Michael Dorosh Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I predict wbs rocks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Dang it! BDH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 I agree it was an interesting hint by Steve and a Brilliant deduction by Barrold WWII looks like a GOOD bet for the first release.... (I hope) there was a hint (a small one) a LONG long time ago that they wanted to do the "early WW II" in the ETO next (or something) Now the down side of that is there are no American's in the Early WW II and mostly it was just a matter of the German Panzers and Blitzkrieg tactics rolling over EVERYONE in there way on Continental Europe so as a setting for a war game (one that might want some balance in the two sides) this period "might" be a questionable choice.... :confused: And there are no American speaking units -tom w Originally posted by Barrold: A-HA!!!!!!! I am now more convinced of a WWII will be the initial release than ever. After I lowered the lid to the laptop last night, it struck me as I reflected on the palpable "development fatigue" in Steve's post about the number of hours put into the project. It could be a feint of course, but I tend to think the passionate explanation of the number of hours gives away something important. IF they had been researching and designing something other than WWII for the past two years, would there be A) this amount of hours coming so readily to the mind and the expressed weariness over a subject that hasn't been worked on in over two years. As I said, this could be a head fake from a wily target, but I think its a genuine expression. Since I choose to believe this, I would also like to express that the dedication the BFC team puts into these projects does engender a reflected loyalty and passion from a fan base that truly appreciates the effort despite the occasional whining. BDH [ September 15, 2005, 07:35 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Barrold, I am now more convinced of a WWII will be the initial release than ever. After I lowered the lid to the laptop last night, it struck me as I reflected on the palpable "development fatigue" in Steve's post about the number of hours put into the project.Yeah, except that I explicitly stated that number was just for CMx1's effort Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Ruddy Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Wow - I though this thread would be locked by now. My initial prediction was a bit tongue in cheek to get folks going (my tongue - my cheek) So I guess I put down my official guess: - there's no horses, so pre WWI is out. - Steve is telling us it *might* not be WWII - so it is probably WWII - There's been a few guesses of BotB, or Americans in Normandy. If it is WWII I agree, and I guess I'll have to be the Germans until the commonwealth is represented... But there's been hints of Reactive Armour modelling etc... So now I'm thinking it may just be modern. (Leveraging cross sales off the popularity of BF2 & AA) It would make sense as far as developing modules. CM:Modern Battles - Module: Gulf War #1 - Module: Gulf War #2 - Module: Six Day War (OK not exactly modern is it?) - Module: Soviets in Afghanistan - Module: Bay of Pigs - Module: Yugoslavia (Hypothetical) - Module: Invasion North Korea - 2008 - Module: WWIII in Europe - 1982 - module: Middle East Burning - 2006 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Just to clarify the Module thing... we'd never make Modules like that. If we did a Gulf War era game the Modules would only be Gulf War era. There wouldn't be any of those other things. The purpose of a Module is to be fairly close to the main Title's setting. Anything outside of the Middle East after or before the 1990-91 timeframe would be similar to making an entirely different game. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Ruddy Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 OK - Thanks for the clarification Steve! I'll leave the previous post as is as an example of what not to expect. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander: I am still hoping for a modern (21 century) warfare sim. Those figthing in Middle East deserve to be honoured by BattlefrontAlthough I'm an unabashed fan of a possible modern CM, I would prefer it be based on a hypothetical conflict rather than either Gulf War. I don't see how it could be both realistic and balanced. I'd make it NATO vs. a neo-imperialist Russia in Easter Europe, or maybe US vs. China somewhere in Asia. UK vs. France in the Chunnel. Whatever. Kicking the crap out of some third world armed mob holds little appeal for me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrold Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Heh...Oh Steve you rogue, nice try, but I was speculating from the second set of numbers you mentioned to Tom. Of course I don't want to bug and I am not whining, so it is good to know that the entire BFC Team (and a swell bunch they are) is reinvigorated by being able to focus on something other than WWII since the release of CMAK. Space Lobsters, MadMatt's Disco Dust-up, Guano Wars, 3D Space Invaders, or whatever...just make it good. BDH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 UK vs. France in the ChunnelEr... I think the Chunnel has had enough pyrotechnics already As for a modern setting... I agree with you that open desert warfare, like Desert Storm, probably wouldn't be all that interesting for a game system like CMx2. But I also think the same would be said for an open battlefield matchup between NATO type forces any anything else. It would be a turkey shoot for the most part. So for modern/near future one must examine the kinds of combat that ACTUALLY are happening to find interesting subject matter (or go "silly" like the Chunnel example ). Current warfare, and that predicted out to at least 2020, involves mostly small unit warfare in tight, often urban, terrain. Ops are conducted by highly integrated, combined arms Battalions or Brigades, rarely more than that with the exception of an initial invasion phase. That is perfect material for CMx2's scale and level of detail. 3rd world nations simply can't afford to keep their armor forces even 20 years out of date, not to mention on a par. They can't afford air forces, and if they could they would be 30-40 years out of date and their pilots would have few flying hours due to the cost of actually using them. So if you were a 3rd world bad guy nation state... would you continue pissing money away into an armored force that is likely to be neutralized in a couple of days, an airforce that would be neutralized in a few hours, or small combat units that can be outfitted "cheaply" and have a decent chance of actually doing something before getting wiped out? This is the serious, real world reality of today's battlefield. And it is accelerating in this direction at a very rapid pace. The US didn't just bankrupt the Soviet Union in the arms race, they priced everybody out of even getting into the race! (Note: some will say that North Korea is an exception. The few reports that have come out about their Armed Forces true potential threat don't support such a claim). Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Heh...Oh Steve you rogue, nice try, but I was speculating from the second set of numbers you mentioned to Tom.Still CMx1 only. I included Charles and the rest of the crew's time in that much larger figure. Space Lobsters, MadMatt's Disco Dust-up, Guano Wars, 3D Space Invaders, or whatever...just make it good.DAMN! I knew there was something I forgot to put into the specs Seriously guys... thanks for the support and opportunity to discuss things like this. Even though you might not get what you want all the time, you guys have no idea how much you influence the decisions we make. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 ...all the more reason that it should be a Cold War era game! It has to be. It's the only scenario that has been denied. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Finland 1939 it is. Whew! Logic wins out over false sentimentality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 steve So if you were a 3rd world bad guy nation state... would you continue pissing money away into an armored force that is likely to be neutralized in a couple of days, an airforce that would be neutralized in a few hours... I believe they will still buy to hammer their own insurgents and counter a threat from similar neighbours. As for near future, when there is a unipolar power others tend to ally to counter it. Be that china/Russia or other unforseen combination, well time will tell. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 as per this post? Oh, and yes Tom... that is just my hour count. As a team we are probably at... 62,000 hours of nothing but WWII. That comes out to be about 7+ years of 24/7/365 work on nothing but WWII. It still looks like he is either bragging or complaing about working on WW II constantly for the Past 7 years up until now INCLUDING the past years of WW II CMx2 developement IMHO Originally posted by Barrold: Heh...Oh Steve you rogue, nice try, but I was speculating from the second set of numbers you mentioned to Tom. Of course I don't want to bug and I am not whining, so it is good to know that the entire BFC Team (and a swell bunch they are) is reinvigorated by being able to focus on something other than WWII since the release of CMAK. BDH 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mazex Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Hmm, a modern day setting seems more and more likely. As long as it isn't US/UK vs. Iraq I'm in... Not that Saddam didn't deserve it but shooting Toyota pickups trying to do suicide attacks from an M1A2 will get boring after a few hours. A battered T72 appearing from a bombed out shelter would be the highlight of the day? From that perspective the german invasion of Poland seems comparable in terms of balance? Pz III meets cavalry -> M1A2 meets Toyota pickup Pz III meets rare 7TP -> M1A2 meets rare T72 If modern day -> go for cold war in Europe! My .02$ /Mazex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Ok here is my prediction. The "Pig" War of 1859. Small units : check Artillery : check Off board arty (ships guns) : check General George Edward Pickett : Check (jump off for Pickett's charge Module) English speaking units: check No Finns : Check little to no horses : check Only need to make one map so development time is cut down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bewildered Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 There is another issue to be considered if the new game (and if wargaming is to be as inclusive of as many people around the world as possible). There was an earlier post today saying "I am still hoping for a modern (21 century) warfare sim. Those figthing in Middle East deserve to be honoured by Battlefront" You may not like it, but there are many people who would ask exactly which of those fighting in the Middle East should be "honoured". Usually in war, there are at least two viewpoints. That's why wargames are better than wars. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Finland 1939 it is. Whew! Logic wins out... Well when you find some logic in that, just let me know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Originally posted by Pzman: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Finland 1939 it is. Whew! Logic wins out... Well when you find some logic in that, just let me know. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Just add the 'ed' and drop an 'n' and you'll have it right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Ruddy Posted September 15, 2005 Author Share Posted September 15, 2005 Originally posted by Bewildered: You may not like it, but there are many people who would ask exactly which of those fighting in the Middle East should be "honoured". Usually in war, there are at least two viewpoints. That's why wargames are better than wars. Hi Bewildered, Just a reminder that in the interest of stopping us from killing each other in wicked flame wars about government spending and the role of war in a modern civilized society, there is a "No Politics Allowed" rule. War sucks! Down with Greed! Viva Canada!!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 *Sets taser for "in excess of 15,000"* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bewildered Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 OK Canada! Makes sense. I'll go along with that. War sucks. Down with greed. Sell games and not guns! Viva vivo! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted September 15, 2005 Share Posted September 15, 2005 Could we exile the Canadians to their own forum, please? They give me the creeps. And yes, Pvt Ryan was right - it will be done when its' Finnish. My God, the sheer poetry... 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.