CM in the Pacific

[Ogadai]

After having been reading the BBS for a while I've seen references to the idea that BTS isn't going to be doing a Japanese war version of CM. Is this true? Why not?

At the same time I've seen on a couple of CM dedicated websites, references to a modded version of CM for the Pacific. However despite an extensive bashing of the various search engines I've been unable to find it. Does one exist and where can I get it?

[Andreas]

Don't know about the second question, but for the first one it is that they did not seem to feel the experts on the war that would be necessary to portray it correctly. This has led them to develop a long-term path for the CM machine, which does not include the Pacific. That's what I can recollect.

I guess they also did not think that CM as a combined arms simulation lends itself very well to the tactical problems in the south-east/east-Asian theatre.

If the search works, try it with Steve's member number, and 'pacific'.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Well, actually, the main reason Steve gave is that they do not have much personal interest in Pacific War ground combat and they do not care to make games on subjects they do not find interesting.

[Rupert_2]

Well, I would love to see a Pacific/Far East verison of CM...Shame they aren't going to.

But if you do want to play a Pacific CM I think MikeT is making a Mod for CM of the Pacific....Check out ;

http://www.wargamer.com/cm/cmworld/defaultflash.asp

If that doesn't work check the Warfare HQ site for a link.

[MikeT]

Ogadai, I will restart the Pacific mod soon. I do have parts of it in place now such as Japanese language files, some uniforms for USMC and Japanese soldiers, plus a Tarawa map. I also have via a Japanese CM gamer the wav files for the IJA rifle which has a very distinctive cycle sound, the dust covers rattles when the bolt is cycled. I do have a selection of 100 scenarios to convert to cmbs.

I have talked to Dave Singer, my uniform modder, and he is getting back into the various uniforms I want.

I do have a problem with getting good bmps for jungle trees. The European trees obviously don't work. So if you know of a modder interesting in helping please let me know.

MikeT

desertcmt@home.com

[MikeT]

Oh forgot, I also got the involvement of Wild Bill, a very productive sceanrio designer, in the Pacific. He has offered to work up some hypothetical scenarios on the allied invasion of Japan in 1945. Some interesting possibilities here with the Japanese making their own versions of German equipment such as tanks.

MikeT

[Boris Balaban]

One thing that CM has that a version in the South Pacific (SP) would not work is the cover of trees absorbing enemy small arms fire. I new a person that was in the SP and he mentioned that a tree in Europe would stop a regular bullet and a palm tree would not even if you had them 3 deep. :eek:

[Brian]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Boris Balaban:

One thing that CM has that a version in the South Pacific (SP) would not work is the cover of trees absorbing enemy small arms fire. I new a person that was in the SP and he mentioned that a tree in Europe would stop a regular bullet and a palm tree would not even if you had them 3 deep. :eek: <hr></blockquote>

Interesting claim. This would of course explain how Japanese coconut log bunkers were able to absorb such tremendous punishment, now wouldn't it?

[Brian]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Well, actually, the main reason Steve gave is that they do not have much personal interest in Pacific War ground combat and they do not care to make games on subjects they do not find interesting.<hr></blockquote>

Shame. Very interesting period and theatre of war. Perhaps the problem is that there aren't hordes of tanks?

[Phantom Captain]

Personally, i would love to see a pacific campaign. CC never did it, and now it doesn't seem we will see one here either. My Grandfather was one of Merrill's Marauder. He won two bronze stars and a purple heart in Burma after being involved in the Guadalcanal campaign. How awesome it would be to honor him by fighting battles he was involved in!!! Just a little thought of mine.

[Michael Dorosh]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Brian:

Shame. Very interesting period and theatre of war. Perhaps the problem is that there aren't hordes of tanks?<hr></blockquote>

To make it interesting, you would need a campaign game, which BTS is also opposed to doing. With a truly skilled AI used to fighting in dense jungle, perhaps the game would be of interest, but who would want to play the Japanese, especially after 1943? Sit in a bunker and wait for the flamethrowers?

I think it would essentially have to be a solitaire offering, though the earlier fighting on,say, Guadalcanal might offer some opportunities for tactical maneuver.

But really, the Pacific fighting was a case of unmatched enemies beating up on seriously weaker opponents, at least in the case of nationalities of greatest interest to computer owners - ie American, British, Dutch, Canadian. The Japanese walked all over them from 1941-42, and by 1944 it was the other way around.

The fighting in China and Burma may have been different, but until you find a Chinese, British or Australian game company willing to invest the time, I guess it would be hard to convince an American developer to take the project on - and to do it justice.

[Ogadai]

Michael, I am going to admonish you. Your northern hemisphericity is showing, big time. There are other people, outside of the USA, UK, Canada and Holland and they did take part in the anti-Japanese war.

I'm surprised that you discount for even those nationalities, their efforts against the Japanese so glibly and attempt to suggest that there is simply no interest in this theatre. I'm surprised that you've forgotten even the involvement of your own nation's forces in this theatre, at Hong Kong, the Aleutions and even in Northern Australia.

I'm also surprised that BTS appears to be so glib and dismissive of the potential market that exists for such a theatre being addessed by their game. Afterall, it lasted longer and covered a huge geographic expanse from the steppes of Central Asia to the islands of the South Pacific. Indeed, the scope, tactically is pretty amazing, with jungles on one hand to the steppes of Mongolia to the freezing sub-artic of the Aleutions.

The Japanese were a match for all of the nations that fought them, and like the Germans, it wasn't until either the application of tactical skill or overwhelming expenditure of material resources that they tended to be defeated.

[Michael Dorosh]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai:

Michael, I am going to admonish you. Your northern hemisphericity is showing, big time. There are other people, outside of the USA, UK, Canada and Holland and they did take part in the anti-Japanese war..<hr></blockquote>

That's exactly what I said. Face it, the campaigns in China or Burma are probably not going to be of interest to your average North American gamer and least of all your average North American game developer - nor would the actions at Hong Kong by two poorly trained Canadian battalions accustomed to garrison duty and ill equipped with transport and heavy weapons.

No?

[Gyrene]

I'd really really love to see a Pacific War version of CM, but I'll be a realist and say that there really isn't 1/2 of the interest in the PTO as there is in the European/North African war.

I think the reason for that is very straight forward: There are no Germans & their wonderful machines in the Pacific.

I have no figures to back this up but I'll stick my neck out and assume that at least 80% of all land combat WWII games involve the war against Germany.

Hell, if I'm not mistaken the Gung Ho module for ASL got released after there was nothing else to cover in WWII; even partisans and minor Allies got attention before the US forces in the Pacific & the Chinese did.

I would buy CM in the Pacific, possibly even before I would get the Eastern Front version, but I know that I am in the minority.

Hopefully we'll see it one day.

Gyrene

[MikeT]

Gyrene, I remember in the heyday of boardgaming it was said that a game would always sell if it was "Natos, Nukes, Nazis". So you are fight in that most wargames are in Germany, being 1944 or 1984. Personally I would love a 3D Pacific game. I would enjoy the ability to send my troops in a mass charge against jarheads. Well it will happen soon enough, at least at some level.

MikeT

[Michael Dorosh]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by MikeT:

Gyrene, I remember in the heyday of boardgaming it was said that a game would always sell if it was "Natos, Nukes, Nazis". So you are fight in that most wargames are in Germany, being 1944 or 1984. Personally I would love a 3D Pacific game. I would enjoy the ability to send my troops in a mass charge against jarheads. Well it will happen soon enough, at least at some level.

MikeT<hr></blockquote>

Mike T, I wonder if a conversion from CMBB to Pacific wouldn't be better? The Marines had a lot of automatic weapons by 1945 - comparable to German units; the Japanese would need special Human Wave rules, which we might see with the Russians, not to mention the Japanese had some primitive tanks that might be best simulated by early Russian ones.

If there is the captured vehicles option, you could have German Shermans which could be modded to US as well, though flamethrowing variants would probably be out...

Just food for thought.

[Ogadai]

I would suggest that the "average American wargamer" is not necessarily the market that BTS is trying to tap into.

I think its rather misguided and arrogant, thats all to be so dismissive of both a potential market and a theatre of war where tens of millions lost their lives.

If BTS won't do it, will they hand over or even perhaps sell their engine so that other could?

I suspect not but its a thought. I just wonder if Gyrene isn't right, the lack of interest is perhaps because the Japanese didn't have all those cool tanks...

BTW, there were other Canadian forces involved in the anti-Japanese war, other than just the garrison at Hong Kong (which did pretty well, if my memory serves me correctly).

[Vanir Ausf B]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai:

I'm also surprised that BTS appears to be so glib and dismissive of the potential market that exists for such a theatre being addessed by their game...

I think its rather misguided and arrogant, thats all to be so dismissive of both a potential market and a theatre of war where tens of millions lost their lives.<hr></blockquote>

I don't agree with this. For one thing, judging from comments made on the subject, they are not dismissing the potential market. Rather, they simply do not find the subject matter interesting. I don't see why that is a crime. You could make the same arguement about the Napoleonic wars, American Civil War, WWI, or whatever (in fact, at various times people have lobbied BTS to make a CM games for each of those wars).

My point being, whether or not Pacific War ground combat is interesting or not is an entirely subjective arguement. I would no more rake BTS over the coals for feeling the way they do than I would call someone a fool for finding the US Civil War dull.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>If BTS won't do it, will they hand over or even perhaps sell their engine so that other could?<hr></blockquote>

They've been asked, and as you correctly guess, they said no. I have doubts about how well the current CM engine could handle jungle warfare anyway. You would probably need to shrink the scale down and model the individual units in more detail.

[Fairbairn-Sykes]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

You would probably need to shrink the scale down and model the individual units in more detail.<hr></blockquote>

A very intriguing concept; and perhaps no longer CM... But it does sound like a better approach to certain aspects of the theatre. Burma would make for a challenging set of operations & scenarios. However, I think the USMC could be portrayed in their island hopping campaigns after the CM3 rewrite addresses certain engine limitations.

As a separate game, though, I think the fortifications of Iwo Jima, for instance, might be an interesting 2 player battle...

[Tanaka]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai:

...so dismissive of both a potential market and a theatre of war where tens of millions lost their lives...

<hr></blockquote>

How did you managed this number of lost lives ?

Unless you include Chinese civilians, (but those were not killed in "CM like" battles, they were murdered),I can't see how you come up with such a number

...but that isn't why I posted, if CM was about the number of death, it would be played in a prisoners camp and not in a battlefield.

****Attention****

Don't read this if you don't like speculation ! :cool:

Steve and Charles have a very good knowledge about the so called "Europe theater of operations ", that can be said if we review their past work commitments (games they have made or have somehow contributed, Charles mainly, see AH/Atomic time)... on top of that, just out of a pure hint, I strongly suspect, their "jowl of the crown" is the Russian front.

When they embarked on the CM project, they had a problem... The main market is the US, but the average US buyer/player doesn't like or doesn't want to know about the place were roughly 9/10 of the German army disappear. So What they did was these; they created a game engine that would be so good, that the players would follow them every where it goes... even to the Volga ! So the thing started with an advertisement called CMBO (it had American troops on it)... now we go to the main course, the author masterpiece, CMBB... Let it come, honestly, I would buy it even if it was on the 90s in the Kuwait/Iraq "thing". :eek:

After this we are told the game engine will be rewritten and goes to the NAfrica, and after that, when some of us have grandchildren :cool: ,Western Europe again, this time early war...

So in ETO we have it all,

CMBO -> "Political war"

CMBB -> "Fatal war"

CMB? -> "Romantic war"

CMB? -> "Incompetence war"

...no PTO.

We can't expect Charles, ok, and Steve, plus a few more aid camp troopers would be experts in the pacific war too, could we ?!

This thing of them doing only what they strongly know about, is one more assurance of their commitment to supply us with a very good product. If they wanted to hit the golden eggs chicken, they would just do new theaters one after the other, with none or little background study, like many other game companies do (remember cc ?)... Some of them don't even supply a playable product on the first go, and then, want more $ from you to finish their "unfinished" business (remember stw ?).

[Doug Williams]

Didn't Talonsoft do a Pacific game based on their East Front/West Front engine?

[Brian]

I find it interesting that some people seem to think that the scale for CM wouldn't be useful in a Pacific or as Ogadai more accurately seems to prefer "anti-Japanese" wargame. I'd suggest that actually, its pretty close to what you need.

While I'd perhaps like to see a ground scale which allowed a little more detail to the terrain, even the present 20m ground tile is more than adequate.

Fighting just doesn't occur at smaller than section level, if you're talking about tactics. I for one wouldn't want to try and maneauvre individual men. Its hard enough trying to keep track of sections, let alone individual men.

Nor is there any advantage to such an idea IMO. Even in what is euphemistically referred to as "jungle" (but which is reality usually secondary tropic rainforest), while your vision might be limited because of vegetation, the range of your weapons isn't nor is the way in which you maneauvre your men, except that command distances should perhaps be reduced.

Having spent several years training for the war I missed - Vietnam, Jungle tactics are not all that different from those of more open terrain. There is more reliance on small unit tactics (at least for us there was) but even so, there is little terrain where fighting didn't occur in the "anti-Japanese war".

I concur with Michael in that I think that perhaps CMBB might be a better choice than CMBO for a Pacific war game, particularly if some of the lend-lease equipment is included, such as the M3 Stuart and the Tilly. Those, along with the M4, should make the SW Pacific and Pacific theatres playable. The absence of the M3 Lee/Grant will make it impossible to do late war Burma (although 1941-42 should be possible as the M3 Stuart was the only tank there) but if a captured vehicle option isn't included, then it will be difficult to have the Russians substitute for the Japanese.

As to this abandonment of the Pacific theatre in general by BTS, I'm just very surprised and disappointed.

I'd be more than willing to party with the readies if such a game was available.

[MikeT]

Michael, I have considered CMBB for the Pacific. Minor allies might serve as the Japanese while the Russians for the allies. American armed would be a stretch but.....

In any case I am collecting what must be done and getting the various components together. I still need jungle type trees figured out and buildings into something that looks jungle/island like.

Most of the scenarios I have a very heavy infantry battles so armor isn't really a problem.

After as the Bard says, the play is the thing. It is the scenario that gives you the feel of a Pacific battle. The dressing just provides the atmosphere.

MikeT

[Slapdragon]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Ogadai:

I'm also surprised that BTS appears to be so glib and dismissive of the potential market that exists for such a theatre ...

<hr></blockquote>

I am interested in reading the quotes which you seem to think are glib and dismissive by BTS. Having read and even spoken to BTS on this subject a number of times, I thought they had some pretty well defined reasons, but perhaps your own conversations with them have resulted in this glibness. Please expand on this.

[Slapdragon]

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Brian:

As to this abandonment of the Pacific theatre in general by BTS, I'm just very surprised and disappointed.

I'd be more than willing to party with the readies if such a game was available.<hr></blockquote>

I believe this is a fallacy, since to abandon something, you need to first take it up, and BTS has stated quite strongly that their system's engine will never be sold to thrid parties, and will not be developed into a Pacific game. I think I first read this from them two years ago after Steve had done a bunch of reading on the subject and just decided that the flavor of the various theaters in the Pacific was not to the BTS crews liking.

However, and this was discussed by several, there is another solution: design your own Pacific game. Lewis (Username) for quite some time was discussing an engine he was designing that would be CMx1000 in quality solving all of the flaws and problems with CM. It would also solve some of the games logistic problems as he saw them (by dropping Macintosh support, supporting a smaller set of video cards, and prehaps providing support for a version of Unix, although this did not come directly from his mouth so I am unsure about it).

So pacific lovers could form a Linux like design team and ask Lewis to sell or donate his current code base to the effort. Then a new game could be developed from scratch. No company can be all things to all people, and with a very few programmers (read one) and the next ten years of development mapped out, this would be the only solution for a Pacific game in the near future.