaons, or force structures in place. These things can't be hacked in, especially the vehicles (which are compiled externally to the CM EXE). There would also be no terrain and weather effects for tropical conditions, no consideration for unique aspects of jungle warfare, etc. To do the PTO even half assed would require a huge effort from Charles. This might happen sometime in the future, but I can assure you that no well meaning hacker is capable of making a Pac mod for CM.

I'm not rubbing this in anybody's face, but I don't want anybody getting their hopes up. CM right now can't even adequately do the Med. Theater, and that is only a heartbeat away from Normandy for the later stages in Italy. This is the "downside" of not having an over simplified game system with early 1990s computer technology

Steve

[Los]

Agreed. Though when I'm talking Mods I'm talking cosmetic stuff like CoolJ is already doing. Japanese uniforms instead of german, changing some tiles around, perhaps in a future release when we see a DuKW. Boom that's all that's needed. It's like Jurassic park where the Dinosaurs suupposedly can't breed.

Los

[Los]

I think the big technical hurdle for the Desert will be handling longer range engagements (yes I know there are also short range things) which will require a larger map on the average, and also a better way of doing LOS checks, assigning targets etc when you have targets as a norm (for some battles) out past 800 meters, etc.

Though hopefully by then we'll be in P1000 territory so the hardware won't be a problem, (providing you don't go photo realistic?)

Los

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Well, the PTO folks are also showing their ignorance on the ETO stuff, so I guess we can call it even Anybody that calls a 4 year clash of some 20 million men, on a 1000 mile front, involving tens of thousands of evolving AFVs, from Arctic to desert conditions (and everything else inbetween), "boring" doesn't have any right to be critical of my feeling that the PTO would be less than exciting. The Eastern Front is probably the most balanced and varried theater in the entire war. If other games have lead you to think otherwise, question the games, not the reality they supposedly simulate. Which brings me to my point...

The bottom line is that although the ETO has been done a couple of times at roughly CM's level, it has never been done RIGHT in our opinion. If we were simply making yet another "chit" and "CRT" style wargame, then the criticism for our decision to stay in the ETO vs. the under done PTO holds some water. But we are doing something so different that it is almost our DUTY to redo the ETO. In our minds the ETO has never been done at all, so we are breaking as much ground in the ETO as we would in the PTO.

Steve

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, I agree. The East Front has really never been done correctly. Back in the Steel Panthers days, to knock out a T-34 or KV tank you almost had to run a PzIV or Tiger up right behind the Russian tank to have even a chance to knock it out. Plus the old "tanks automatically turning to face a threat" bug was quite frustrating and ridiculous.

If CM2-East Front contains the many eastern European countries like Bulgaria, Rumania, and hopefully Finland, it should be a pretty damn entertaining game. Talonsoft's East Front II did include Poland, but of course, that will be included in CM4-Early War.

Ironically, alot of Russia's terrain consists the flat Steppes. Remember the movie "Stalingrad"? It's even apparent in the Shuttle's map mission now. Alot of western Russia, on the west side of the Caucasas Mountains is flat!

As for CM3-Mediterranean Theater, I think that would be awesome. There is quite a bit of mountain ranges & passes in north-western Africa. I've got more, but I gotta go. I'll edit later.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Los, just keep in mind that those Japanese units are going to have a LOT of firepower

As for the increased engagement ranges, this is also an issue in Southern Russia, so we will likely be forced to figure out how to do this before we get to North Africa. Personally, I am not concerned. CM2 is about a year off and the systems that have come out in the last year or so (including 3D cards) can probably already handle an increase if the terrain is realitively flat. So it is a matter of dropping focus on the 2xx MHz systems as our middle ground, and instead call them the low end.

As for terrain in the Soviet Union, there is everything you can imagine. A VERY rough outline of the terrain goes like this (from North to South):

1. Tundra

2. Dense forest and lots of swamps

3. Dense forest

4. HUGE swamps

5. Rolling planes turning into stepps

6. Coastlines and mountains

Also MAJOR river systems, urban areas, and a temperature difference going from -35 F to 110 F.

Upshot is that the Eastern Front has pretty much everything except for jungles and sahara type deserts.

As for Axis forces, we will have them all if we can. Shouldn't be out of the question. However, quibble, the Bulgarians won't be in the Eastern Front as they really didn't do anything but a land grab from its neighbors in the closing days of the war

Steve

[Guest hunt52]

Will the effects of extreme temperature be modled in CM2? I would imagine that if you can't feel your fingers it would be hard to aim.

- Bill

[CoolColJ]

I'm really looking forward to CM2 - Eastern Front. Germans Vs Russians, is just more sexy to me

Big brutal battles, and lots of nice big tanks and AT guns

ccj

[Guest Big Time Software]

Not sure what the weather is likely to do. Really tough to say. Obviously fatigue is a no brainer, but in extreme cold and heat weapons tend to malfunction more often so that will probably have to be simulated more. I think the worst aspects of the weather are more or less outside of CM's scope. If you can't get your frozen tanks started, or if your platoon froze to death during the night, then they would never make it to the battlefield

Steve

[Zamo]

Your right, I WAS basing my assesement on the Eastern front, not on history as much as on previous games, my fault. For what it's worth I do actually know somewhat about combat in the east, and was basing my response on a mixture of disappointment that my dream of a PTO CM will not happen and the afore mentioned poor Eastern front gaming blight. I appologize if I was (again) out of line.

I recently read "Fighting in Hell: The German generals speak" or some title like that and highly recommend it to anyone interested in combat on the Eastern front, as well as "Front Soldaten" which is also good. These both describe life and death in the east very clearly.

It is simply a personal desire to see more PTO games which got me worked up, I am a former Marine, with a BA in History as well as an avid wargamer. Combine those three and that should explain my tirade sufficiantly.

[Spook]

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

It is simply a personal desire to see more PTO games which got me worked up, I am a former Marine, with a BA in History as well as an avid wargamer. Combine those three and that should explain my tirade sufficiantly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I shouldn't revive this thread, but.....

Just to say to you, Zamo, that your tirade is justifiable to a degree. Far too many of the Pacific battles were hard-fought & bitter, hardly definable as "boring." The Marines' effort at Iwo Jima stands to me as one of the pinnacles of valorous conduct in the entire history of the US armed forces. When I read one Iwo book many years ago and thumbed through an appendix describing the CMH winners (mostly posthumous), I was shocked at how many times I read one recurring action: "Smothered grenade with his body to save the lives of his comrades."

I wouldn't label PTO land warfare as boring in the least, Zamo. But I would instead use the term "compelling" where a PTO version of CM might NOT be very compelling.

The reason that a PTO CM might not be very compelling has been espoused by others already. At the lowest building-blocks like small arms and squad organization, the Japanese side already is potentially outmatched. Add the possible plethora of Allied fire support through artillery, naval, & air assets, and the tilt gets even worse. I couldn't possibly see myself trying to play a CM "operation" (connected scenarios) as a Japanese company commander from 1943 onwards, unless I had the benefit of deep-rooted fortifications & booby traps to hide behind so to even the odds. Even then, though, the ability to maneuver is pretty well stripped out.

I think that using the Japanese in larger formations (battalion & higher) is better for a Pacific/Asia-based game that needs some move & countermove. So a game like TalonSoft's Rising Sun might be better suited for gaming the PTO than CM would. Yeah, I know, it's turn-based and platoon-level, but maybe that'll work better in this case.

[This message has been edited by Spook (edited 02-16-2000).]

[killmore]

To me East front is the most intresting off all.

Why?

Because of variety of equipment.

In early war Germans had problems with KVs and T-34s.

In mid-war SU had problems with killing Tigers.

In the late war equipment became more balanced.

Also this is where most of the wermacht force was.

Waves of Tanks? - It does not need to be so in CM because the battles can be designed by YOU.

You have all of the war equipment here from early to the late war.

Italy, Desert - these have limited equipment (in years)

Pacific? - I don't think CM engine is well suited for Jungle fighting (at this time).

[Richard III]

Oddly, I'd like to see a fusion of CM1 and CM2. A 'broken Alliance' type thing. For some reason I have always been interested in potential Allies vs. Soviet Union scenarios. Pershings vs JS-II!

[Guest Ol' Blood & Guts]

Well, after watching the second installment of the History Channel's World War II in Color in which they covered the Battle of Saipan pretty well, I'm inclined to go with Steve's assessment. For one, as an above post mentioned that Pacific scenarios wouldn't be "compelling" to play. I'd have to agree. Because the Japanese were just outclassed in weaponry, mainly in tanks and air/naval-power. Don't get me wrong, the battles were bloody, but I don't think they'd translate well to the CM engine. I mean how many times could you assault a row of bunkers or dug-in caves without getting bored of the redundency. However, the modelling of Banzai Charges would be interesting. You know, maybe a drop in the immediately affected units' morale.

IMO, I'm looking forward to the East Front and Mediterranean Theaters for the diversity of units and engagements.

[Simon Fox]

The point about who would want to take the role of a Japanese CO, is a good one I suspect for a PTO-CM there could be a lot more vs AI play than PBEM.

Just musing as the nature of the bonsai (oops banzai) charge. I guess it depends upon the nature of the infantry ethos: stand off and blast 'em or get in amongst them. Interestingly accounts of banzai charges seem to figure more frequently in US accounts since they were seen as a suicidal tactic whereas Commonwealth accounts seem to see them as a more legitimate tactic.

From an Australian army assessment of the fighting in New Guinea: "Japanese infantry are extremely susceptible to a well timed bayonet charge"

Think of the current CM beta demo tactic of charging those German SMG squads up to 20 metres and blasting away, a tactic which I might add is fairly ahistorical though I am not sure how it could be discouraged. Trying to match that kind of close range firepower is a waste of time. Just consider (though CM doesn't allow for it) you can't attach a bayonet to a MP40 and the Germans didn't like the close quarters stuff much.

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Fox:

Think of the current CM beta demo tactic of charging those German SMG squads up to 20 metres and blasting away, a tactic which I might add is fairly ahistorical though I am not sure how it could be discouraged. Trying to match that kind of close range firepower is a waste of time. Just consider (though CM doesn't allow for it) you can't attach a bayonet to a MP40 and the Germans didn't like the close quarters stuff much.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

On WW2 in Color, there was a quote from a young Tommy describing his basic training. Apparently, they spent a lot of time on bayonet tactics. "Jerry doesn't like cold steel".

Ethan

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

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[Major Tom]

I would actually consider rushing your enemy to be a realistic and good tactic. Suprise is a vital asset. If you charge up on your enemy firing SMG's they are going to be shocked and react badly to your advance. However, if they charge across a long open field, then you are toast because there is no shock.

The Japanese small tree attack (bonsai) actually has it's merit. The Japanese were very adept in tactical psychological warfare. Infiltration tactics were very successful in getting your enemy to abandon a position without fighting. Bonzai tactics worked well if they were able to cause fear in your enemies, like during the American Civil War with the Rebel Yell (no, not the Billy Idol song). However, doing a Bonzai charge against a well entrenched and well armed enemy doesn't work. The tactic was sound, they just used it too frequently and in the wrong situations.

Dealing with the Japanese infiltration tactics, General Slim took notice stating something to the effect, "Sure, the enemy is now behind you, but remember, now you are also behind your enemy as well". General Bennet, commander of the 8th Australian Division in Malaya was very successful in stopping the Japanese Crack Imperial Guards division inflicting severe casualties on them by resorting to Japanese tactics.

I still say that an early war Pacific game would work in the CM invironment. However, it would be difficult to create, and too many battles will be fought in dense jungle (like constantly fighting in woodland).

[Los]

Gosh this thread has got to be getting long enough to close down by now but someone keeps adding something interesting. I'll say this about a Banzai attack. To a large extent, the main purppose of a banzai attack, as they generally occured in the Pacific was two fold:

1. To die with honor in a situation that was clearly hopeless. There never was any doubt that the attack would not end in the complete annihlation of the attacking force.

2. To take as many of the enemy with you and cause as much casualties as possible.

Very rapidly after Saipan most overall commanders took firm steps to prevent units from "indulging" (I'm quoting Kuribayashi, commander of the defense at Iwo), the luxury of banzai attacks. After that (with some small exception) the strategy was to defend inland and fight thedefensive battle, and cause as many casualties in order to disuade teh US from further offensive operations.

And don't confuse attacks made by the Japanese, say early in the war like in Guadalcanal on Edson's Ridge or Matanikau, with later banzai attacks such as those seen in the Marianas. (though for the troops facing them the experience would have been the same.) Also regular Japanese fire and manuever attacks such as early war or in the CBI theater.

Likewise, there is a big differnce between Huamn Wave assaults ala' the Russian Front, and Banzai attacks, mid and late war in the Pacific. Again on the Russian front, the Soviets had the manpower to expend in this fashion, coupled with their lack of lower level tactical acumen at the time, it became a viable alternative (at least in their minds) to try and get things done under certain circumstances. And Human wave assaults were usually followed up with manuever forces of some type.

The Japanses who conducted Banzai attacks knew they did not have the resources at hand (or the follow on forces)to make the attacks stick or bring about victory, it was either Banzai attack or die a miserable cowards death cowering in a hole (generalizing to some extent to make a point).

Cheers...

Los

[Speedy]

To the earlier BTS post about CM2 Axis unit nationality, will you be including Hiwis ( I certainly hope so ).

Now back to the topic at hand although I myself am quite happy with the proposed course of CM releases I must add that I disagree somewhat with some of the negative comments about the PTOs' suitability for CM. Most of you seem to be concentrating on the island hopping campaigns, for Americans I realise this is understandable. However the island hopping campaigns were in reality only a very small percentage of the overall fighting in the PTO. I myself do not believe the island hopping campaigns would be very suitable for CM for many of the reasons already expressed above.

However the other campaigns such as PNG, Guadalcanal, Burma etc I would find very interesting these are areas where the fighting went on for quite extended periods of time and both sides fought both offensive and defensive battles.

Also it is interesting to look at the timescale of the various campaigns, each Island hopping battle usually lasted only a week or two, whereas PNG campaign lasted over a year ( in itself longer than the entire scope of CM1 ). Then you have Burma which lasted most of the war and has been stated earlier was the only place where the allies were still on the strategic defensive in 1944.

Personally I would love to play the initial campaign in Papua New Guinea. This campaign had relativly small numbers of troops, ( do not quote me on this as I don't have any refrences on hand ) I believe it was 1 Jap Regiment v 2 Battalions of Oz Militia, with the Australians conducting a fighting withdrawal acoss the Owan Stanley mountains.

Oh well thats enough of my rambling, just incase you have become as confused as myself reading this I reiterate I want to see all of ETO done before PTO is attempted

Speedy

[Guest gyrene251]

I am all for a Pacific/CBI version of CM before Africa or Eastern Front...the Pacific theater rarely gets treated in any game. I think it's high time that changed!