engy Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: The majority of the war was either poorly equipped troops being overrun (South Koreans by North Koreans, then North Koreans by Americans, then Americans by Chinese) and eventually a war of small unit actions and patrols, with little armour. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry Michael, but I'm going to disagree. Using the US Army resources at www.army.mil reveals how much armor was a part of the Korean battlefield for both the North Koreans and US/ROK forces. Specifically South to the Naktong, North to the Yalu and Combat Actions in Korea give wonderfully detailed accounts of individual battles and firefights, tracking the actions of both infantry and tank platoons. Armor plays an important part in many (I'd like to say 'most', but I haven't reread it in awhile and I don't want to kill my argument by exaggerating) of those accounts, and I can easily visulize those battles as very playable CM scenarios. As far as 'poorly equipped troops being overrun'...well, was that not historically the case in the spring of 1945 in our current incarnation of CM, and will it not be the case in summer/fall of 1941 in CM:B2B? Besides, I like to think of the initial stage of the Korean War as a 'fighting withdrawal to consolidate our postion'...it sounds so much nicer than being overrun. To everyone else, if you haven't done any reading on the Korean War, I highly recommend the two links above. The stories are in plain text files so the formatting is a bit ugly, but the accounts themselves are quite easy to read, very informative, and very engaging. [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: engy ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: Me? Would I ever? (innocent bunny look)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> God!!! not your classic innocent bunny look .. Regards, John Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gyrene: And if you hate Jabos now, wait until you run across USMC Close Air Support. Gyrene<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How do you call dropping Marines W/o parachutes, on the enemy CAS .... Regards, John Waters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Peter Cairns: Is this something that peoplewould be interested in???? Peter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes, ever since the first month of playing CMBO back in June of last year the thought of the CM engine and Korea has been a recurring wet dream for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen-x87H Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Sure I could go for a Korean Version if and only if the following is done first. 1. The Desert War + Sicily + Italy 2. Early War 3. Total all encompassing game where you can pit all forces on all forces. Then go ahead and do anything you like. Gen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeT Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Gen-x87H, have you checked out the downloads at www.dfdr.net? With these you can get the feel of desert warfare. Plus I did work up some conversions of existing boardgame scenarios for Italy, Sicily, and desert. Now perfect nor ideal but they are workable. MikeT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Robertson Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeT: Mike, personally I wish that BTS would simply modify one exe file with Russian armor/troops for one side and US armor/troops on the other. Let us gamer-modders do the rest. We can and would quickly modify existing bmps and wav files and make our own battles. It shouldn't, technically speaking, be difficult since nearly all the hardware does existing in CM1 and CM2. MikeT<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are forgetting that to ave a proper Korea you need the uber tank of the theatre to Centurian MK3 with its lovely 20pdr gun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 14, 2001 Share Posted July 14, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by engy: Sorry Michael, but I'm going to disagree. Using the US Army resources at www.army.mil reveals how much armor was a part of the Korean battlefield for both the North Koreans and US/ROK forces. Specifically South to the Naktong, North to the Yalu and Combat Actions in Korea give wonderfully detailed accounts of individual battles and firefights, tracking the actions of both infantry and tank platoons. Armor plays an important part in many (I'd like to say 'most', but I haven't reread it in awhile and I don't want to kill my argument by exaggerating) of those accounts, and I can easily visulize those battles as very playable CM scenarios. [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: engy ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> After the mobile battles of 1950-51, tanks were mainly used as pillboxes, or as indirect artillery. Yes, you are correct in drawing a comparison between WW II and Korea in that armour is usually vastly overrepresented in media accounts (I include computer games in here too) of WW II. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts