Hype justified.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

CMSF is everything I hoped for .

If you go back three years or so all was talk of “what CMX2 should be”…happily for me it soon became clear from Steve that the scale and scope of CMX1 was to remain. Just more detailed modelling. Exactly what I whished for.

CMSF has turned out to be just that. Could not happier .

CMSF is by a huge margin the number one wargame/simulation out there. I have tried them all, thrown money at the problem in the hope of finding another game to rival CMX1 while waiting for CMX2…. nothing, bit nothing comes close.

CMSF, like CMX1, is so high quality it is a form of military history, future history in this setting, but you get the point. That is why I am such a fan of all things CM, it is strictly from the military history standpoint that I come to CM. I play no “PC games”.

Great to have another version of CM to play with…looking forward to more of the same…

Did someone mention the Eastern Front .

Congratulations to all,

All the best,

Kip.

[Runyan99]

I thought you were going to mention the Fulda Gap again.

[rune]

Hmm..Kip, want to edit the manual

Kip said:

CMSF has turned out to be just that. Could not happier .

Rune

[RavenouZ]

Got home from the city last night after drinking some beer with my brother and realisedthat my GF had bought me CMSF and it was alot better then i thought.

AWSOME game just hope they get the freeze bug fixed it is very anoying.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by RavenouZ:

Got home from the city last night after drinking some beer with my brother and realisedthat my GF had bought me CMSF and it was alot better then i thought.

You go drinking for all night and your girlfriend buys you CMSF?

You realize that she's a keeper?

[RavenouZ]

Just went out for 5-6 hours to meet my brother and had been talking about CMSF all day so she bought it online and downloaded it so she didnt have to listen to my nagging about the game, so yeah she is a keeper =)

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

Hi,

CMSF is everything I hoped for .

If you go back three years or so all was talk of “what CMX2 should be”…happily for me it soon became clear from Steve that the scale and scope of CMX1 was to remain. Just more detailed modelling. Exactly what I whished for.

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=001492;p=1#000000

Seems to me you doubted our ability to make the scenarios long enough...have you revised your stance yet?

[kipanderson]

Hi,

Yes… CMSF has turned out to be a stunner… way more interesting than I expected. I knew it would be good, with a great engine, never thought it would have this much potential .

From all the Jane’s journals and such that I consume I knew that ‘90s Russian AT weapons would be a huge threat even to the latest/heaviest of western armour but there is no replacement for actually watching in glorious techno-colour just how much of a leveller down current generation Russian AT weapons are .

Added to the above the artwork and modelling is shockingly good. I remember how surprised I was when CMBB appeared to see how it recreated the look of Russia, the landscape, houses and such. CMSF does the same, but even better , for the Middle East.

Great stuff…. Has forgotten just how much fun CM can be, and no Borg Spotting anymore .

All great fun,

All the best,

Kip.

[ChrisND]

Marry her. Like right now.

[Michael Dorosh]

So in all honesty, Kip, are you finding the longer scenario times enough? Do you play WEGO or RT?

[Runyan99]

As long as we're talking about scenario times, I had a thought Michael.

You said that you thought the lethality of modern weapons means that troops move around the battlefield less than they did in WW2, which perhaps explains the longer scenarios in CMSF.

However, I'm thinking that the volume of fire with modern weapons means that the firefights are deadlier, the firefights get resolved quicker, and therefore there might be even more movement in modern combat than there was in WW2.

Imagine how CMSF might play if you replaced M4 carbines with bolt action rifles. The amount of lead flying around decreases by maybe 66%. That means it probably takes a lot longer for guys to score hits, and for casualties to mount.

This makes me think WW2 scenarios would move slower. Two squads facing off in buildings across a street could plink away at each other with bolt action rifles for, I dunno, forever? The same fight would be a lot deadlier, and come to a decisive conclusion much faster, with AK47s and M4s, I think.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Runyan99:

As long as we're talking about scenario times, I had a thought Michael.

You said that you thought the lethality of modern weapons means that troops move around the battlefield less than they did in WW2, which perhaps explains the longer scenarios in CMSF.

I don't know if "less" is as accurate a representation of what I said as "more slowly".

However, I'm thinking that the volume of fire with modern weapons means that the firefights are deadlier, the firefights get resolved quicker, and therefore there might be even more movement in modern combat than there was in WW2.

Imagine how CMSF might play if you replaced M4 carbines with bolt action rifles. The amount of lead flying around decreases by maybe 66%. That means it probably takes a lot longer for guys to score hits, and for casualties to mount.

This makes me think WW2 scenarios would move slower. Two squads facing off in buildings across a street could plink away at each other with bolt action rifles for, I dunno, forever? The same fight would be a lot deadlier, and come to a decisive conclusion much faster, with AK47s and M4s, I think.

I don't know - the MG42 fired a lot of ammo, and by doctrine, was expected to be the primary killing agent of a German rifle squad of 10 men (later 9, with additional semi-automatics, assault rifles and machine pistols replacing some of the bolt action rifles). Naturally they rarely had full orders of battle. The U.S. were very well equipped with M-1 Garand semi-autos, M1 and M2 carbines, and SMGs, and the Russians had whole battalions with SMGs. Only the CW really seemed ill-disposed of the major players in Europe to use firepower, keeping their Vickers guns in MG battalions at divisional level and doctrinally assigning the LMG the exact opposite role that the German LMG had, i.e. instead of the riflemen supporting the LMG, the British LMG supported the riflemen.

The battle drills the British learned, though, emphasized rapid maneuver and flanking actions, so I don't know how often things would devolve into plinking. 25-pdrs on call would probably get things moving again in a hurry. Depends on the terrain - in the Netherlands, where a platoon attack might involve moving single file along a dike between two flooded fields, there was no fast way to do anything.

Modern infantry seem to have a lot mechanized and armoured transport - which is why I'd love to see more light infantry forces in the game and tried to include the same in the scens I did.

I think maybe at the most basic level it is simply hard to recreate any kind of "realistic" tactics at this level given the problems of player omniscience and a lack of context. Given that the trade-off for realism is fun, I guess I'm happy with fun. I wouldn't want to play a company assault that takes 8 hours to resolve, as many historical actions certainly did just from readings of my own regiment's history in the Second World War. Abstraction is a good thing in that regards.

How it will play out in CM, is hard to say. Have scenario designers erred by making scens too long? That's one of the bits of feedback I'm hoping to get from the community - we all are - once the technical issues of the game are sorted out and we can settle in to talking about the game.

[athkatla]

Originally posted by Runyan99:

However, I'm thinking that the volume of fire with modern weapons means that the firefights are deadlier, the firefights get resolved quicker, and therefore there might be even more movement in modern combat than there was in WW2.

I'm no expert or grog but my former Battalion is currently serving in Afghanistan and of course I am keeping an eye out on how they are doing over there. There have been several occasions when they have been involved in battles lasting over 6 hours, as have other units serving out there too.

[Steiner14]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

[QB] Hi,

Yes… CMSF has turned out to be a stunner… way more interesting than I expected. I knew it would be good, with a great engine, never thought it would have this much potential .

From all the Jane’s journals and such that I consume I knew that ‘90s Russian AT weapons would be a huge threat even to the latest/heaviest of western armour but there is no replacement for actually watching in glorious techno-colour just how much of a leveller down current generation Russian AT weapons are .

...

Great stuff…. Has forgotten just how much fun CM can be, and no Borg Spotting anymore .

Since i can't check it myself yet: and does the absent borg-spotting finally give well placed AT-weapons their power they deserve?

[jomni]

The Borgs will be back when they implement LandWarrior technology.

[Pak_43]

Have scenario designers erred by making scens too long? That's one of the bits of feedback I'm hoping to get from the community - we all are - once the technical issues of the game are sorted out and we can settle in to talking about the game.

I would certainly say that the 3rd scenario (Al Hamr? The MOUT company attack)is way too short..45 minutes allowed to penetrate a town populated with enemy T72's and infantry with my Stryker company, with no fire support?

Given that I could lose an entire squad crossing a road or moving from one building to another, I'd triple that if I wanted to minimise casualties. I played it 3 times and always ended up rushing for the final objective knowing there were around 3 or 4 T72's hidden there all the same, which had a corresponding impact on my casualty levels...

I didn't play it on elite level only veteran but I would suspect playing on elite it would be almost impossible to attain all 3 objectives with a low casualty rate...

[kipanderson]

Michael,

“So in all honesty, Kip, are you finding the longer scenario times enough?”

I think I am ..yes… In fact I have spent most of my time playing with the editor; I do that with new games . But the longer scenarios are certainly a big help.

I play mainly in Veteran mode RT, so I can pause when I wish.

Good fun.

Steiner14,

Yup, the death of Borg Spotting is very noticeable. When an ATGM launches and the M1s and Bradleys spot it in their thermal imagers only a small number will turn and fire at once. Not the entire pack as in CMX1.

All the best,

Kip.

[Renaud]

Yes, I am surprised by how much I like the demo. I did not expect to really want to play modern combat, but this is just cool. Of course it helps that it runs perfectly for me. Ordered the game that night, should be here in a week-10 days. It's miles beyond anything out there right now (or that is likely to ever come from another company), but then CMx1 is still miles beyond in terms of pure wargame and it's 7 yrs old. Until cmx2 wwII versions come out, i'll still be making cmbb scenarios, maybe even after that...