Cpl Steiner Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 It would be good if these sorts of units were possible in CM:SF or a subsequent title or module. I would like to see scenarios in which Syrian militants attack US forces using stone-throwing crowds as cover. I would also like to see scenarios in which the US side has to rescue some hostages from some militants. It would be nice if something like the 1980 US "Raid on Iran" to free the American hostages in Teheran could be simulated. I have also read that a scenario based on the 1993 "Battle of Mogadishu" should be possible in CM:SF. To my mind, this would benefit greatly from the presense of hostile civilian units. I would be happy if civilians were represented by just a few "squads" of 6-12 individuals, perhaps even less. these units could help the Syrian side by providing intel on US movements, acting as decoys, and drawing fire that would cost the US side victory points. They could have restrictions on their movement and ability to act for realism. For instance, a unit might be tied to a small block of houses, and only be able to throw a few stones from a distance. Such units would also break and seek cover as soon as they came under any threat (including being near a target of fire from either side). How about it Battlefront? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindyCity Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 Yes battlefront, lets see what a Vulcan will do to a rickshaw :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 as has been stated 10452 times before, civillians will not be included in CMSF, or modules. CMSF simulates combat, not peacekeeping ops. If any civs catch wind of the sort of firepower headed their way, they will most likely stay out of the way. Civillians are a possible for CMBOx2 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted November 27, 2005 Author Share Posted November 27, 2005 Originally posted by Dillweed: as has been stated 10452 times before, civillians will not be included in CMSF, or modules. CMSF simulates combat, not peacekeeping ops. If any civs catch wind of the sort of firepower headed their way, they will most likely stay out of the way. Civillians are a possible for CMBOx2 I am well aware of what Battlefront have said about civilians but it shouldn't stop me saying why I think they'd be a good idea. If enough people agreed, maybe they'd change their mind. It's called open discussion. ..Or perhaps I should just post about something totally unrelated to the game like whether or not some international terrorist is alive or dead, like yourself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I had thought BFC was starting to soften a bit on civilians awhile ago, but it just doesn't sound like an easy thing to simply patch into the guts of the new OS. And civilians would be less appropriate in subsequent titles than a modern mid-east setting (would civilians in a Space Lobseters game be necessary?). I was among the first to lobby for random, AI controlled, untargetable, generic civilians in the game. I think this title would be ideal for their use. I'd love to see them, if only to add to fog-of-war and immersion. And I'm not getting my hopes up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Well, I'd like to see civillians too. The question is if it worth waiting another 6 to 8 (or more) weeks to code them in. BFC has decided that it is not. Remember every week they spend coding is a week that they do not makes sales. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Maybe it would be worth an extra six weeks for civilians. But eight weeks? That would start to get painful. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 And all the while everyone cursing the forum grogs who demanded civies. No thank you... [ November 28, 2005, 11:56 AM: Message edited by: Dillweed ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DASman Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Originally posted by Dillweed: Remember every week they spend coding is a week that they do not makes sales. I've heard that from evey boss I have worked for in this biz.... E 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogface Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Dont you have buckets of money to be taking somewhere? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted November 28, 2005 Author Share Posted November 28, 2005 Originally posted by MikeyD: I had thought BFC was starting to soften a bit on civilians awhile ago, but it just doesn't sound like an easy thing to simply patch into the guts of the new OS. And civilians would be less appropriate in subsequent titles than a modern mid-east setting (would civilians in a Space Lobseters game be necessary?). I was among the first to lobby for random, AI controlled, untargetable, generic civilians in the game. I think this title would be ideal for their use. I'd love to see them, if only to add to fog-of-war and immersion. And I'm not getting my hopes up. I couldn't agree more that if civilians were to be in any CMx2 game, a modern Middle-East setting would be the one worth doing it in. I know that CMx2 is primarily going to be about war fighting rather than peace keeping, but it is still capable of portraying other types of military operations. Remember that civilians need not be crowds of bystanders. They could equally be political or military VIPs being escorted from A to B, civilian consultants and contractors, embedded news reporters etc. Just a few non-combatants would add a bit of variety don't you think? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 Wow, great idea that nobody's thought of yet. Civilian VIPs as 'victory flags' to kill, capture, or protect. You could label your movable VIP 'flag' a visiting ambassador, or a terrorist commander, maybe even an Italian reporter! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted November 28, 2005 Author Share Posted November 28, 2005 Ever see the film "Patriot Games"? As well as military Humvees I want to see CIA limos full of dark-suited "spooks" armed to the teeth with UZIs and Mac11s! Okay, before anyone says it, I may be a little weird! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted November 28, 2005 Author Share Posted November 28, 2005 Originally posted by Cpl Steiner: Ever see the film "Patriot Games"? As well as military Humvees I want to see CIA limos full of dark-suited "spooks" armed to the teeth with UZIs and Mac11s! Okay, before anyone says it, I may be a little weird! Come to think of it, I think the film was actually "Clear and Present Danger", but you get the idea! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 I want to see CIA limos full of dark-suited "spooks" Word on the street is if you're looking for CIA in Iraq you actually look for white SUVs. That's what got those private contractors into trouble in Fallugha, managed to get themselves lost in downtown Fallugha while driving a white SUV. On reflection, President S. Hussein had a fondness for white SUV's, himself. He'd drive around in a long caravan of identical cars so noone could tell which was his to attack. Reminds me of Frank Snep's book 'Decent Interval" where he said the CIA in Vietnam issued white Mustangs to their covert agents for transport. Only problem was they were literally the only white mustangs in the whole freakin' country! Can we hear a big collective Homer Simpson 'D'oh!"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 I've answered this in GREAT detail before. No civilians in CM:SF for extremely sound and very deliberate reasons. There is no changing this. Mikey, Maybe it would be worth an extra six weeks for civilians. But eight weeks? That would start to get painful.If that is all it would take to do up civilians decently, I think we'd do it. But I'd say it would be more like 3-4 months in total effort, probably 2-3 in release delay. Not worth it for a setting that really doesn't require it. Stability and Counter Insurgency Ops... they require it, and that's one reason why CM:SF isn't capable of simulating either of these types of warfare to a reasonable degree. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mazex Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Well as somewhere around 30.000 civilians where killed during OIF I think that they should be represented, and you should loose the scenario if killing more than x civilian(s). One may say that people beeing that stupid to stay in a warzone deserve to die but just look at the people living in New Orleans when Katrina devastated the city. Did all of them leave? I guess they where all waiting to throw stones on the National Guard... /Mazex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan_gigante Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 One can represent the effect of civilian deaths on victory by having the destruction of civilian buildings effect victory. As Steve has already said many a time, scenario designers can set victory conditions like "Don't blow up those schools and hospitals" or something like that. I venture a guess that 90% of all civilian casualities in high-intensity warfare come from arty, CAS, and other sorts of HE delivering. So I think you would see (in a realistic representation) nearly all civilian casualties not being seen by the US player, because they would be killed by that air strike you just called in, not because your troops are shooting them willy-nilly. Hence, there really isn't a major need to represent civilians graphically or as their own "side" in the battle, as long as the simulation quantifies damage done to civilian assets and such. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted December 5, 2005 Author Share Posted December 5, 2005 Originally posted by juan_gigante: Hence, there really isn't a major need to represent civilians graphically or as their own "side" in the battle, as long as the simulation quantifies damage done to civilian assets and such.There isn't just civilian damage to think about. The simulation would also have to take into account the use of mobile phones etc., by civilians to tip off local militia etc. about an impending US attack. In a MOUT setting, the civilians will be watching the US side's every move and using their mobiles to tip off local forces about US movements. In other situations, the US side may also face movement restrictions due to angry crowds setting up road blocks etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSColonel_131st Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Not-so-on-topic, but I've been trying to code civilian crowd behaviour into some Operation Flashpoint missions for a while. It's certainly one of the things that makes modern MOUT such a challenge, and I remain a bit sceptical how CM:SF will play without this burden. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan_gigante Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Cpl Steiner: Why not just have a roadblock like we do in CMx1? Does it matter who built it? It's there, right? Are you saying that CMx2 should show civilians building roadblocks during scenarios? Why not, then, have troops did new foxholes during scenarios? Most of the effects civilians would have on the battle are on really on the scale of the tactical level. It would be absurd for the Syrian leader to have constant updates on the positions of every US unit, but civilian HumInt can be represented by a message in the briefing for the Syrian player like "Civilian OPs have reported about a half a dozen Strykers coming down Al-Amouk street." And the player's setup zone is on Al-Amouk street. I think this is more realistic and easier. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Don't think "Civillians are not being modeled" think "civillians are being modeled abstractly" with the aformentioned points hit for destroying certain structures. I don't think the cell phone thingy would work either. I know the communications system is one of the first things we hit. While we might keep the cell phone system up at first (to see if we can catch leaders being dumb enough to use it) I imagine we'd bomb it to hell pretty fast if it became clear it was being used by military forces. Steve: Think you could give every civ building a minor penalty for being destroyed. Just a very small points hit, so that if one were to take down 3 or 4 houses it wouldn't matter. But doing "the whole *#&$ing village" with MGSes and f-16s would take a considerable bite out of the final score. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Originally posted by DASman: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Dillweed: Remember every week they spend coding is a week that they do not makes sales. I've heard that from evey boss I have worked for in this biz.... E </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSColonel_131st Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Ouch, that's gonna leave a mark. 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.