Holo Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 Now that the concept has been more or less chosen (Syria with Minor backstory and Fictional Subsection), maybe we can discuss what should be the first follow up module (and why). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 It will simply be a set of new units in the same setting. My personal pick is for USMC and a few new Syrian units. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cpl Steiner Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 Do USMC first to get it out quick (presumably a lot of the research has already been done for the main game) but give us some British units for module 2. The national differences in training and equipment would make for an interesting module IMHO. Also, given that UK forces have expended well over 400,000 rounds of ammunition in recent months fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, they are definitely a current and major player on the international military stage worthy of a module in CM:SF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holo Posted September 26, 2006 Author Share Posted September 26, 2006 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: My personal pick is for USMC I was afraid that would be the answer. I must honestly admit that, as someone who lives in Europe, I'm not very interested in seeing USMC module as a first follow up. Sure, I guess it is easiest to make, but no matter what the differences are between one US military branch and the other, after all, I believe that for lot of players it will come to this - Abrams is still Abrams. My pick would be either Euro Force module, or Russian module. First consisting of something like combined UK/Germany/(France?) forces, so lots of new things to play with, and although this may look as too big job to do, if their forces are limited to "these SPECIFIC forces are sent to war zone" and not modeling everything there is in their armies and arsenals, I believe it's possible for module to be made in reasonable time. Russian module on the other hand gives us opponent that is much more advanced than Syrians are, so in scenario making terms I think it is more valuable. Besides, modeling extra equipment that ads on to original game should be easier than in Euro Force module, considering Russian equipped Syrian army. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 So what will come first. The first follow up module or the first WWII game or will that be decided later? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Warrior Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 I would second the nomination for adding Brits. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudel.dietrich Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 I would want to see the Germans since they have the most powerful force avaliable to Nato besides the Americans, but well...im biased 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moronic Max Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 I vote for: whatever. Just give me more toys. Do we have an estimate on how much these modules will cost? Further, has it been decided whether these modules will feature singleplayer campaigns or are more "sandbox" style additions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
istari Posted September 26, 2006 Share Posted September 26, 2006 The more important question for me is not WHAT will be in the next module, but WHEN will it appear? I'm concerned because the history of episodic gaming to date (SiN, Half-Life 2) seems to be a gap of 8-12 months between each release. That seems like it will be long wait for a few more toys in the CM:SF setting. OTOH, 4-6 months would be great. That way within a single year after release of CM:SF we'd have potentially USMC, UK and another Euro force or Russia. Istari 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Well, for starters we have zero plans to put in Russia at all, ever. Not that it wouldn't be interesting, nor that we have something against the Russians. It's because there are more possible topics than we plan on doing. We hope to have the 1st Module out sometime before the WWII version. Our target is 8 months from start to finish. The USMC is significantly different that the US Army, both in terms of equipment and organization. I've gone over this before, but as it stands right now (which means its just my personal take on things) we will do the following: 1. USMC 2. British 3. German based (this would likely include Germany, Canada, and perhaps The Netherlands) That's it. Figure 8 months each and you've got yourself nearly 3 years of Modules. The reason for doing it in this order should be obvious to equipment grogs. #1 is going to be done along side CM:WW2, therefore it makes sense to do something that has the least risk of screwing up the main effort (WW2). Then we will have some breathing room and can afford to do the Brits right. Same for the German based stuff. No way are we going to do the Brits *and* another major nation all at the same time. It's gotta be one or the other. Sorry, that's our new philosophy for remaining sane and we're sticking to it. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imperial Grunt Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Looking foward to it all, but I must say I cannot wait for the USMC module. Blood makes the grass grow! Semper Fi! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudel.dietrich Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 If you modeled German equipment you could model half of Europe. Not sure why Britian would come first unless it is just preference. Anyways, I like the idea of a modern USMC force. Maybe we can get some M-60s Or are those still in use? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudel.dietrich Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 It would also be nice if BF could one day grow to be able to support two teams. One team working on WW2 stuff and the other post WW2 stuff sharing the same engine both teams developed. I have very little interest in WW2 these days since I have fired more virtual bullets than were fire in the real war itself. Nut I know that is how BF earns its money. WW2 related would be a Korean War game which I would purchase in a heart beat. I dont think that has ever been done in 3-D tactical before. Would not be a huge change from WW2 either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Brits and Germans are great, but ideally I'd rather see France than USMC because of the more interesting blue vs. blue scenarios. Who wouldn't want to do US vs. France? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 British regulars and Australian SAS 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PanzerMike Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 The Netherlands he? That would be very interesting, a welcome change from the USA. They make a big effort for such a small country (Iraq, Afghanistan). I vote for the Dutch! Oh, and the Germans too ofcourse Bring it on! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holo Posted September 27, 2006 Author Share Posted September 27, 2006 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Well, for starters we have zero plans to put in Russia at all, ever. I guess that, as someone mentioned earlier on another thread, at the end we'll end up playing blue on blue, just to get some balance. Shame for not including Russians, that could give us oportunity to make all sorts of scenarios and campaigns. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holo Posted September 27, 2006 Author Share Posted September 27, 2006 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: No way are we going to do the Brits *and* another major nation all at the same time. Steve My vote is for: 3. German based (this would likely include Germany, Canada, and perhaps The Netherlands) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mav1 Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 What about the French? Iam surprised that the Netherlands is suggested rather than France. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertram Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 I guess the Netherlands would be (relative) easy to do once US and Germany were covered. Most, if not all, equipment would have been done then. France has a whole new batch of toys. Also, in both Afghanistan and Iraq the Netherlands joined the fun when asked by the US. France declined. So it might be more plausible that the Netherlands would join in next time to. We do have elections before 2007 though (november actually) so this might change..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Though I haven't given it much thought and I don't expect to have an affect on their decision, I'd vote to get the Canadians in there somewhere. Turreted LAV IIIS, LAV Bisons, and apparently Leopard Is are back in the inventory too. Poor Canada gets no respect, though they seem end up in every hot spot out there. The reason why the U.S. purchased the Stryker was because they were jealous watching Canadian LAVs spearheading the march into Bosnia. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rudel.dietrich Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Originally posted by MikeyD: Though I haven't given it much thought and I don't expect to have an affect on their decision, I'd vote to get the Canadians in there somewhere. Turreted LAV IIIS, LAV Bisons, and apparently Leopard Is are back in the inventory too. Poor Canada gets no respect, though they seem end up in every hot spot out there. The reason why the U.S. purchased the Stryker was because they were jealous watching Canadian LAVs spearheading the march into Bosnia. Once Germany is done Canada will follow according to Steve. Once you model the US and Germany and USMC you have most everything Canada uses and I am sure BFC will fill in the gaps. I have also read that late last year Canada was has either purchased or is going to purchase some plain vanilla strikers, true or not true? [ September 27, 2006, 09:39 AM: Message edited by: rudel.dietrich ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Originally posted by rudel.dietrich: If you modeled German equipment you could model half of Europe. Not sure why Britian would come first unless it is just preference. Anyways, I like the idea of a modern USMC force. Maybe we can get some M-60s Or are those still in use? Phased out in 1994. I'd like to see the German module include a couple CV90 variants too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 27, 2006 Share Posted September 27, 2006 Don't know whether any of you saw it or not, but CNN reported yesterday that the French force in Lebanon is bringing LeClerc MBTs with it, presumably along with other AFVs. This was news to me and opens up even more possibilities for grog agitation. Regards, John Kettler 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.