Very unoffical "Top Five" settings.

[vetacon]

Either of the following would suit me 100%

1 Market Garden. Given what’s been said about the size of action which the engine is specifically designed for (i.e. reinforced company level) it would seem to fit rather well (think about the 1st Airborne’s approach to Arnhem or some of the bridge seizures by the 82nd and 101st. It has an interesting mix of units on both sides (US and British Airborne, British armour / infantry, Hohenstaufen and Frundsberg, Fallschirmjager plus all manner of other German troops). Maybe a little armour-light for some tastes though there were various engagements involving armour on both sides in and around Hell’s Highway IIRC.

2 Kharkov 1943. II SS Panzer Korps in action. Classic German quality versus Russian quantity encounter and at a time when the Eastern Front was still more or less in the balance. Could also be used as the basis for a later Kursk module without too much difficulty I imagine.

However, I think I read that there’s a very strong chance that one of the first two releases won’t be WWII. In which case one of the following would be great:

3 Theoretical WWIII scenario – Warsaw Pact vs Nato Northern Europe early ‘80s. A little wide in scope probably but you could narrow it down to the OOB of a handful of divisions which would have been likely to be involved. Would be great to use some semi-modern weaponry within the CM system.

4 Falklands 1982 - The right sort of size of engagements but practically devoid of any armour which might rule it out, together with its lack of appeal to a US audience.

Whatever it is I’m absolutely confident it’ll be an awesome game.

[Michael Dorosh]

I just want to be able to recreate my neighbourhood in the mission editor.

Admit it, you all do too. With 2m terrain tiles and 6 story buildings, I think we just might be able to.

[Pvt. Ryan]

So, we'll get to invade Doroshburgville?

[Sergei]

Originally posted by vetacon:

4 Falklands 1982 - The right sort of size of engagements but practically devoid of any armour which might rule it out, together with its lack of appeal to a US audience.

Uh... could you cite anyone from outside UK or Argentina who would find a Falklands game appealing? :confused: Even "The Space Lobsters of Doom IV: Grenadan Spring Break" would be more interesting to 95% of gamers...

[vetacon]

Apologies for daring to express an opinion. I'll know better next time.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sergei:

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

4 Falklands 1982 - The right sort of size of engagements but practically devoid of any armour which might rule it out, together with its lack of appeal to a US audience.

Uh... could you cite anyone from outside UK or Argentina who would find a Falklands game appealing? :confused: Even "The Space Lobsters of Doom IV: Grenadan Spring Break" would be more interesting to 95% of gamers... </font>

[Sergei]

Yeah, well, uhmm... apology accepted. Just don't do it again!

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I just want to be able to recreate my neighbourhood in the mission editor.

Isn't your last name spelled wrong? Shouldn't it be spelled 'DesRoches'?

Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:

So, we'll get to invade Doroshburgville?

Sweet, I'll bring the naval bombardment!

Originally posted by vetacon:

Apologies for daring to express an opinion. I'll know better next time.

Damn straight! Next time try telling Dorosh that the Nazi Party had some kind of connection to the invasion of Poland...

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

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

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

4 Falklands 1982 - The right sort of size of engagements but practically devoid of any armour which might rule it out, together with its lack of appeal to a US audience.

Uh... could you cite anyone from outside UK or Argentina who would find a Falklands game appealing? :confused: Even "The Space Lobsters of Doom IV: Grenadan Spring Break" would be more interesting to 95% of gamers... </font>

[J Ruddy]

You Canucks lick the Queen's toes when she so wishes, and you do it with a pleasure.

umm... how about those Canucks not of Irish descent... so you can kindly go and sodomize a reindeer.

I had a hard time pledging to Elizabeth, Queen of Canada with a straight face... frankly I don't know why we even bother with it anymore....

[PseudoSimonds]

Originally posted by Sergei:

Yeah, well, you're a Pom anyway. Don't try to deny it. You Canucks lick the Queen's toes when she so wishes, and you do it with a pleasure.

The Queenhaters on SCTV:

I've always had a dream

I'd like to meet the Queen

I'd like to punch her in the face

Yeah, that would make me laugh

I'd love to kick her in the face

And then I'd make a picture of it

In lovely Ektachrome

And then I'd give it to the Prince

I hate the bloody Queen

She makes me go to school

I hate the bloody Queen

And all her bloody rules

I'd like to drown the Queen

Off the coast of Argentine

Throw her off a battle ship

With her Faulklands war machine

She taxes me to death

I can't afford me dope

I'd like to get her high

Yeah, that would make me laugh

Ha, ha, ha, ha

I hate the bloody Queen

She makes me go to school

I hate the bloody Queen

And all her bloody rules

I hate the bloody Queen

I hate the bloody Queen

I hate the bloody Queen

I hate the bloody Queen

I feel sorry for you Lady Di

Having a mother-in-law like that

[Philippe]

In theory a game on the war in the South Atlantic in 1982 could be very interesting. I think there is something like that over at Shrapnel, and I know there has been some treatment of it in boardgaming.

What makes the situation exciting is that it is a bit like Space Lobsters in the sense that it is a war that is being fought over impossibly large distances. To get the real flavor of the thing (and the cold, empty vastness of the South Atlantic) you have to show the strategic game, the naval war, and the air war. They all intersect at the same point on the map, and if you get one of the wrong...

I am sure there must be at least a score of good, small tactical actions on the ground with this one. But what would really make for a South Atlantic trilogy are the what-ifs.

The generals were fighting their secret war and trying desparately to hang on to power when they hit on the scheme of liberating the Malvinas. But for two or three years prior to that it was touch and go with Chile: there were naval incidents off Tierra del Fuego and small troop deployments (had to be small -- the terrain is too inclement) that eventually led to mediation by the Vatican (or P2, depending on how conspiracy-prone you are).

So the alternative to the UK v.Argentina was almost a nasty shooting war that would have stretched across the foothills of the Andes from Tierra del Fuego to the Gran Chaco. Varied terrain, many different climates, more or less modern weapons, some cavalry, and huge egos. I think the junta may have decided to go after the Malvinas because it would have been a lot less nasty. Besides, the best vineyards down there are in Mendoza -- did they really want to see it turned into a warzone? (Ignore me, that was rhetoric -- they were too thick to really care).

The other what-if, much less likely, would have involved some kind of attack on Brazil. The war would have been fought out in the general neighborhood of Uruguay, and would have been quite nasty. An equally stupid war because Argentines wouldn't be able to go to Brazil for Carnival in the summer. But it would have had enough manpower and relatively modern hardware behind it to make it interesting. 1982 was the very beginning of the Latin debt crisis, and because western bankers were funding their deficits with euroloans, most Latin countries hadn't figured out that they were bankrupt (and Walter Wriston never figured it out).

The game modules that I'm describing would be a smash hit in Latin America, especially with the military crowd. And you could follow it up with an unrelated (and non-hypothetical) module covering fighting between Peru and Ecuador over the Corridor del Condor. Ecuador likes to get into little fights with Peru to take attention away from the political comedy at home. I've seen it happen twice, and I know there were Italian trucks and Chinese roadbuilding equipment in the OOB's because I know the guy who financed them (much to his horror a photo of the comandeered trucks ferrying Peruvian soldiers to the front appeared in the Financial Times a week after he closed the deal). Ecuador and Peru don't really want to fight each other, it's a bit like the posturing that goes on just before closing time at raunchier bars. But the point of contention is a disputed zone deep in a jungle which grows over rumored deposits of oil-laden sludge. Given the current price of oil it's probably worth fighting over again.

One drawback to going this route, though, is that the Forums will probably pick up about 20,000 new members, all of them speaking Spanish. You might have to revisit your English-only policy.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by J Ruddy:

Next time try telling Dorosh that the Nazi Party had some kind of connection to the invasion of Poland...

Please tell me you're not going to whine in every other thread you post in about being wrong; that will get old fast.

Sergei - the fact that the Falklands were smaller than Kursk is what makes it a selling point, to me. How large was the British force - a brigade group? You could conceivably play out the entire operation in CM, one company at a time, and see the results of each company fight on a master strategic template, given a little skill and imagination and creativity.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by J Ruddy:

Next time try telling Dorosh that the Nazi Party had some kind of connection to the invasion of Poland...

Please tell me you're not going to whine in every other thread you post in about being wrong; that will get old fast.

Sergei - the fact that the Falklands were smaller than Kursk is what makes it a selling point, to me. How large was the British force - a brigade group? You could conceivably play out the entire operation in CM, one company at a time, and see the results of each company fight on a master strategic template, given a little skill and imagination and creativity. </font>

[Michael Dorosh]

I find the ones that protest the loudest about potential subject areas are generally the ones that know the least about them. We've seen it time and again:

"World War One would suck because tactics weren't invented yet and everybody ran like lemmings in brigade sized lines towards automatic weapons for four years."

"The Pacific would suck because all the Japanese did was sit in concrete bunkers and the Americans just ran at them in big waves until the Japanese ran out of ammunition."

"Vietnam would suck because all the Viet Cong hid out in tunnels all the time and the Americans mostly just massacred civilians for 10,000 days."

Blah blah blah....

If you're not interested enough to do some research beforehand, it follows you won't necessarily be interested in that same topic being the subject of a game....

Give a read to a history of the war or two, perhaps a personal account - Robert Lawrence, MC wrote TUMBLEDOWN, that's a good one - then report back with your new interpretations.

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by J Ruddy:

Next time try telling Dorosh that the Nazi Party had some kind of connection to the invasion of Poland...

Please tell me you're not going to whine in every other thread you post in about being wrong; that will get old fast.</font>

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I find the ones that protest the loudest about potential subject areas are generally the ones that know the least about them.

Maybe you'd like to point out the excitement that Falklands would offer CM-wise to us mortal earthlings? As opposed to any other bush war in the history?

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by Sergei:

Except for those few east-coasterners who remember Louis XIV with fondness.

Ew. How ill informed. We only remember those who came over to freeze their toes with us.

As for fondness... bwahwahwah !

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by J Ruddy:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by J Ruddy:

Next time try telling Dorosh that the Nazi Party had some kind of connection to the invasion of Poland...

Please tell me you're not going to whine in every other thread you post in about being wrong; that will get old fast.</font>

[vincere]

For the Falkland an interesting what if would be if the Argies didn't surrender at Goose Green.

From what I can remember reading an SAS fighting patrol joined the firefight and led the Argentine commander to believe there were many more Brits than there really were. Before SAS support the Para attack was grinding to a halt.

Falklands wouldn't make it in my top 5 though.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I find the ones that protest the loudest about potential subject areas are generally the ones that know the least about them.

Maybe you'd like to point out the excitement that Falklands would offer CM-wise to us mortal earthlings? As opposed to any other bush war in the history? </font>

[J Ruddy]

Break out the champagne, I agree with mD. (Does this mean there's hope for peace in the middle east )

I have to admit that I am a bit biased, because I love (LOVE) the FN-FAL family. I got my first 'kiss' from a C1A1 that I let get a little too close to my cheek in a speed firing (20 rounds in 20 seconds) range 'test'.

Anyways, I haven't read much on the Falklands War but I did watch a documentary on it and I think it would make a good module, I just hope they model the sheep properly. Unfortunately I don't have a clue about how well it would sell in the US or mainland Europe. I guess they could bundle it with a module for Grenada 1983 to go after the US Market?

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by J Ruddy:

I have to admit that I am a bit biased, because I love (LOVE) the FN-FAL family. I got my first 'kiss' from a C1A1 that I let get a little too close to my cheek in a speed firing (20 rounds in 20 seconds) range 'test'.

I did my basic with the C1A1 and thought it sucked. Fired a perfect score with the C7 one year subsequently on the Level II PWT; wasn't sorry to see the FN go the way of the dodo.

[J Ruddy]

I found the C7 to be way lighter than the FN, that's a big plus. And the 5.56 gives almost no recoil (another plus) but IMHO the rifle is so frigging ugly. Now I see they've gone to green plastic on the black metal so it's even uglier...

I'm not sure how the boys are finding the 5.56 is performing in Afghanistan. I heard rumours that the US Marines are trying out the 6.8spc as a possible replacement for the 5.56. Although designed for human targets, hunters know that 5.56mm NATO is a varment round, not suitable for animals over 30 lbs. From a hunters stand point the necked down version of the 7.62x51 known as the the .243 Winchester is a much better round for 200lb targets.

Anyways, my 5 are:

5) The ZULU War. Module: Rorkes Drift

4) Eastern Europe 1939-1942. Modules: Barbarossa, The Winter War, Poland

3) UN in Korea

2) Eastern Europe 1942-45. Modules: Stalingrad, Operation Bagration, The Warsaw Uprising, 1945 Assault on Berlin

1) Western Europe 1944-45. Modules - Juno Beach, Canadians in Holland, Ardennes Offensive, BotB, Market Garden

[edit - there's no t in Juno - where the heck did I get that from?]

[ September 21, 2005, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: J Ruddy ]

[MikeyD]

Let's try thinking waaaaaay outside the box, people!

The engine's supposed to be infinitely expandable, ein't it? Able to use multi-story, multi-room buildings and perhaps open water (if they ever get around to coding for it). So what wild stuff could be shoe-horned into the engine?

How about:

1: Attica Chaos! Convict gangs fight eachother and the guards as the prison burns around them (multi-player, multi-side).

2: Cartel: Drug running gangs fighting turf battles against fanatic Maoist rebels in an **unnamed* mountainous South American jungle (lots of river deployment, maneuver fighting).

3: Bladerunner Clone Wars. futuristic agents confroning super-strength (though sympathetic) clones in a heavily built-up crowded urban environment.

4: Monster Mash: 1960 Tokyo. Giant fire-breathing monsters on the march. And you command the Japanese defense forces with Walker Bulldog light tanks and Sabre jets. I think I'd want to play the monster side.

5: And probably WAY outside of the game engine's capabilities: "CMx2: Master & Commander". From seaborne maneuver warfare to coastal raiding parties to the finer points of sailing & navigation.