Michael Emrys Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Originally posted by Berlichtingen: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys: So what's the OWB up to then?Ski trip... I can hardly wait to kick him while he's hobblin' aboot on his new crutches. This'll be better'n spittin' on him </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 LoL, Hmmm I say, “CM Vietnam”, looks like a discussion on what the next CM will be. I’ll start at the end and see what the hot topic being discussed is. I didn’t figure it would be the best way to kick a cripple. You can always learn somethin’ new on this board. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 There's a great lesson in Chaos Theory to be learned here, son. Bifurcation, strange attractors, the works! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 5, 2004 Author Share Posted January 5, 2004 Originally posted by Ted: LoL, I didn’t figure it would be the best way to kick a cripple. Actually, Seanachi prefers to be called a "'tard." But cripple is ok with me. =) Kitty 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moop Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 I would much rather have a Napolonic version of the game. [/QB]Wow seconds to that. That would absolutely rule. I wish there was a Napoleonic game as good as CM. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 5, 2004 Author Share Posted January 5, 2004 Originally posted by moop: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I would much rather have a Napolonic version of the game. Wow seconds to that. That would absolutely rule. I wish there was a Napoleonic game as good as CM. [/QB]</font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BARMAN1950 Posted January 5, 2004 Share Posted January 5, 2004 Hello all: having a vested interest, I would vote for the Korean War. It had much of the tactical situations of WW II plus Everyone was involved in one way or another. We had Yanks, Brits, Aussies, Kiwis,Greeks, Turks,Philippinos,& Canadians in the combat arms plus Danes etc in support roles. On the other side there were of course North koreans, Chinese, and Soviet advisors. Although primarily an Infantry war there was plenty of armor around (although primarily in the infantry support role). There were summer campaigns, winter campaigns etc. What is not to like? An additional thought was that, I think for the first time, you could see the differences between allied Vs Soviet combat doctrine against each other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitty Posted January 5, 2004 Author Share Posted January 5, 2004 Originally posted by BARMAN1950: Hello all: having a vested interest, I would vote for the Korean War. It had much of the tactical situations of WW II plus Everyone was involved in one way or another. We had Yanks, Brits, Aussies, Kiwis,Greeks, Turks,Philippinos,& Canadians in the combat arms plus Danes etc in support roles. On the other side there were of course North koreans, Chinese, and Soviet advisors. Although primarily an Infantry war there was plenty of armor around (although primarily in the infantry support role). There were summer campaigns, winter campaigns etc. What is not to like? An additional thought was that, I think for the first time, you could see the differences between allied Vs Soviet combat doctrine against each other. I'd enjoy a Korea CM too but Vietnam Korea had a lot of the elements you mention too... Aussies, Kiwis, ROKs, Montagnards, etc . . . I'll take either but I'm sure we'll get neither. Kitty 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 Originally posted by Ted: I’ll start at the end and see what the hot topic being discussed is. I didn’t figure it would be the best way to kick a cripple. You can always learn somethin’ new on this board. Give us a kiss! We're not crippled after all, at all. You mancky buggers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lt_gouws Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 I think it would be quite difficult in the rainforests with all the vegetation, it would be difficult to find all your guys, they would have to make it on a much smaller scale, so that you only control about 50 guys in total, and maybe the odd tank or so, and they should add Friendly Fire, to simulate the screw-ups made with the arial bombing and artillery strikes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saedor Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 If it's true that the developers are primarily interested in armored combat and that the Pacific theatre is highly unlikely, I doubt theres much chance for Vietnam. Korea, on the other hand, would be very do-able. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 Originally posted by Saedor: If it's true that the developers are primarily interested in armored combat...Why do people keep saying that? CM is a combined arms game! Infantry is still the single most important element, not those armor plated, rolling coffins! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 Originally posted by lt_gouws: ...and they should add Friendly Fire, to simulate the screw-ups made with the arial bombing and artillery strikes. Whaddaya mean "add...screw-ups made with arial [sic] bombing and artillery strikes"? CM already boasts those "features" in plenitude. If anything, they'd have to tone it down a tad to depict improvements in technique over two intervening decades. :confused: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted January 6, 2004 Share Posted January 6, 2004 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by lt_gouws: ...and they should add Friendly Fire, to simulate the screw-ups made with the arial bombing and artillery strikes. Whaddaya mean "add...screw-ups made with arial [sic] bombing and artillery strikes"? CM already boasts those "features" in plenitude. If anything, they'd have to tone it down a tad to depict improvements in technique over two intervening decades. :confused: Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Some things never change. The thread started out well. Some old names in here. With Berlichtingen's permission I am redoing DZXray for CMAK. Playtesting now. I am looking for any other Vietnam related battles if anyone can point me to them. BO BB or AK PS did anyone ever check to see how the Brits got the Malvinas in the first place. That's a good story. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 A made for CMAK Vietnam scenario, "Small Battles, Vietnam Primer", is in the works. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Whilst modern is possible surely a Napoleonic - or more to the point - horse and musket can be stretched to cover such a huge number of conflicts rather than just Vietnam or Korea. Much larger market to sell to so commercially a better bet. {Which makes me wonder whether you can equate sailing ships to tanks and through that in also} 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucho Posted October 10, 2004 Share Posted October 10, 2004 Kitty, junk4drive: I will shortly release a semihistorical scenario about the fightings at Dien Bien Phu. But attention, it´s huge (regimental assault). I have another scenario based loosely on some historic ambushes against French convoys... Have to check it, if there is a briefing... At the Proving Grounds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weasleboy Posted October 11, 2004 Share Posted October 11, 2004 Two, we're all whining for CMX2: just that the engine will cut its teeth on Vietnam. Frankly, WWII is getting a bit boring. [/QB] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchy Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 Originally posted by CMplayer: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sergei: If I had to point out some of the most uninteresting conflicts of 20th century for a squad level game, that would be one. Have you actually studied the subject? Vietnam (both the French Indochina war and the American involvment) is full of interesting tactical situations, which would work well at the scale of CM. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Originally posted by Hans: A made for CMAK Vietnam scenario, "Small Battles, Vietnam Primer", is in the works. Sounds interesting.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hans Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Watch what you say V or you'll be the play tester! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.E.B Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Hi all Actually, Vietnam is the perfect threater (like WWII) for a CM style game. 1. It spans two decades 2. It involves many nations 3. The weaponry is still close enough to WWII (ATWGMs, laser guiding and tank guns that kill at 3 km only make a tiny appearance 4. Infantry dominate the battlefield (all the other arms are support) 5. Vietnam (plus Laos and Cambodia) have diverse terrain types (Vietnam is not all jungle) 6. Many major battles occurred, including tank battles and city fighting 7. You even have riverine warfare with fast attack boats and monitors Vietnam was as urbanised as large areas of Europe where during WWII, so fighting inevitably impacted on civilians. And the attrocities committed by all sides pale in comparison to the attrocities committed during WWII. Even the Battlefront logo on this site (if I am not mistaken) is a M48A2 firing at a NVA PT76 during a night battle in 1968 (I think) at Ben Het (again I think) in the Central Highlands on the South Vietam/Laosan border. If you could change/add the hard coded units in CM:BB or CMAK, you could create a Nam mod now, as a M48 or a T54 is not that different from WWII tanks (unlike modern armour). Also, just for the current US elections, you could add special HQ units, like the BUSH that never arrives on the battlefield, or the KERRY that initially fights well but then suddenly changes sides. Better still would be a CMX2 engine that could handle all of WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Israeli/Arab and any other war up till the 1980s when technology changes the dimensions of armoured warfare. Regards A.E.B 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.