Vietnam Module?

[DzrtFox]

Hey guys,

I was just curious... Considering we now have a pretty decent simulation of asymmetric warfare in CM:SF, what is the possibility of us seeing a Vietnam War module somewhere down the line? I've never really ever seen the Vietnam War accurately portrayed in a game before, but it seems like CM:SF has layed the groundwork for creating something like that.

Just an idea... (sorry if this has been mentioned before)

[Sequoia]

It would have to be a full blown game, not a module. I don't think Battlefront has even decided what they're going to do after the first WWII game. Lots of people say space lobsters, i.e a science fiction game. Who knows?

[YankeeDog]

First off, Vietnam wouldn't be a Module, it would be another full game release. Modules are different TOEs/theaters in the same conflict.

But anyway, reading the tea leaves of BFC's comments thus far, I would say there's less than 1% of seeing a Vietnam Game.

Sorry to rain on your parade. . . but the plan-as-it-stands seems to be:

1. CM:SF

- USMC Module

- British Module

- Other NATO Module (probably mostly German-Dutch-Canadian)

And, then, overlapping with the above:

2. CMx2:WWII, probably US Kit Normandy to start, with possible modules following, in no particular order:

- Something w/ Commonwealth Kit (Market Garden, maybe?).

- Something East Front (Bagration?)

- Something else to further expand time period(s) and kit.

3. Who the heck knows. . . we're looking pretty far into the future here, so anything's possible , including I suppose your Vietnam game. But I wouldn't call it any more likely than Space Lobsters of Doom, Some crazy Swords and Wizards Fantasy tactical game, or any of the other wild and crazy ideas that have been floated about.

Cheers,

YD

[ February 22, 2008, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: YankeeDog ]

[DzrtFox]

Ahh, I guess I misunderstood the plan for future development with this engine. I thought even the WW2 games were going to basically be modules using this same engine. I just went back and re-read the original announcement and I guess you guys are right.

I was just watching Platoon and thought it would be interesting to see this engine set in the jungle...

[jeffsmith]

1. YD you might want to change CMx2:WWI to CMx2:WWII in #2

2. Past Response from BFC regarding a Vietnam game has been Pretty Much

"NO"

[DzrtFox]

I am actually most excited about seeing this engine set during WWII, but I would also MUCH prefer to see the engine set in Vietnam than with a sci-fi theme.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by jeffsmith:

1. YD you might want to change CMx2:WWI to CMx2:WWII in #2

2. Past Response from BFC regarding a Vietnam game has been Pretty Much

"NO"

Whups. Thanks for pointing out that typo. . . fixed. Wouldn't want to give any WWI grogs false hopes.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by DzrtFox:

I am actually most excited about seeing this engine set during WWII, but I would also MUCH prefer to see the engine set in Vietnam than with a sci-fi theme.

Who knows, by the time we're 4+ more years down the road, and BFC gets to whatever comes after CMx2:WWII, they might have changed their mind as well, and have a hankering for a Vietnam game.

Of course, by then any of a number of things are possible. We might have started yet another war, giving BFC more current conflict material to model.

[bodkin]

I don't know if a Vietnam module would work in this sort of game. Jungle fighting would mean you'd have to play most of the game with the trees turned off which looks a bit average.

Maybe Battlefront could include a feature like Madminutegames where the trees become transparent in a small radius around known troop locations.

[jeffsmith]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

Who knows, by the time we're 4+ more years down the road, and BFC gets to whatever comes after CMx2:WWII, they might have changed their mind as well, and have a hankering for a Vietnam game.

C'mon YD

You have been around here long enough

When BFC has stated clearly

they are NOT going to do a certain Game

Have they ever changed their mind?

No:

Warsaw Pact vs Nato

Vietnam

No Arab vs Israel

Beach Landings

Though the CM Modding & Scenario Design Community

HAS tried their hand

[ February 23, 2008, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: jeffsmith ]

[hoolaman]

Originally posted by bodkin:

I don't know if a Vietnam module would work in this sort of game. Jungle fighting would mean you'd have to play most of the game with the trees turned off which looks a bit average.

Maybe Battlefront could include a feature like Madminutegames where the trees become transparent in a small radius around known troop locations.

That's an excellent idea for this or any other CM game.

[Meach]

I would love a Sci-Fi setting and see the imagination of the BFC team run riot with no real-world limitations on gear and weapons.

If Jump troops have 1Gw Laser capacity, who's gonna argue? Do we have Jump Troop 1Gw Laser grogs out there?

[flamingknives]

Ah, but science fiction has to be based on science. The clue's in the name. However, since any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, set it far enough in the future and almost anything is possible.

If you want fantasy in space, then that would be good too.

Personally, I have always wanted Combat Mission's attention to detail and real-world rules applied to the background of Warhammer 40,000. The trouble might be one of scale - as soon as you have Titans (and it wouldn't be complete without them), you need battalions to oppose them. I suppose that you could leave the super-heavies out and have a maximum size of an MBT-equivalent, but Titans are so very shiny.

[Meach]

Maybe the term space opera would be best suited to it then? If we are gonna break the rules of science lets do it in grand style

[Sequoia]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

And, then, overlapping with the above:

2. CMx2:WWII, probably US Kit Normandy to start, with possible modules following, in no particular order:

- Something w/ Commonwealth Kit (Market Garden, maybe?).

- Something East Front (Bagration?)

- Something else to further expand time period(s) and kit.

YD

So you think East Front might be a module to the first WWII game instead of it's own game? It could work. All the German units of '44 would be already be done. Of course you'd have to add special East Front building types. We'll have to wait and see I suppose. Hey they could call it "Memoir '44:the computer game."

[vincere]

I recall BF saying east front GAME is pencilled in for after Normandy.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

What is possible with a module is Yom Kippur War ’73.

CMSF is huge fun and way ahead of all comers as a simulation of contemporary warfare. There is no contest.

But…. In my view we need a setting where there is high-intensity, mechanised warfare between rivals that are at least in the “same ball park” technology wise.

With the coming of the T90 and BMP3 in the Marines module such clashes will be one step closer.

But the Yom Kippur War happened, the Arab /Syrian forces are 90% included in CMSF already… so we really just need an IDF ’73 module. Given that Battlefront is to do a British module… why not an Israelis ’73 module?

All good fun,

All the best,

Kip

[jeffsmith]

Other than the Fact BFC has said NO Arab vs Israel

I guess none really

Obviously I dont speak for BFC

but we do have what they have said

about certain things

When BFC has stated clearly

they are NOT going to do a certain Game Theater

Have they ever changed their mind?

the CM Modding & Scenario Design Community

Who has done an amazing job thus far

will simply have to step in and fill the gap

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by vincere:

I recall BF saying east front GAME is pencilled in for after Normandy.

Interesting. I find this surprising.

I mean, really, once you've done Normandy, you've done 90% of the German TOE for Bagration, plus a good 20% of the Russian (Lend-lease). And the terrain isn't all that different. Need some new building skins, and change the species of trees in the forests, but that about it.

Not really any different than doing, say, US Stryker Brigade TF vs. Syria, and then British Armored TF vs. Syria. The US and the Brits actually don't share much kit.

But what do I know. It's all just wild speculation.

Cheers,

YD

[FAI]

Lack of armor action in Vietnam, as I recall, was a major rationale for the "No CM:Vietnam" policy.

[the Fighting Seabee]

The more I think about it, the more I think a Vietnam module could be done. It would just be a lot of infantry stuff and they would have to add in choppers that could fly in and out. But not all of Vietnam's battles were in dense jungle. Many were in farm areas, rice paddies, and cities like Hue. A lot could be done that would still feel like the 'nam experience. There are really endless possibilities.

[DzrtFox]

That's what I was thinking too, Seabee. I like playing with infantry more than anything anyway, and there was still some armor action. There are a lot of cool possibilities, especially if somehow choppers could be incorporated.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

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

I recall BF saying east front GAME is pencilled in for after Normandy.

Interesting. I find this surprising.

I mean, really, once you've done Normandy, you've done 90% of the German TOE for Bagration, plus a good 20% of the Russian (Lend-lease). And the terrain isn't all that different. Need some new building skins, and change the species of trees in the forests, but that about it.</font>

[Sgt Joch]

personally, I would love a CM:Vietnam game.

The type of company to regimental type action in Vietnam would perfectly suit CMx2 and despite the commonly held belief, U.S. forces did not win every battle.

My understanding of BFC's reluctance is the worry that there may not be a market for a CM:Vietnam game. There does not seem to be a lot of interest in the Vietnam war outside of the U.S. and even in the U.S., there does not appear to be great interest in remembering it.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Sgt.Joch:

personally, I would love a CM:Vietnam game.

The type of company to regimental type action in Vietnam would perfectly suit CMx2 and despite the commonly held belief, U.S. forces did not win every battle.

My understanding of BFC's reluctance is the worry that there may not be a market for a CM:Vietnam game. There does not seem to be a lot of interest in the Vietnam war outside of the U.S. and even in the U.S., there does not appear to be great interest in remembering it.

The real answer, I think, lies elsewhere.

Looking over the list of BFC's programming abilities and what have and have not been included so far and what is conspicuous by absence, how well do you think they would do at things like spider holes, tunnel complexes, or helicopters interacting realistically with the tactical battlespace? And it's not as if those things would be outside the scope of a tactical game - the base camp and AO of the 25th Infantry Division at Cu Chi as I recall was pretty much right on top of a huge tunnel complex.

Opposed helicopter landings were probably as rare as opposed parachute landings were in the Second World War, but the famous ones in both cases (Ia Drang Valley/Crete or Ste Mere Eglise respectively) would call out for inclusion and be conspicuous by absence.

You wouldn't need such things in the game, of course, but the constant whine of people on this forum begging for them as if it was life or death would simply deter from the other aspects of the program and probably make the whole project seem not worthwhile.