CM Vietnam

[1 RCHA]

What do you think about CM3 being about tactical warfare during the American involvement in Vietnam? This conflict has been severely underrepresented in the computer wargame community. Maybe I'm the only one who thinks this way . . . so be nice, I'm a newbie.

[LC-]

I agree it would be nice to see a well made Vietnam wargame. But I dont think we will ever see a good one. For CM to do the Vietnam conflict it would require a 1000 times better 3d graphics representation for the dense jungle. and even then, it wouldnt be much of a tactical game. Your orders would be to march down a trail in the jungle, lose a few men to boobytraps, continue on after a dust off chopper carried away the dead and wounded. After continueing on you would stumble onto a enemy ambush that would probably only last about 5 to 10 turns in CM. Even with this combat you wouldnt have much control and the ranges would be VERY close with all the dense jungle around. It would be great to have a good game about Vietnam, but I doubt it could ever be done. Then again they never thought putting men on the moon could be done.

[Pzman]

One problem CM3 is Africa/Italy and CM4 is Early war Poland/France ect. This has been brough oup about 10,000 in the last year. Well not that many but thats what it feels like.

[ 07-25-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ]

[Michlos]

I believe that the reasons against a Vietnam version of CM (except #3 already being taken hehe) will also be the reason why I doubt we will see CM featuring the fighting in the Pacific region.

A far as I know, the fighting in that particular area (Iwo Jima for instance) was very much like the Vietnam war and would be very hard to portrait.

[Rocket Fodder]

To make Vietnam CM possible Battlefront would have to make another tool available called the Stupid Political Tool or STP for short.

The STP would be similar to the LOS tool available today. Dragging the STP from one American unit to an enemy unit would tell you if you are allowed to engage that enemy at that time. If you are allowed to engage it will also tell you with what ordance you are allowed to engage with.

Also Battlefront would HAVE to provide the Torching Unit of Death who's only responsibility would be to set small villages aflame in order to flush out any enemies hiding within. The player could then use the STP to engage the whatever flushes from the burning village.

[Cubbies Phan]

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

One problem CM3 is Africa/Italy and CM4 is Early war Poland/France ect. This has been brough oup about 10,000 in the last year. Well not that many but thats what it feels like.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Jesus Rob, he said he was a newbie. He had no way of knowing that it has been discussed before.

[Pzman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cubbies Phan:

Jesus Rob, he said he was a newbie. He had no way of knowing that it has been discussed before.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats why I said the CM3 was taken. I was saying that it had been talking about before. So go suck on something. If you read the hole post not just the second half you wouldn't have wasted this space on the BBS.

[ 07-26-2001: Message edited by: Panzerman ]

[lcm1947]

Put men on the moon? - yeah right, very funny.

[Subvet]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947:

Put men on the moon? - yeah right, very funny. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, one country did!

[olandt]

I think the most interesting game for Vietnam would more closely resemble the old X-com game, based mostly on squads, platoons, and at the VERY most, compnaies. Larger scale engagements weren't seen until later in the war with the TET offensive. That's about the only stage of the war to see combat similar to CM, including plenty of street fighting. As mentioned in a different thread, some of the US arsenal will be a challenge to model. How do you model something like a B52 strike to make a FAIR QB? (Turn 1, horde of VC and NVA comes out of the jungle, US commander radios in air strike. Turn 5, EVERYTHING on the board goes up in smoke and every unit within 1 mile of the strike is panicked, if not routed) Not to mention napalm and a few other goodies as well. I think the game would need to take on a different scope. I would love to see a good vietnam game, but I think CM is better suited to something like the Korean war (which has even less written for it).

[Chad Harrison]

vietnam would be nice and definatly challanging!, but i would rather see what is already slated for CM3&4 to come out, and for five, if technology permits it to be somewhat simplier, i think modelling the pacific war would be the ultimate! assult craft and everything!!! maybe BTS?

[Desantnik]

Afghanistan would be much easier to implement. Rocky terrain with occasional desert isnt a dense jungle to model. Besides it would be interesting to see CM style game with modern hardware. Particularly interesting would be the way the modern battlefield is represented (things such as helicopters, CAS aircraft, modern firearms, modern tank capabilities etc.)

Btw, fot all Vietnam freaks i suggest to check Vietnam mod for Operation Flashpoint. It isnt tactical sim, but still

[Madmatt]

Now boys, play nice.

Small unit tactical battles were very prevalent in Vietnam and would make (I think) an excellent addition to the Combat Mission family.

But not until we get done with WWII first.

We cover the wars in order gentlemen, no line jumping!

Madmatt

[Michael Emrys]

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

We cover the wars in order gentlemen, no line jumping! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Damn right! After WW II (including the Pacific/Asia ), we go to Korea. Then we should attend to the Arab-Israeli wars (which are from a wargaming point of view much more interesting than Viet Nam). Then maybe we should go to Southeast Asia.

Then we can have an sf game...

Michael

[lcm1947]

No line jumbing? Well, then what happened to WWI? Was it ever even a thought by you guys? Just wondering?

[HRM JeffRoi]

While I believe there are some operations of a large enough scale to be modelled by a CM-like system (not all of them late war--Masher for example) I agree with them who say it would be better modeled by something that works on a smaller scale.

Something on the scale of individual soldiers, more or less, wherein the scope of your command would be squad leader to platoon leader more or less, largest scale being company commander would be ideal.

I've played Vietnam-era scenarios in TacOps, and I don't think it was the most interesting or illuminating for that conflict.

Not all the potential scenarios are boring--I think any scenario involving a hot LZ would be interesting, and scenarios such as leading seal team to assassinate a local politico,or leading a NVA sapper team on an attack on a U.S. firebase would be particularly challenging.

But scenarios like the marines at Khe Sanh or VC enduring Arc Light attacks at Cu CHi would be dull and depressing.

A game system very similar to CM could be effective, and as far as the 3d goes, I bet a lot of the jungle could be treated as solid masses of vegetation and if the texture mapping were clever if it would look great too.

Hrm. by the time such a beast could be developed computers might be able to model every blade of grass in Southeast Asia effectively.

A WWI game could have an "attack senselessly until everyone except for the General, his wife, and their pet tortoise Allan are killed" feature.