Marines Module update at Blogfront

[RommL]

yeah !

i'm waiting too...

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by Marwek77 aka Red Reporter:

- why absolutely NO TRUCKS??? (for both sides)

Um... did you actually read the blog?

[Nicdain]

OK, great news!

I will probably buy the Marines module as soon as it comes out, but in the meanwhile, I would like to know more about the Marines Corps, how and why is it different from the Army, not only in terms of organization/equipment, but also from the point of view of doctrine, tacics, etc.

Are there readings covering these subjects that can be retrieved online or at Amazon?

Will Battlefront.com publish a more detailed article on which will be the added value contained in this forthcoming module?

Thanks in advance

[RommL]

Originally posted by Nicdain:

OK, great news!

I will probably buy the Marines module as soon as it comes out, but in the meanwhile, I would like to know more about the Marines Corps, how and why is it different from the Army, not only in terms of organization/equipment, but also from the point of view of doctrine, tacics, etc.

Are there readings covering these subjects that can be retrieved online or at Amazon?

To know a little on the marines, I read the book RAID , this book is in French.

[Scipio]

I'm pleased that the T-90 is in! I look forward to some performance tests.

Have I missed the sheduled release date in the blog? The US-$ is very cheap in Euro-Land right now, so there's no time to waste!

[Battlefront.com]

Ack... a post I made yesterday apparently didn't actually get posted. Oh well, time to reconstruct and add to it!

Syrian Airborne is basically Special Forces with BMP-3s and some slightly different weaponry (AT-13 standard, for example).

SRAW is not in. It's a program that has been mired in problems and currently is in "limited production". More importantly, as far as we know not a single one of them is sitting in either Afghanistan or Iraq. Something's not all peaches and cream with that program, so we decided not to touch it. Yet, at least.

The Humvees with "patrol" armor on the roof is not something we feel is appropriate for the CM:SF conventional setting. These things, along with a rather lengthy list of other items, are designed for COIN ops, which is why you see pics of them in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We never adjust our pricing based on someone else's bargain bin mentality. That's been our philosophy from the start of retail involvement (2000) and will continue to be that way. Modules have always been planned for direct distribution (i.e. our contract with Paradox was for CM:SF only). The economics do not favor Modules going into retail distribution, at least not for a long time and never as stand alone product.

No, we are not going to give away the Marine Module to anybody. However, that isn't to say that we aren't planning on giving away something else.

Yup, I see the Mk19 Humvees was accidentally left of the list. I'll get that corrected.

Remember that the game's setting is Syria in the very near future, therefore we are not including complete fantasy equipment. The Syrians will probably have some (though very few) T-90SAs in the near future, so we felt that was an appropriate thing to add. BMP-3 is already in Syrian inventory. Other vehicles, which have nothing to do with the Syrian setting, will eventually make their way into CM. But a large scale "what if" conflict between the best of NATO and the best of Russian and Chinese equipment is not going to happen for a while.

We will eventually add Red Air Support, even though it is completely ridiculous to think that it would survive more than a few minutes of the conflict prior to the ground attacks starting. The Israeli Air Force predicts that the Syrians would last no more than an hour or so, and that was years ago when the Syrians were more prepared The recent incursion of Syria's airspace by IDF planes proves that they have no intention of doing battle in the air because they know they will lose.

Pics of the T-90SA, and others, have to wait for a bit because they are still being textured.

The Marines are a very different force. Yes, they have some of the same equipment as is currently in the game, but not as much as you would think. As the blog entry states, the backbone of the Marines is the 13 man Rifle Squad of three Fire Teams. The only weapons in common with an Army Rifle Squad are the M4 carried by the Fireteam Leaders, AT-4s, and grenades. Other than that, nothing in common. Think of the current US Army MOUT Squads with more men and heavier weapons. Vehicles are also quite different.

Steve

[ May 04, 2008, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Clavicula_Nox]

The Humvees with "patrol" armor on the roof is not something we feel is appropriate for the CM:SF conventional setting. These things, along with a rather lengthy list of other items, are designed for COIN ops, which is why you see pics of them in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I disagree with this pretty heavily. The uparmored humvees in service will never have that armor removed especially not for a conventional war when a level of armor protection would be more warranted. Saying that the armor is just something for COIN because that's how it is in Iraq and A-Stan, while fairly understandable, is a little short-sighted, I think. Especially when these units are deploying FROM Iraq, Turkey, and the Sea. Since 2005, and possibly earlier, it has been a CENTCOM requirement for fully armored vehicles before trip tickets can be issued. I even remember a convoy of mine being turned back at Navstar, Kuwait to return to Camp Virginia, Kuwait, because the shoddy armor on our humvees didn't match CENTCOM standards, this was in December 2004 and forced us to adopt the sheet metal salvage doors temporarily.

If the US military had been adequately prepared and not half-cocked, our humvees would have had this armor for the invasion. As it was, I know of a few combat arms and severak combat support units that went into battle with the original canvas doors, doors that have since been replaced with Level III armor doors. Just because they had canvas doors for the conventional aspect of OIF, doesn't mean that is the Army's future standard.

As it is now, there is next to no reason to take humvees into battle, the gunners last a total of 5 seconds from first contact. I honestly feel like a jerk every time I order my unarmored humvees into the fray, mainly because I know that I just wasted the lives of X number of gunners. Having them armored would greatly improve this.

[MikoyanPT]

Great news battlefront.

I am specialy pleased to find about the addition of the armoured trucks.

Altough i know battlefront doesn´t intend to transform CM:SF in a counter insurgency simulator, prefering the traditional military campaign, the addition of utility vehicles adds enourmous tactical possibilities.

And any such conflict would turn from front line battles to supply convoys versus insurgents in a matter of weeks.

The red force vehicles addition are great news also, at least the red side will get a infantry fighting vehicle capable of represent a serious treat to Bradleys.

Beside that, BMP3 and LAV-25 are much sexyer than Bradleys, Strykers and BTR.

25 bucks, how much is that in euros ?... oh boy... only that !

This add on will sell well in europe.

[MikoyanPT]

I totally agree with Clavicula Nox.

Guess why i am pleased whith the Onkosh armored trucks.

[Flanker15]

The Syrians get a truck too right?

[Battlefront.com]

The Humvees in the game now are uparmored (twice over, IIRC), but are not up to current specs. The FRAG-5 kits started going on Humvees only recently.

Here's the problem with the armor stuff on Humvees... the vehicles are NOT doing well with it. Reduced ranges, reliability problems, shorter lifespan, greater chance of roll-over, etc. are all understandable side effects of having more weight than was ever intended. These things are not advantages for moving over long distances with ever lengthening supply lines.

It's anybody's guess what would happen to these overburdened Humvees if a ground war was launched against Syria in the near future. Us? We think they'll be like the ERA kits on Bradleys and the just barely introduced TUSK kits on Abrams. These kits also have the same negative impacts on the vehicles and are definitely not standard equipment. They're available but by default not installed unless the commander (Brigade or higher no doubt) signs off on them being used.

It's not just the Humvees. The gunner's armored window arrangement is on Strykers, Bradleys, and even Abrams. I can't see those being used SOP for a conventional conflict either.

If anybody can point me to some sort of official document about intended future use of these kits, I'm definitely interested to see it because so far it's mostly speculation coupled with actual practice for some of these kits.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

The Syrians get a truck too right?

What you see on the list is what we are offering. Trucks for the Marines were only added because the bulk of Marines are ferried around by trucks, not APCs. Since Blue is on the attack, it made no sense to have the bulk of the Marines foot-bound.

Steve

[dan/california]

The only disadvantage I see for tusk on the M1 is a slightly higher profile. Given the fits that the Israelis had with Hezbollah ATGMs I would think they would want the reactive armor regardless of weight. It will break most bridges as is, so what is the disadvantage?

The other vehicles mentioned the additional weight is a far higher percentage of their original design weight and I completely agree that the drive train maintenance issues are significant.

[JSB]

"Marines Assault Amphibian Battalion": does it mean water?

Trucks: does it mean exit objectives?

[Duke d'Aquitaine]

Awesome news!!

[Mishga]

So, Steve?

When do I get these hunky Marines to play with?

[Thomm]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We will eventually add Red Air Support, even though it is completely ridiculous to think that it would survive more than a few minutes of the conflict prior to the ground attacks starting.

Caution, Steve!

You have to think "Red versus Red" when you assess Red air power, also!

Best regards,

Thomm

[handihoc]

Excellent point, Thomm. Red v Red is becoming increasingly popular, and in many ways more interesting, given the technical superiority of the US.

More Red v Red equipment and weaponry would be a definite plus.

[MikeyD]

While you're drooling over that giant AA7 in the first screenshot you may have missed the devildog in the foreground shouldering a M32 multiple grenade launcher. Old movie buffs may recall Christopher Walkin in the 1981 film 'The Dogs of War' blowin' up stuff reeeeal good with an earlier South African incarnation of that weapon

[Huntarr]

More here...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/huntarr/sets/72157604631123211/

[Clavicula_Nox]

Here's the problem with the armor stuff on Humvees... the vehicles are NOT doing well with it. Reduced ranges, reliability problems, shorter lifespan, greater chance of roll-over, etc. are all understandable side effects of having more weight than was ever intended. These things are not advantages for moving over long distances with ever lengthening supply lines.

I get what you're saying and everything, and I completely understand why you would leave the armor off, but I seriously doubt an entire Task Force is going to uparmour their humvees, drive across Iraq, and then take the armor off because they're about to go into Syria. On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if this happened, either.

In garrison, as rapidly as they can be installed, all humvees are being equipped with this armor. All combat training involving the use of humvees is being conducted with fully armored vehicles. It may be pure speculation, but I think the gunner's coffins are here to stay until something better happens along.

Remember the fiasco in 2004, when Rumsfeld was confronted at Camp Buering about the salvage metal armor? I was there, incidentally, picking up my salvage metal door humvee when that went down, and immediately after that, we couldn't go anywhere without some form of protection for the gunners. America doesn't like it's soldiers not having body armor, and America doesn't like it's vehicles not having armor, good or bad, some 4-star would be forced into retirement and lose rank over this.

I agree that there are several issues that come up because of this armor, but I also think it's suicide using humvees in game without it.

[Battlefront.com]

Nope, no water (or any other new terrain) in the Marines Module. The Assault Amphibian Battalion is the Marine's only "armored infantry" formation. In Iraq I don't think they touched water, but they did go all the way into Anbar Province overland. In fact, one of the most intense battles in the opening phase of OIF was fought with Marines in AAVs in the streets of Al Nassariyah, aka Ambush Alley.

Red vs. Red is something that we have always seen as a "it was easy to do, so we did it" feature, not something that we specifically set out to support. But it has proven to be popular so we are taking that into consideration. Red air power will make it into the game, probably with the next Module.

Ah... The Dogs of War... a forgetable classic

No release date yet. We're only just starting the process of testing the real vehicles and infantry formations.

Steve

[z1812]

Hi All,

I understand that there will be 2 icons on the desktop. One for CMSF and the other for the Marine Module.

Does that mean?

1. Click CMSF and get only CMSF

2. Click Marine Module and get CMSF plus module.

I suppose I am wondering if it works like a plug-in.

regards John

[Battlefront.com]

Clavicula_Nox,

As you say, it's not an easy call to make one way or another. I agree with you that the door/body armor kits are never going to come off. The days of flimsy sheet metal Humvees are over and done with. The question is if all that top heavy stuff is going to go with the vehicles wherever they go from now on. I don't even think anybody in the Pentagon knows (and that shouldn't be surprising if true ). For now, however, we're not planning on putting the gunner's coffin on any of the vehicles. We may change this in the future.

z1812,

I understand that there will be 2 icons on the desktop. One for CMSF and the other for the Marine Module.

Correct. When you install the Module the installer asks you to register. This will make the Marines Module EXE verified and able to run. To play the game all you have to do is use the regular CM:SF EXE just like you do now. The EXE then looks to see which Modules you have installed and licensed and then incorporates the data into the game. This means you get full access to all of your installed data without any additional work.

Steve

[Thomm]

Originally posted by z1812:

I understand that there will be 2 icons on the desktop. One for CMSF and the other for the Marine Module.

The way I see it there will not be any additional icon on the desktop. The icon Steve is referring to (I think) is displayed in the main screen of CM:SF. You start CM:SF the way you are used to and it automatically loads the modules. So there is no need for an additional icon on your desktop.

Best regards,

Thomm

PS: Note distinction between "desktop" and "main screen".