Theaters of War for CMx2

[Hans]

Originally posted by Tarkus:

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

I just want CMx2 released in my lifetime.

I support that. :cool:

I am very happy that they are working to enhance the 3D environment and can't wait to see the results. That alone will go a long way in renovating the simulator.

To keep the guessing going, even if I'd like WWII best, I'll support (read: buy) almost anything. Just about any conflict in the 20th century would be worth simulating, although 1915-1917 positionnal warfare could be a little tricky:

* * *

Originally posted by thisguy:

- "Hey guys I'v been playing this cool scenario on the Chemin des Dames, it was like at ten battalions assault, huge arty support, very messy ground. I got a total victory with 85% losses. Boy, those 100 yards were long indeed!

- 85% losses ? How'd you do that ? I could not achieve anything below 96% losses ? Please write an AAR !

* * *

Cheers </font>

[Macphail]

I'm pretty new here, so my opinion probably doesn't carry much weight, but i'd like to see this kept in europe. this is where all the best action occured IMHO. everything else was merely a side-show. i don't care about the pacific, or korea. there i said it. i would like to see a better implementation of air support though. the few times i've used it, it has been random, and i'm not sure how helpful given the cost.

[Mace]

Originally posted by KG_Steiner:

I'm pretty new here, so my opinion probably doesn't carry much weight, but i'd like to see this kept in europe. this is where all the best action occured IMHO. everything else was merely a side-show. i don't care about the pacific, or korea.

Ahh, but others do care about other fronts (eg I prefer Eastern Front).

I'd be quite happy if Battlefront produces various CMx2 releases to cover all of these (including the Pacific and Korea as well).

Mace

[zukkov]

i'm with you mace. first choice, eastern front. but it really doesn't matter what they pick. it's about the tactical level, so almost any theater will do. of course, if they DO put in something at the operational level, i'd definetely vote for russia...

[arax3]

Dorosh, Dorosh, Dorosh! I don't know whether to laugh or cry? A3

[arax3]

Dorosh, Dorosh, Dorosh! I don't know whether to laugh or cry? A3

[poppy]

Hopefully BF will include in their new CMx2 for each release a major theater ie Northern Europe,Italy etc. and another theater like Korea, or Burma/Malaya WW2, in the same release. Hint Hint. poppy

[Pvt. Ryan]

Speaking on behalf of BFC,* games under the CMX2 engine will be released as separate battles, i.e. D-Day, The Bulge, Market Garden, Pork Chop Hill, etc. Gamers who choose to acquire all the modules will be able to fight all the world's wars as a continuous campaign.

*Not

[poppy]

I meant Western Europe instead of Northern Europe. Another "minor theater" that might prove to be interesting is the Spanish civil war , the one that Ernest Hemingway wrote about and where the Russians tested their weapons and where the Germans tested their weapons. Just prior to WW2 by a couple of years. poppy

[Tank Ace]

I still think Korea would be a good venture. I'd love to blast some commie tanks full of HEAT rounds. Plus it would be nice to have something different.

[Macphail]

"Ahh, but others do care about other fronts (eg I prefer Eastern Front)."

I would consider the East Front to be a part of the greater ETO, and would like it encompassed. I just meant that pacific theatres, and later era conflicts do not hold the same interest. I dont want to step on toes, but i think something Korea-ish could easily be modded, so probably does not need a title of its own.

sorry for not being more clear, but, i think everything from Poland, to the last days in Berlin should be covered. If 'zee german's' were there, lets see it. East Front is critical.

I don't know if this has been said before, but i would like to see some form of campaign, possibly following a unit or battalion through its war history. I doubt i will get bored just playing isolated battles, but it lacks a sense of continuity.

[YankeeDog]

Rather ironic to hear to the East Front to be referred to as "part of the greater ETO", when arguably it should be the other way around; the East Front was far and away the largest ground combat theatre in WWII, containing far more varied terrain, OOBs, and spanning a longer time period than any other theatre.

Hey, I'm up for anything. As far as priorities go, for the inital release I'd like to see East Front and/or the ETO as the theater for the initial release, in that order of preference. This is mostly because I see the East Front as providing the most opportunity for providing a varied, interesting setting for tactical combat, with the ETO being second in that regard.

After that, as far as I'm concerned BFC can take the new engine wherever they want and I'll probably follow. Early War, Pacific, Korea, Cold War, back to North Africa and Italy, whatever. All of these contain interesting unique tactical challenges to me.

Now that I think of it, it might actually be better if BFC focuses on a more limited theater for the initial release, much like they did with CMBO with the original engine, and then tackles the expanse of the East Front in a follow-up release once they've got the kinks worked out.

One of the things BFC has going for it with CMX2 is that it's already done much of the background techical and TOE research most of the combatants in WWII -- the only major combatant they've got left is Japan (unless you count China, but China's forces had only limited units beyond simple leg infantry). This should reduce the amount if time it takes them to create follow-up releases in any WWII-based theatres, and actually for Korea as well. This alone makes me suspect that for the inital release they will go with a theatre not involving Japan so they can focus on the model fundamentals, rather than unit and OOB research, and then if they do tackle any aspects of the war in the Pacific, they will do so in a follow up release.

But hey, I'm just blowing smoke out of my ass. . .

Cheers,

YD

[Speedy]

I've been waiting for the early war 39-41 for 4 years now, there's no knowing what I will do if it's not included.

[Hans]

I think I can say without fear of abuse.

I'll take ANYTHING that comes out....what ever it is, when ever it is and where ever it is, I have a feeling it'll be great.

Speedy, there are a number of 1940 scenarios, they may lessen the pain some.

Junk2Drive: Hey dude my emails are bouncing back it would seem your service think my proxy server is a spam source, probably is. May have some commo problems. I cannot sent to you but can receive.

[junk2drive]

send to @hotmail.com

frontier needs to detect the isp source of it will bounce. enjoy the internet while it lasts.

[mrpwase]

Yes, the European theatre (by which I mean the theatres covered by all three CM games) is the most popular, but that doesn't mean we should keep making games about it. I see CMx2 as a general war simulation game, and I hope that other theatres, either through expansions or mods etc., will feature in some way.

I've been nurturing my own game idea for several months now, but I won't go into details - basically, I've been so obsessed with it that I've made a whole TO&E for an army in this game. If CMx2 had a way to create new units and TO&E, I'd be overjoyed.

One last thing (slightly off topic): a dynamic campaign system would rock. I wouldn't care much for the upper levels (operational etc.), but if some kind of feature was available for a group of people to set up a large strategic map, and make a load of CM-size maps (or even one big one divided into sectors) to 'fit into' the strat map, then play through a war they 'designed' on that map...wargaming heaven. A bit complicated, however. I'll go and collect my thoughts and post again in a while.

Meanwhile, I'm holding out for CM:Vietnam.

[Kilroy Lurking]

Hi MD!

...If CM is willing to consider the Pacific for the new game engine perhaps that means the new game engine is going to be able to handle water?

Wow! Just what I've been waiting for.

Full Naval battles - Amphib. Ops. -All theatres of course.

No wonder the new game engine is taking a few extra weeks to develop.

David

[Le Tondu]

Originally posted by Moon:

Nobody has said anything about the *new* engine.

Martin

And why not? What's the big hold up????

[Speedy]

Probably because when that was posted they were still working on the CMAK patch.

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:

Will the Pacific theater have King Tigers?

Ah !

Reading this thread, I'm wondering if BFC will consider the preferences of the majority of CM consumers : american people. It's logic to privilegiate them, as they are the majority of those who will buy the next game. Then, I guess that they have a real preference for theaters where US troops fought : Normandy, Italy, north Africa and Pacific. Is that right ?

On the other hand, isn't it a bit risky, for game designers, to select a distinctive theater of operation ? Wouldn't it be better to make a more general game, like Steel Panthers ?

Personnaly, I bought CMAK to support BFC, as the Italian theater and north Africa aren't my "cup of tea". Eastern front and Western Europe campaign (44-45) are definitly what I prefer. I'm not sure I would buy a "Pacific CMX2 game"...

[kipanderson]

Hi,

When it comes to settings for CM type games my three favourites are Eastern Front, North West Europe ‘44/’45 and Cold War ’70-’89. As the Cold War has not yet been covered, no one will be surprised if I lobby for it as the first game with the new engine.

What all three have in common is the dominance of combined arms warfare. The skill in mixing the use of armour, infantry and artillery to fit the tactical situation. This is where the real fun comes from….for me anyway.

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! The quality and type of toys being played with in CM matters to me…. they are a very big part of the fun.

I suspect that many would join me in finding the study of T64s/T72s/T80s/M60s/ M1s /Leopards and Chieftains/Challengers fun… for a while… as a change from WWII. Then back to WWII for the second game in the CMX series. What would the outcome have been if late ‘70s T72s mixed it with late ‘70s M60s? Just how dominant would the fully mature, second generation ATGMs really have been in a European environment? And so on…..

One objection some have to the Cold War in CMX 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 T72s to a late “1980s” western tanks. 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 near 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. Compare like generations of equipment from East and West and it is a very close run thing, even in the last five years of the Cold War. Massive gaming potential.

Of course, Moon/Martin has made clear that one of the stated aims of the new engine is that it will enable a quicker turn round of new games. Thus, until I hear otherwise, I am optimistic that nearly all the more mainstream topics will eventually be covered.

My guess is that eventually there will be both a Pacific Theatre and Cold War setting with the new engine, time will tell. One small downside of the increased production of games will be that not all the topics chosen will be popular with all CM fans. But it is still the case of “the more the merrier”.

If you assume that BFC produce new games at the rate of one a year over the next four to five years my hope is that they cover Eastern Front, North West Europe ‘44/’45, Cold War and Pacific theatres. But not in that order.

If others were asked to list not just one setting for CMX but four or five….what would they go for?

All the best,

Kip.

[Other Means]

Originally posted by mrpwase:

[snip]

if some kind of feature was available for a group of people to set up a large strategic map, and make a load of CM-size maps (or even one big one divided into sectors) to 'fit into' the strat map, then play through a war they 'designed' on that map...wargaming heaven. A bit complicated, however. I'll go and collect my thoughts and post again in a while.

Meanwhile, I'm holding out for CM:Vietnam.

You mean like this?

[Le Tondu]

Originally posted by Speedy:

Probably because when that was posted they were still working on the CMAK patch.

Ah yes Speedy. It was originally posted in September. Still, the statement is relatively true today. One has to be a little perplexed to say the least.

I mean, BFC must have an idea of how they want the next couple of years to happen. It is fair to say that if they're programming, they must know what they're programming for when you consider that it has been said that CMx2 will most likely be out by the end of 2005. It isn't too far of a stretch to believe that at least a general flow chart of the project has been created.

Since it is our money that they're after, I find it a little strange that they are so reluctant to share (with us) the most general of information about the project. Heck, I'm not asking for anything specific. Just something to root for.

[Bogdan]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

One objection some have to the Cold War in CMX is that the Cold War never became hot.

Yep, that is the big problem here : I can't imagine BFC building a brand new game, based only on fictionnal scenarios or small peripherical conflicts.

World War 2 era is still, in my opinion, one of the best period to depict in wargames : variety of engagements, materiels, theaters, etc. The principal point now is to guess/bet which WW2 theater will be chosen by the designers !

[Ace Pilot]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

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.

Mr. Picky Pilot would like to point out that the Cold War ended in 1991, not 1989.