Game developement

[track]

Accurate military simulations have a limited audience and the game developers have to make a living. I guess this starts to show in Battlefront's releases as well.

I'm not a great fan of modern combat. There is

no real conflict anymore. No third world country

will be able to stand up and win against US. If it is, then it is not a true war, but rather a limited scale conflict.

I'm afraid that near future "what if" games will lose their value quickly. Combat Mission series has lasting value. It created something that just was nowhere else to be found.

Let's just hope that we don't see something that I have encountered in some recent WWII games -->

There are many videos and intros telling how accurately the game rewrites militay history and in the game you find yourself reloading a German single-shot Panzerfaust, tanks get knocked out after exactly 3 hits, AT-guns won't fire at infantry... and the list goes on. It gets even better knowing that the military advisor for the game is a former US major.

Despite of all this there will be tomorrow.

[Soddball]

My uniformed opinion is that the core market of this 'military simulator' is not going to be ordinary people but governments.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Originally posted by track:

I'm afraid that near future "what if" games will lose their value quickly. Combat Mission series has lasting value. It created something that just was nowhere else to be found.

I think once the modules with countries other than the USA come out the game will have legs. Then you can have forces at or near the same tech level against each other using the blue on blue option.

But this is not an issue specific to the modern setting. I predict a great wailing and nashing of teeth when the first WW2 CMx2 game is released and it only has Americans vs. Germans.

[Dillweed]

Originally posted by track:

I'm not a great fan of modern combat. There is

no real conflict anymore. No third world country

will be able to stand up and win against US. If it is, then it is not a true war, but rather a limited scale conflict.

Now normally I would hurl countless obcenaties at you and tell you to read previous comments on this. But seeing as you are new, I'll be nice.

What you say is true, for a world war 2 style conflict. Gulf War 1, blew one of the 5 largest armies in the world straight to hell in 100 hours. Thats great, but thats a big empty flat desert. You can see things from miles away. Now tradionally the way to beat US forces is to engage them REALLY close, like under 100m. This prevents supporting fire (arty/airstrikes) and allows the OPFOR to get a shot at more vulnerable sides of tanks. Now MOUT (or urban warfare for you knobs) accomplishes both of these things (very much so for the tanks) So with all the US's whiz bang toys stipped away things quickly become much more even. A US infantry company will outclass a militia any day of the week, no doubt, but in any infantry action, especially extended MOUT guys are gonna get killed. If the fighting goes on long enough this will be a serious problem. The company that the NY times's correspondent was embedded with in lost about %25 of its men over 8 days in Falluja. Considering Damascus is about 8 times larger than Falluja, you could see how a pretty rag-tag 3rd world force could give the image concious US a serious run for its money, at least.

[track]

Move to a smaller scale and a more limited focus may not be bad things. In Combat Mission you have an unrealisticly clear view of what is happening on the battlefield to base your commands on.

But it is after all just a game.

[track]

And if the Damascus had to for some reason to be taken at all costs just hit it with a tactical nuke. Bang! No street fighting to be done. Syrians are dead, no friendly casualties.

[Mace]

Originally posted by track:

And if the Damascus had to for some reason to be taken at all costs just hit it with a tactical nuke. Bang! No street fighting to be done. Syrians are dead, no friendly casualties.

Hmmm wonder if world opinion will be modelled?

[Andreas]

Originally posted by track:

And if the Damascus had to for some reason to be taken at all costs just hit it with a tactical nuke. Bang! No street fighting to be done. Syrians are dead, no friendly casualties.

What I don't like about modern warfare in CM are idiot posts like this.

[Bigduke6]

Andreas in his wisdom has gone well beyond his unfortunate militaristic and sausage-laden upbringing. He is quite right.

Already I am nostalgic for some dolt telling me how the Russians are all cattle, how Commonwealth soldiers drink too much tea, and how the S.S. always helped grandmothers across the street, between 2000 meter first-shot kills on T-34s.

Instead, we have to hear about nuclear bombardment of Damascus (the oldest continuously settled site in the world, some forum readers may be interested to know.)