Would this be fun? (Campaign for CMSF)

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[nathan S.J.]

hell yea, but how you planning to do this?

[Kieme(ITA)]

Man sounds really good!

For sure I'd suggest the use of a forum or sticky thread, or even a dedicated online site...

Anyway if you need some help I'd be glad to.

Good luck with your project!

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by nathan S.J.:

hell yea, but how you planning to do this?

If it's anything like 90% of the CMX1 campaigns, there will be several weeks of squabbling over rules regarding engineering assets, road movement rates, corps order of battle, simultaneous with an overbearing effort to get the battle area mapped out accompanied by threats and broken promises. If the game reaches critical mass you might play one or two engagements before the GMs realize the task of updating Excel spreadsheets doesn't appeal to most of the players who refuse to give timely reports on what they're doing and the entire effort collapses before it really starts.

And then there's this:

http://the-battle-of-lauben-campaign.foren-city.de/

Which is working out pretty well, even if I am late in reporting my status to my superiors...or returning a turn.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

The sort of thing I would be interested in is an operational game along the lines of CMMC. The 2nd CMMC… or first depending on if you count the training version…. that is the Normandy version with the 43rd Wessex division amongst others…was a huge success. Wargaming does not exist that is better .

For a CMSF version the following elements would be necessary… in my very prejudiced view. In no particular order.

1) Use real OOB for both sides but assume that the Russians had seen the confrontation coming and decided to support their old friends with resources. Thrown some $20 billion of their $405 billion reserves at the problem over a 9-12 months period.

2) Assume Russia had supplied a large number of their current model air-defence systems that are believed by defence journals such as Jane’s to be as effective against the latest western aircraft as their AT systems are against the latest western tanks. Then assume that for political reasons the US decides not to use their aircraft much for close support so as to keep their losses down to a politically tolerable level.

3) Also assume that Russia supplied Syria with a very large number of their current/’90s AT weapons. This means that in the editor you always use Excellent as the equipment setting for the Syrians.

4) Assume the US invasion force is quite stretched, small due to over stretch caused by Iraqi.

5) Use real Syrian terrain. Model maps from high quality topographical maps of Syria. Of course, you have to decide the region of Syria the fighting will be in first .

6) You must have enough game empires/ game masters recruited to ensure the game will run with tolerable/sustainable levels of commitment from the empires and GMs.

This is just a quick list… clearly there would be much else to consider in additions.

Time allowing could be fun…

All the best,

Kip.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by AdamL:

I will probably use the CMx2 editor to create an imaginary country with many similarities to Syria.

Originally posted by kipanderson:

For a CMSF version the following elements would be necessary… Use real OOB for both sides...

...Use real Syrian terrain. Model maps from high quality topographical maps of Syria. Of course, you have to decide the region of Syria the fighting will be in first.

...This is just a quick list… clearly there would be much else to consider in additions.

I see Squabble Number One is off the ground and reaching altitude.

What you might like to try that I haven't seen done before is have all participants fight their battles vs. the AI. That would mean no waiting for PBEMs, and phases could be completed in days, not weeks or even months. The only bad part of that is you couldn't prevent FOW reveals at the end of games, but it might allow more time for detailed friendly-side staff planning, resource sharing, etc. and just more teamwork in general, plus keeping people more involved. The quicker you play games through, the less likely people are to lose interest. Also less of a need for "GMs" and you get more direct participation from everyone. You would still probably want a skeleton OPFOR staff to plot out grand strategy for the enemy.

The only downfall is that enemy AI now needs to be scripted, so creating battles would be labour intensive - far moreso than in CMX1.

[kipanderson]

Michael,

I do not think there is any argument developing here… we are likely to end up in different games. If I have the time to play in any operational CMSF game at all.

For me CMMC is the model because done well…. and that is no easy thing… it produces the best results. The most rewarding operational and tactical game.

All the best,

Kip.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[kipanderson]

Adam, hi,

I know… what I have in mind… given the time… is a very different beast to your idea.

Good luck with it.

All the best,

Kip.