In Praise of the Cold War for CMX2.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

OK, I admit it; I am the most unhinged fan of the idea of the Cold War as the first game with CMX2.

But I am not entirely unhinged in that, overall, WWII remains my major “hobby” interest. Just to prove the point, the books I am currently reading are the David Glantz big item version on the Battle for Leningrad, Hell’s Gate by Douglas Nash, and Accounting for War by Mark Harrison, on the Soviet war time economy… all are stunning books. However… I do like a change.

I am old enough to go back to the high water mark of war games as a mass hobby, if it ever was a mass hobby, the second half of the seventies. In those days it was all a matter of Squad Leader and the “one hex to one mile” operational games. Most were WWII games, but every now and then I, and my war game chums, would turn to Cold War games. The change was hugely good fun. Change is good.

One of the most appealing aspects of a Cold War version of CM is the opportunity to become wildly nerdish, enthusiastic, about technology from a different era. I have to confess to sitting at home working out armour penetrations equations long before CM was even a flicker in the eye of Steve and Charles, so I am not quite sane. I greatly enjoy the detail of the technology of military matters as a hobby. Subscribe to Jane’s military journals in the same way some people subscribe to car magazines. But I suspect that many would join me in finding the study of T62s/T72s/T80s/M60s and M1s fun… for a while… as a change from WWII. Then back to WWII for the second game in the CMX series. What could a 1975 RPG7 penetrate… and what could it not penetrate… and so on.

One objection some have to the idea is that the Cold War never became hot. However, at least the armies on each sides of the Iron Curtain were real. The problem with a contemporary setting for a version of CM is that even the armies do not exist. In the Cold War there were WWII scale armies lined up, now the latest versions of tanks, or AFVs in general, can often be counted in tens., couple of hundred at most. For a version of CM you need two, or more nations, lined up against each other in roughly the same ball park in military technology. At this point I should stress that Soviet technology certainly was the equal of that in the west up to the end of the Cold War.. 1989… overall. The mistake many make.. almost everyone in fact… is to compare a “1970s” model T72 to a late “1980s” western tank. If you compare the model of the T80 introduced in the same year as the 120mm gunned M1, 1985, you will find the T80 is immune all forms of ammunition used by the M1 until the end of the 1980s. And.. yes.. this was confirmed by US sources who tested one in the early 1990s. I could give many similar examples.

Of course this is really addressed to BFC as I recon they will simply produce the game that most appeals to them, most takes their imagination. I have a feeling that the guys at BFC really have achieved the ultimate goal of many… they really do spend their time doing what would be their hobbies if they were not paid for what they do. Life does not get much better… in an imperfect world.

My hope is that one or more of them may be a secret… or not so secret… Cold War fan. Was Steve not thinking of buying a T72 a while back.. or is that wishful thinking on my part.

All good fun,

All the best,

Kip.

[eichenbaum]

Cold war in a 3d wargame has been done before.

Operation Flashpoint !

This succesfull game has everything that you're wishing for

Personal, I would very like to see WWII again in CMX2. Maybe more Japanese issues...?

Eichenbaum

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Operation Flashpoint is a very fine game. No doubt about it… but it is not quite the same scale as CM.

CM, and Squad Lead, both have the manoeuvre units as squads, individual AFVs and such. In Operation Flashpoint the scale is one click down… sections or individual soldiers. I am not familiar with the exact terminology… but I guess Operation Flashpoint is a shooter… or semi-shooter.

In my view there is something near magical in the way CM draws one in… I think the jargon is immersion. In my view, a lot of the reason for this is the scale, the exact scale, of CM. As well as the stunningly high quality of the execution by the gang at BFC.

Steelbeasts is the game which comes closest to CM, for me.

However, in truth, the CM series has no competition. They are in a different stratosphere to anything else.

Thus… it is CM or nothing. The CM games are the only computer games I play.

All the best,

Kip.

[Nightwatch]

I think it would be a good idea actually.

The problem is that it could get preety political, preety fast. The Cold war is still recent enough that there are people who would have been sitting on the 2 sides of the fence still around. And that people have a vested interest in looking good. There was a company that made a board game for the US navy to practice naval tactics, and they were screamed at because they made it possible in the rules for US aircraft carriers to be sunk. The official line was that they were invincible, so they had to be in the game, case closed. National pride is a very strange thing. And if you think its impossible for guys in grey suits to call on Battlefront, you dont know the intellegence community.

And what about when those suber invincible M1 Abrams start blowing up all over the battlefield. Can you imagine the flame wars?

WW2 is a nice safe place to game without dragging in all that. Trust me.

[MikeyD]

BFC certainly isn't intimidated by modern warfare, to judge by TacOps.

They're telling us that the new game engine will be sufficiently modular for them to turn around product at a (much?) quicker pace. Perhaps this will lend itself to profitably producing more esoteric wargames. Vietnam? Yom Kippur war? Bosnia? Korean war? NATO vs Warsaw Pack 1945-1969, 1970-1995? I doubt they'd be able to locate sufficiently accurate TO&Es for the Iran/Iraq war. Would BFC prefer to produce a small number of 'blockbuster' titles, or a whole shelf full of smaller games covering a wide area? I believe early Blitz WWII may still be on their 5-year plan.

As wild as our pipe dreams may be it all hinges on whether the theater of operations can hold the interest of the BFC team. If they ain't interested in it they probably won't want to devote all their waking life to producing it. Matt seems particularly unenthused about the Pacific theater.

[YankeeDog]

Well, I must admit that I am probably more a fan of the WWII setting for Wargames than I am other eras, but I do think the idea of a Cold War CM is interesting.

BFC has been pretty coy about exactly where and when the first setting for CMX2 initial release will be, but I strongly suspect that it will be something WWII and European Theater, for the simple reason that the massive task of researching and compiling all the unit data has already been done. Even if they decide to do early war for the initial release (Poland, France and the Low Countries), between CMBB and the upcoming CMAK the vast majority of the vehicles and infantry units have already been done.

In order to do a Cold War game, they'd basically be starting from scratch as far as the unit data goes. True, more modern military data is often somewhat easier to find than historical data from WWII and earlier, but just organizing all the data about armor thickness, penetration, speed, etc., not to mention TOEs into a usable form for the game would take quite a bit of work.

The good news for you Cold War types is that BTS has already made some comments about designing the CMX2 engine to be more modular and expandable, so that the basic engine could be expanded with new units and into new time periods than the current engine. This suggests to me that they're eventually looking to take the engine beyond WWII and Europe/Mediterranean. I just doubt this will happen with the initial release of the new engine.

But I'm just speculating. I could be wrong and if they do release a Cold War game based on the CM engine, I'll be there.

Cheers,

YD

[Amedeo]

Yes, a Cold War era CM would be a very interesting and addictive game! If I could decide BFC schedule for the next months I'd like to see a new CMBK (Combat Mission: Blitzkrieg covering the early war years... Poland, Winter War, France etc.) with the same engine of the CMBB and CMAK series followed by a Cold War game when the new game engine will be ready.

Can't wait for looking the autoloader of my T-64BV finish its loading cycle after my first BM-29 missed the M1 and M735 rounds start ominously bouncing off around

Amedeo

[flamingknives]

As ever, I'll just pop in and add my support to a Cold War CM.

As for the values, they're out there, in field manuals, declassified documents, Janes', original handbooks etc. What's more, if the team asked, I'm sure that some of the forum would be able to provide what they're after, as any given subject will be someones pet project.

I think the inclusion of earlier cold war would be good too. JS3s, T54/55s, Centurions, Conquerors, for example.

[MikeyD]

Ooooooh... Conqueror hvy tanks!

Ooooooh...

[Lars]

Don't forget tactical nukes!!!

The only real problem for a Cold War game. But if you toss that out...

Immediate post WWII is easy enough, everything is pretty much there.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Good to see there are some out there who are nearly as keen on a Cold War game as I am.

I own favourite would be 1970-1989. The reason is that the technology is so far from WWII. May as well go for a reasonable leap in technology to make the change, the break from WWII, more complete.

I appreciate that there is potential for politically sensitive matters to spring up, but this is also the case even with WWII. Steelbeasts, as used by the US military among others, plus the US army’s own WEG, an arms catalogue on the Threat Support site, are very open about the capabilities of Soviet equipment. If we end with 1989 the information is certainly out there on its capabilities.

3rd Shock Army driving through the Fulda Gap. Would defence in depth work? There is strong evidence from WWII that it would not. Let’s model the Cold War and find out!

All the best,

Kip.

[Ruthless]

I would also like to add my desire to see a Cold War CM pack to the pile.

That said, if anyone is interested, I am working on my own wargame/sim and planning to do the first release using modern equipment and theatres. In a nutshell, the idea is to have a very sophisticated game engine that can handle just about anything you want to put in and do so in great detail. I.E., if you really WANT to see how the ancient Romans would fare against the WWII Germans, you could set it up and the game could handle it (though the results would be quite gruesome for the Romans, I think ) The engine could handle tactical battles, operational, AND strategic and all could be connected such that tactical battles could be spawned from the operational level, etc... To say the least, there is still much to be done especially since this is a solo project.

Graphically, I believe it will likely be similary to Talonsoft's West Front, but without the hexes and units can move more realistically instead of discretely. I haven't totally decided yet, but since I want to allow naval units and don't want to put an artificial size limitation on anything, plus 3-d is a lot more work, I believe it will be 2-d graphics. All game calculations will be in 3-d space, however, and the terrain will be modelled in 3-d, just not graphically.

Anyhow, if anyone is interested, you can drop me a line at chrismw12@yahoo.com

I hope to be able to load and to display a map from a file within a few months. I'll post some shots here if/when I am successful at doing that (and if they don't look too ridiculous ) if the moderators don't object.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Preach on brothers! May I have another witness?!!!

[Nippy]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

Preach on brothers! May I have another witness?!!!

Count me in!

At the very least, I would love to see a post WWII NATO vs Warsaw Pact battle. It could use equipment already modeled but that never entered WWII in significant numbers like the T-26 Pershing, JSIII, and maybe throw in slightly more "modern" units like the M48 and T-55 and a few early jets for CAS.

[Hans]

Post WWII yeah baby

Bring on those Arab and Israelis, Korea and a host of others

A cold war (Nato vs Warsaw) set in the mid 60's might be interesting with the advent of Saggers and Tows.

Helicopters would be an interesting development also.

[Code13]

I have got to say I would love to see a Cold War period game, playing board games like MBT and Air Cav really got me into this hobby and the thought a game as rich and detailed as CMBO/BB might be available for it makes me very happy.

It would also be interesting to see the shift of power from MBT's to Helicopers to AFV's.

Mind you a specific Korean setting game would also be great, tech is advancing just enough to be different from WW2, especially air power.

[Moon]

Ruthless, no objections, provided you do it in the General Discussion Forum. And in fact, feel free to send me more info on this when it's done ( martin@battlefront.com , maybe it'll be good enough to get its own forum and sales page here

Martin

[zukkov]

cold war, huh? not a bad idea i suppose, but it would have to be done much better than steel panthers 2. i just couldn't get into that game. but speaking of the cold war, i was wondering whether russia's invasion of afganistan was really a practice battle for attacking western europe. or at least that's what the soviets intended it to be. i mean look at the situation during those times. carter was president. our military was basically a paper tiger, and shrinking every day. many vehicles and aircraft were not functioning due to lack of spare parts. and lastly, the anti-nuke community in the west was growing stronger and stronger. this would not have been lost on the soviets. if there was ever a time to strike, that was it.

i know this discussion should more properly be posted on the general forum, but since this is a CW thread, i figured what the hell...

[James Crowley]

Sorry Kip, got to give my thumbs-down to a cold war CM (again).

Why?

Cold war is certainly different, but then so is the civil war (American or English), the Punic wars, the Zulu wars etc.etc. They just aren't WW2, which is my interest and, as far as I know, BTS's as well.

Maybe down the line BTS might want to explore other fields but there is still sooo much to do WW2-wise.

In any event, the cold war was primarily centered around the threat of nuclear strikes, rather than the potential of conventional armies.

IMO had any of those hypothetical clashes come about, the losing side would have balanced the equation with, at first, tactical nuclear strikes; with the frightening potential for escalation.

"Replicating" conventional cold war battles is just a form of what-if science fiction.

[kipanderson]

Jim,

I understand what you say; the Cold War never went hot.

However, if CM is ever to be set in post WWII, then whatever war you go for will be fictional. Assuming BFC stick to their wish to model mechanised warfare.

Post WWII there have been lots of wars, but not two major industrialised nations fighting it out, hence not mass mechanised war. Of course, this is a very good thing from a real world perspective. Many of my generation, potential 1970s and 1980s cannon fodder, would not be live today if the Cold War had gone hot. But the wars that did happen where not first world mechanised warfare. Even the Arab Israelis wars were only a few short days of fighting, in terms of mechanised warfare.

When BFC went for North West Europe, followed by Eastern Front, few sane potential wargames fans could complain. And the Med, as a last game with this engine, to feed the addictions of myself and many on this forum, is a great bonus.

However, when it comes to their next game… there was always going to be a difference of opinion. I would go into decline if I thought that there was never to be a version set in North West Europe, and then later the Eastern Front, with the new engine. But I would like a more modern setting for just one game… as a change.

When it comes to nukes, my guess has always been, was during the Cold War too, that neither side would ever have used them. Because neither side would have used them “first”. Anyway… many an exercise, on both sides, were run on the assumption that nukes had not been used yet, thus a similar assumption in a CM version would be no problem. Whatever would have happened in real life.

When it comes to contemporary settings, post the Cold War, I agree with Jim. The leap of imagination is too great… the armies do not even exist any more. But during the Cold War they certainly did exist.

Also… for me.. it would be hugely good fun to see if NATO tactics of defence in depth would have worked. Flexible defence, and defence in depth, are often used interchangeably. In fact they are very different things. A commander may combine them, but they are not the same. German use of defence in depth was often catastrophic in WWII, as opposed to flexible defence. This is not the thread for a detailed discussion of the differences, but it would be massive fun to model them in CM set in the 1970s or 1980s Germany.

All will not agree on the choices BFC make for their games over the coming years. We must all harden ourselves to the fact that any one version of CM may not be our number one favourite setting. But most will be delighted to simply have new versions of CM continue to come through, whatever the setting.

For me, once the Med is done, time for a change from WWII for one game, then back to North West Europe.

The thought of having different military technology to get enthusiastic about is a major attraction of the Cold War. But we are all different.

All the best,

Kip.

[Lars]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

When it comes to nukes, my guess has always been, was during the Cold War too, that neither side would ever have used them. Because neither side would have used them “first”. Anyway… many an exercise, on both sides, were run on the assumption that nukes had not been used yet, thus a similar assumption in a CM version would be no problem. Whatever would have happened in real life.

I would dispute that.

Whoever started to lose would certainly have used them.

[Tha_Field_Marshall]

My two cents, This would not be a big deal to a cold war game set in the 1960's or 1970's but it is my understanding that the composition of the armor on many of the modern MBT's is a closly guarded secret. Hence it would be difficult to create a realistic game if one did'nt know exactly what protection, said armor afforded. Not that I would'nt love to see a CM style game using Cold war era equipment.

[Degs]

Another vote for a Cold War CMX2, including hypothetical WarPac vs NATO scenarios. Do we know if the new game engine will be able to handle maps for scenarios with direct fire weapons like TOW with ranges of 3,000m plus?

[flamingknives]

Posted by:MikeyD

Ooooooh... Conqueror hvy tanks!

Ooooooh...

Do I detect a fellow FV 214 enthusiast?

Posted by: Tha_Field_Marshall

My two cents, This would not be a big deal to a cold war game set in the 1960's or 1970's but it is my understanding that the composition of the armor on many of the modern MBT's is a closly guarded secret. Hence it would be difficult to create a realistic game if one did'nt know exactly what protection, said armor afforded. Not that I would'nt love to see a CM style game using Cold war era equipment.

The exact composition might by classified (even though most current armour types are a step on even from late '80s tech) but the effect is usually known and typically quantified as RHAe (Rolled Homogenous[steel] Armour equivalent). Although this isn't 100% accurate and changes dependant on weapon type hitting it, the values are known.

If you use the early 1980s as a cut-off, you do away with even that problem, as pre-M1/Challenger/T80 all used steel armour.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Degs:

Another vote for a Cold War CMX2, including hypothetical WarPac vs NATO scenarios. Do we know if the new game engine will be able to handle maps for scenarios with direct fire weapons like TOW with ranges of 3,000m plus?

Well, the current engine can handle simple direct fire at ranges over 3km - try putting a big gun on one end of a large flat open map, and a bunch of trucks 3+km away. You may also need a sharpshooter or something similar closer to the trucks to spot them. The gun is perfectly capable of targeting and hitting the trucks.

A bigger issue with weapons like the TOW is being able to model things like flight time and optical guidance, not range per se. A tank can potentially detect an incoming TOW and have time to either release obscuring smoke, or even dart behind cover before the TOW arrives. Issues like these would require a totally new functionalities that the current model does not possess at all, mostly because stuff like this really wasn't an issue in WWII.

Again, BTS has hinted that the goal for the new engine is to make it capable of modeling as much as possible, and then restricting what individual units are capable of, as opposed to only programming capabilities needed for units actually in the intial release, and then trying to add on later. How far they go with this is anybody's guess. At some point, they are going to run out of time and resources to keep coding new model features before the initial release of the new engine. This is another reason why I suspect the initial release will stick to WWII - less new things like optical guidance etc. to come up with a model for.

My WAG is that BTS will, however, build the intial CMX2 model with an eye towards expansion, so more modern weapons systems like the TOW etc. can be added for succeeding products. This is just supposition based on a few vague comments by BTS, and nothing more.

Cheers,

YD