Alex Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 War at 80's. I think it will be very intensive conflict with very big numbers of artillery and air support, and because so, it will be not so very interesting. 1 shoot of SMERCH MLRS and game is over. You don't think so? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Churchmoor Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Ever since I first read "Red storm rising" I have waited a good game covering its land battles. I can not think any other theather post WW2 where opponents would be so well balanced game wise and at the sametime would have über cool equipment on both sides. CM: RSR. Yes, please. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSG Grymm Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 One of the things that have made me enjoy playing CM:SF so much was its current feel. It feels like I never left the Army and am at some new computer simulator. I'd hate to see it move backwards in time or too far forwards. I'd like to think the Battlefront dev team can watch the news and see current hot spots. With a bit of creative thinking, come up with possible conflicts. The Balkans always has a chance to explode, another Russian excursion into Georgia(this time there is a US unit there training and gets sucked in), expanded middle east conflicts(a NATO vs Iran conflict), there is always Africa to toy with. The possiblities are out there. I keep going back to the ideas of a 1980's Fulda Gap battle. I am not sure I'd like this one, as when I did my first border rotation I was told the we were expected to make 1 radio trasmission before we overrun, 7-10 seconds after the intial breach, if I recall correctly. Even if you survived that, riding around in the M-113's just waiting to stumble into a BMP-1 does not excite me. Anyways, great discussion and game. I'm sure whatever it is it'll be fun. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Why choose between Russia or China? We likes them both Steve Wow, did everybody miss this bone? Steve virtually stating outright that CMSF2 will include China. That's pretty cool. Anybody for the Battle of Taiwan? (if we can imagine anything left of the island after the middle range missiles have blasted it apart) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcrof Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 War at 80's. I think it will be very intensive conflict with very big numbers of artillery and air support, and because so, it will be not so very interesting. 1 shoot of SMERCH MLRS and game is over. You don't think so? True, there are uber weapons like MLRS and NBC stuff but warfare was expected to be increadibly mobile with big gaps between units. Because there would be no defined 'front line' for any length of time it would be difficult to effectively employ these weapons effectively, especially with the expected breakdown in command and control due to extreme electronic warfare. Because of this, the chances are high that formations would stumble across each other frequently and begin a fast paced meeting engagement without heavy artillery support. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandokan Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Well, for what that matter I vote for the 80'. Scenarios would be more balanced that any fictional war nowaday. Mh, apart the first 12-24h or so, when WP arty could hit known targets (Alex's MLRS!). And also there would be less guessing about the real performance of a good deal of weapons. Moreover, in the 80' I still was in the Army 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zwobot Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I'm favoring the 80'ies Fulda gap too. Or the Falklands/Malvinas (but not much armor there...). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Why Finland it was the French that have shown Liverpool the championships league door. Because Sami Hyypiä left us. *sniff* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I hope we'll one day see the Space Lobsters of Doom realize. THAT could be set somewhere in 2020-2030, with plenty of liberties in regards to Earthern military technology, like point defence systems against artillery or active camoflage. The opposition would have even more advanced weaponry, such as sharks with lasers, giant robots, genderbending zombies (ala Plan 9 From Outer Space) and what not, with the goal of turning mankind into a special cuisine in Betelgeuze Fried Chicken. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I would personally prefer a future 2015-2025 conflict between NATO and Russia and/or China in a temperate environment, rather than some fictional 1980's fulda gap alternate universe, although I would play both. If we do go back to the past, I would rather have a real war, like the Ramadan War, 1973. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikkey Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 NATO vs Warsaw Pact in 80' would be good 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 NATO/ Warsaw pact 1980s? I'm one of those who would want to see the game, but I'm wondering if the 'cold war nostalgia' market is great enough to support the effort. I may dream of fighting M60A1s vs T62s, but hey - I'm over 50 and can recall when they were the hottest thing! Teenage gamers? They're celebraing th 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall this week! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermartin Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Still, world in conflict a mainstream RTS was about reds invading US soil in the 80s. For me, 67-73 Arab-Israeli wars seems like the most attractive setting. Historical and a good balance in weapon lethality from upgraded shermans to slow moving Saggers. I hope some day an Israeli based software house would make that kind of module for CMSF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smaragdadler Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 WW3 80's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtjAbOZXffY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFVJVAmLft4 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lomir Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 To those thinking it would be better to set CMx2 in the "near" future (2015-2025) and always with respect for your wishes, Have you considered the discussions around here and arguments we'll get into with questions like what generation of new weapons the Russians/Chinese/Americans/Europeans are suppossed to have by then, which systems should have been improved and which should have been already sent to scrap? And how does it work technology that there isn't any public data source/field testing? Even more, the Western armies have been investing billions of euros in the last years into their Future Combat Systems, and most of them are about to see the light during the next five years if they haven't already done it - If I recall correctly, only the personnal system for a soldier will cost something between 20,000 and 30,000€, with "sci-fi" high technology stuff we didn't even dream of a few years ago. The lethality/accuracy of weapons is going to be much more higher and Western casualties should drop. Does it reminds you something? The duck shooting sensation again. Not to say that such a kind of war will involve, and will be actually win, not so much with the ground-forces war CM could depict, but with "la crème de la crème" of each country's air assets, long-range cruise missiles and thousands and thousands of tons of precision-guided "smart" munitions. All this considering that in such a conflict the use of tactical nuclear weapons would be a reality when the balance will start to tip in favor of one side. The only end of this should be well known to everyone: the U.S. Marine Corps walks cheerfully into a rubbled city of Moscow. Well, and the conflict could be more local, but there still are the questions about the future technology as the troops involved will probably be SFs or the best quality ones available, so it doesn't matter that you set it in 2020 than in 2100, because everything will be totally fictional - the conflict, the weapons and the TO&Es. At least with the Cold War (1980s) the only fictional part would be the war (of course, it will always be in a modern setting if you don't want a real-life asymmetric conflict) and IMHO, the older generation of weapons with lower accuracy will allow for different tactics. It would be better than the opposite. This, or set it right now, so what it's presently in the armies, it's what they are going to get: end of the problem of the future last-moment acquisitions of weapons and possible changes in the structure. For me, both settings would be alright. More than one year ahead in the future since the game is released and I believe that pretty soon there will be loads of complaints about how realistic is the game. Just my two cents. Cheers, Lomir 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Who says it has to be between 2015 and 2025 ? How about 2011 to 2013 ? 'Near future' doesn't have to be that far into the future at all. I think the main idea is to leverage some of the current 3D models and data and expand it into a temperate environment with other opponents who field significant militaries as potential opponents. That said, a Cold-War era '80s game would be nice too, but I HIGHLY doubt CMSF2 will be set in that time frame. Possibly a future game, but nothing immediate. Perhaps when CMSF2 has run its course the next "modern" title can be a Cold War game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I want "near future" as well, but would like to choose a year which is slightly beyond when we will be playing. Playing CMSF in 2009 when it is supposed to be set in 2008 requires a greater suspension of disbelief than if it was set in, say, 2013. Realistically, and this is pure speculation on my part, CMSF2 will probably come out in 2012. If we assume it will have a lifespan of 4 years, then choosing a conflict set in, say 2017-2019 is probably ideal. Its far enough away that it is in the future, but near enough so that all the weapons which will be used either currently exist or are already being designed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSX Posted November 5, 2009 Author Share Posted November 5, 2009 I'm favoring the 80'ies Fulda gap too. Or the Falklands/Malvinas (but not much armor there...). Falklands is definitely out, unless you could do an 80's Mod. Its just far too limited. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSY Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 WW3 80's: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtjAbOZXffY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFVJVAmLft4 Neat. I hadn't seen those before. Thanks for the links Smaragdadler. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TankHunter Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 If you guys want modern war but are not keen on China/Russia vs USA, you can always go India vs Pakistan 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool breeze Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 I remember reading John Kettler talk about how in the 80s we couldnt puncture soviet MBTs from the front with any of our tank guns or man portable rockets. If that is really true I dont think it would be a very popular game. Anybody know about this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
19Kyle72 Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 All China would have to do to destroy us is to stop issuing us loans and loan extensions. SERIOUSLY. :mad: The whole concept of us going to war with China is beyond ludicrous to me. They can wipe us out without firing a single round, thanks to us allowing our capital and shipping our state-of-the-art factories to a slave state, because, you know, that's how you "spread democracy, freedom and advance human rights and prosperity for all." Oh, I'm sorry. Maybe I should rephrase that? Might sound a tad bitter, a silly state to be in considering how prosperous we all are around here. Maybe we should count our blessings that right now, China's in a death embrace with America's economic future. If it were to let us go now, China would tumble down right behind us. And really, if China was "so" anti-western, they wouldn't be renewing those loans right now, would they? This is the most vulnerable we've been as a nation in decades, so if they really wanted to wipe us out this IS the time to do it. So much for that theory, eh boys? But if one wants to create a supreme Chinese aggressor vs. the whole Western world, you can go right ahead and make it. Only it wouldn't be grounded on much fact, so you might as well pick up a fantasy role playing game and play that instead. No, making China the chief Main Baddie Bogeyman is silly. Yeah, there's lots of Americans who hate China because of what "they" supposedly did to us, when in reality, our anger should be directed at those who REALLY made our current pathetic and perverted state possible, our politicians and our corporate masters who sold our country's infrastructure, our future, and our children's future down the toilet. But for a buck, it's WORTH IT! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 Interesting discussion, especially seeing as how I'm far more excited about playing in a temperate climate in the Modern Era than in WW2, already 70 years old now. Modern Era already has everything that WW2 can possibly offer a wargamer and then far more on top of that. I am not so so pessimistic about a distant release date for CMSF2. It's not unlikely that it will be sometime later next year or early 2011 at worst. Why do I think that? We already have most of the kit required to make this game. Once the Temperate environment stuff has all been coded successfully into the game, then we just need some new building facades and we've got a game going. This means that the CMSF2 game most likely would be NATO v Russia as we've got a LOT of Russian kit done but no Chinese. My only real concern is that the Russians would be cast as the 'bad guys' in the background story. I like the Russians and I'd really like to do a proper Russian v NATO campaign played as RED. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theFightingSeabee Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 How about China and allies invade the US West Coast!? Plenty of varied terrain from temperate to desert, mountains to plains, rural to urban. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 How about China and allies invade the US West Coast!? Plenty of varied terrain from temperate to desert, mountains to plains, rural to urban. Only if we get Wolverines Uncons. 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.