Will our heroes in CMSF be rewarded?

[GSX]

If a campaign with the same forces is to be enacted, will our heroes be rewarded with either promotion or medals? Will their abilities increase? Or will they start the next battle as is, but without the casualties incurred in the last battle and Green replacements.

[YankeeDog]

Would you really see promotions or medals actually go through in the time frame of a modern campaign?

I could see battlefield promotions to fill gaps in the chain of command, etc., but it is my understanding that official promotions and medals take weeks or months to be processed, and so would be unlikely to show up.

Same goes for replacements. Maybe a few limited one, but I would think you'd be more likely to see depleted units consolidating, than any large influx of replacement over the time frame of a modern conflict.

This all assumes that the hypothetical timeline of the CM:SF Campaign spans a few months, at most. But given that BFC has already stated that the game is intended to model a tactical combat of the "hot" war, and not any follow-on police action, I have a hard time seeing how a modern campaign would last much longer than this.

Maybe you could do something like not which units are "put in" for promotions and medals er sumfink, tho. I dunno.

Cheers,

YD

[GSX]

Good points, so will the campaign see a careless player who loses too many assets in the beginning really tactically challenged by the end? Will we have to replay missions to avoid this? This is one thing that puts me off many games, the constant replaying of missions to achieve my goals.

[RMC]

I think you could hand out a box of bronze stars in the course of a single scenario...to the air force.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by GSX:

Good points, so will the campaign see a careless player who loses too many assets in the beginning really tactically challenged by the end? Will we have to replay missions to avoid this? This is one thing that puts me off many games, the constant replaying of missions to achieve my goals.

Good points as well. There needs to be a careful balance between making sure that a player's successes and failures early in the campaign have consquences (otherwise what's the point of having a campaign?), but don't simply turn the campaign into an exercise of replaying each battle until you get a near perfect "score" before moving on to the next.

A lot of games I've played with storylines (and a campaign is really just a form of storyline) fall into this trap. It can get pretty tedious when you have to replay the same section of the storyline over and over again to make sure you have enough gold, or powerups, or lives, or whatever, to move on ot the next phase.

Given the depth that the US Military has to draw upon, it might actually be more realistic, as well as more playable, to simply have severely depleted US units replaced by fresh ones. This would allow the player to continue to "play through" with new units, but would ultimately affect the final score. The "final score", then, would be based on how many companies, or whatever, you had to chew through in order to get to the final objective.

Again, probably not unrealistic. Final outcome of a US-Syrian conflict is not really in doubt, but the number of US servicemen's lives, as well as vehicles, etc. that it would require to bring about final victory, could vary widely depending on the relative wisdom of US vs. Syrian commanders. . .

Cheers,

YD

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by RMC:

I think you could hand out a box of bronze stars in the course of a single scenario...to the air force.

...with V for

...volume?

...vacuity?

...vanity?

[Cull]

Madmatt already said that he will provide this "missing" feature by acting as sole arbiter and personally reviewing all requests for commendations/medals for your digital heroes as you play the game.

Just email the story for him to review, preferably with a video file attached of the soldier's actions.