Future of CM:SF

[gibsonm]

Also we could have tactical nukes and a CAS option!!

On a 2km x 2km map?!

I think even a 1Kt Lance warhead would leave very little on the map (regardless of side), let alone the minimum 2Kt Honest John warhead.

[Sixxkiller]

Also we could have tactical nukes and a CAS option!!

I am all for it!

Imagine a guy who has xx years in the military getting beat by Charles. Now imagine when that happens you have a little "equalizer" to reverse the obvious cheat codes he put in to be in the position of beating you in the first place. :cool:

[vincere]

Are you referring to the J-20? Looks fancy but it remains to be seen what it's capabilities and potential are. Both China and Russia are known to be developing stealth fighters, but I agree that at this time China looks more interesting as the "RED" side in CMSF2 mostly because of their greater economic growth than Russia's. More money = more spending on fancy toys and training.

Yeah, the last I read a little more under the surface news was a couple of years ago. But assuming that the PLA is still developing the same they have a two tier structure. A core force that they are modernising with haste and still a mass army not so modernly equipped.

They are a little away from air superiority but certainly contest it in key areas.

If we digged deeper then there would be other interesting aspects. Long range large calibre arty, and although I doubt they'd set out to conduct human wave attacks again, likely a different loss tolerance.

China or Russia and I'll be happy. A cold war, gone hot circa 1985 coming just after.

[gibsonm]

China or Russia and I'll be happy. A cold war, gone hot circa 1985 coming just after.

Maybe we should go for China and Russia (some sort of back story about Siberian resources, etc.).

Terrain would be easy (bog or snow) and we wouldn’t have to put up with any of that boring US crap.

[dan/california]

Maybe we should go for China and Russia (some sort of back story about Siberian resources, etc.).

Terrain would be easy (bog or snow) and we wouldn’t have to put up with any of that boring US crap.

Certainly their would be none of that boring ROE silliness.

[LongLeftFlank]

Remember the Twilight 2000 RPG? Pretty imaginative and well researched work, and IIRC posited on a Soviet-Chinese war that then becomes a European and world (nuclear) war when NATO invades East Germany. Although anyone being able to field an even nominally mechanized army in a post-apocalypse world did strain credulity a bit.

It's pretty difficult to devise a plausible scenario where a US or NATO armoured force would go head to head with PLA mechanized forces CMSF style. Best bet would be the Korean peninsula in the wake of a second Korean War -- even if the Chinese weren't behind a North Korean invasion (unlikely, at least with their current leadership), they would certainly intervene quickly and seize a fair chunk of territory to keep Americans away from the Yalu border. So you could get:

(a) An "accidental" clash in the outskirts of Pyongyang between PLA armoured forces and US/ROK Marines moving in from the coast (the DMZ presumably being devastated).

( Later on, incidents along a "new DMZ" in the Chinese-occupied buffer zone.

© Ongoing guerrilla warfare by die-hard North Korean irregulars, abetted by China, against the "occupying forces".

But very hard to imagine a head-to-head ground clash. Even with major improvements in Chinese airpower and support arms.

[Alan8325]

But very hard to imagine a head-to-head ground clash. Even with major improvements in Chinese airpower and support arms.

Because of a nuclear apocalypse that wipes out all conventional ground forces or because the U.S. would be capable of defeating China's ground forces with other means before invading?

[vincere]

Remember the Twilight 2000 RPG? Pretty imaginative and well researched work, and IIRC posited on a Soviet-Chinese war that then becomes a European and world (nuclear) war when NATO invades East Germany. Although anyone being able to field an even nominally mechanized army in a post-apocalypse world did strain credulity a bit.

It's pretty difficult to devise a plausible scenario where a US or NATO armoured force would go head to head with PLA mechanized forces CMSF style. Best bet would be the Korean peninsula in the wake of a second Korean War -- even if the Chinese weren't behind a North Korean invasion (unlikely, at least with their current leadership), they would certainly intervene quickly and seize a fair chunk of territory to keep Americans away from the Yalu border. So you could get:

(a) An "accidental" clash in the outskirts of Pyongyang between PLA armoured forces and US/ROK Marines moving in from the coast (the DMZ presumably being devastated).

( Later on, incidents along a "new DMZ" in the Chinese-occupied buffer zone.

© Ongoing guerrilla warfare by die-hard North Korean irregulars, abetted by China, against the "occupying forces".

But very hard to imagine a head-to-head ground clash. Even with major improvements in Chinese airpower and support arms.

I like that scenario. Can never say never. Things can change an awful lot in 5 years, ask Uncle Joe.

Same goes for US or west's ROE and loss tolerance. I remember much being made about US being fickle to losses because of Vietnam. Well, I think the public is tolerating them now there's no draft. Put a decade of resession and threat to nation in the mix and the scenarioes can change quite a bit.

Gibson, I like the idea of either China or Russia with CMSF3 being the one that wasn't chosen.

Also I don't know much about this, but I get the impression that China is worried about internal problems. Is it out of the realms of possibility that during a Korean intervention that they have internal war that US gets involved in. Kind of thinking aloud here.

Also, at what point does China make a move to intervene somewhere like Africa to protect its interests.

[Erwin]

Africa highly unlikely. Closer to home in S. China Sea area, it started years ago with conflict with Japan of tiny rocks in the Ocean.

I recall vividly how during the Falklands War, how UK was adamant there was no oil or anything other than the moral issue at stake. I just knew that was BS and today, guess what, oil reserves found all around there.

China is in increasingly desperate state re oil due to fast urbanization and increasing cars. (Altho' anyone who's been there knows they don't have the roads.) However, similar-ish position as Argentina, except with huge armed forces and set to rule the world in a decade or two thanks to US/Bush twittery, (unless they can be persuaded to have a war - mostly likely with India).

[LongLeftFlank]

By the way, this is an extremely important topic for BFC to consider. Putting Chinese (or Korean) forces into a Combat Mission product has huge potential to attract a gigantic new audience for the game.

In this case, as a software company, BFC needs to consider a critical business question (and their CMA experience with the Russian audience may inform this): will they actually generate any revenues, or will the game simply be hacked and pirated on day 3 after release?

Also, please note that the moral circumstances surrounding a Third World War pitting US "main forces" against their Chinese counterparts would likely be vastly murkier than the CMSF Syrian backstory. That one was a total soft-pitch -- Syrian-enabled terrorists kill a bunch of white people, Syrian regime refuses to disavow it and pays the price. Pretty clear morally who the "good guys" are in that one, even though we're invading their country.

Assuming that the venue for such a scenario would be Asia (as opposed to a "Red Dawn" type thing on US soil), the moral circumstances -- big picture here -- would be far murkier.

Even in a Korean War Part II scenario, where the US and Chinese forces come to blows over the prostrate corpse of North Korea, the morality isn't clear. The Americans would see it as simply fulfilling their longtime obligations to the ROK as an ally, and disposing of a dangerous rogue nuclear gangster regime even more odious than Saddam's Iraq. And the Chinese are recklessly interfering in the reunification/rebuilding of the Korean nation. Oh, and a fair number of American troops have lost their lives in this cause over the past month or so (particularly if the KPA popped nukes and chemicals in their initial attack) -- sunk cost.

The Chinese, on the other hand, would see the US presence in Korea as the tail end of an awful* 500 year pattern of exploitative Western meddling (and far worse!) in what was, for most of human history, China's sandbox -- including in China itself. Kind of a Chinese Monroe Doctrine, if you will.

And there is some truth in that view, even though the Japanese, Koreans, Vietnamese and Filipinos wouldn't necessarily like it any more than the Mexicans or Cubans do. Enough truth that the Chinese would likely see the forcible ejection of the last "white army" (not counting the Russians) from mainland East Asia as a just and reasonable cause. Especially when that army was now advancing to their own borders. Which means the Chinese soldiers would fight hard and cunningly, with all the resources at their disposal.

US mechanized ground forces intervening in some kind of Chinese civil war would end up as another lopsided asymetrical fight with Chinese tanks instead of T90s, and I think BFC has learned its lesson on that one. And would definitely make the US the "bad guys", harking back to the imperialist Opium Wars and Boxer Rebellion.

BTW, all of the above also means that Chinese players will see themselves as the "good guys" in any hypothetical CM game they play, not as another set of faceless hordes for the US to butcher.

Curious: are there any Chinese or Korean (and I mean culturally as opposed to genetically) CMSF players on the forums? What do you think about what I have said?

* Although the US Navy benevolently guarding an endless stream of Chinese exports flowing across the Pacific to WalMart under extremely generous terms of trade since 1980 could be argued to be a significant goodwill gift or reparation to China, enabling their super-rapid modernization. But that wouldn't necessarily occur to the average Chinese soldier, or hardline demagogue.

[hcrof]

Good post.

I have to say though, the idea of the US and China fighting a major war with each other is ridiculous. They both rely on each other to keep their economies afloat. Potshots over the border or a few naval clashes is as hot as it will ever get even if relations take a dramatic turn for the worse.

In fact, I cannot personally see the US entering into a war with an equal(ish) opponent any time soon. I would be interested to see the backstory of a game like that but it would be so convoluted as to be implausible even at first glance. Even before the shakey US economy they never had a habit of picking fair fights. (That is not a criticism as such - deliberately going to expeditionary war knowing you might lose is stupid).

Now a Fulda Gap type scenario may have also been pretty unlikely at the time but is certainly more plausible than any big 21st century war.

[Erwin]

I agree with hcrof re any sort of conventional war. However, arguably we have been at war with China (and probably other nations) for a couple decades in terms of economic war, and Cyberwar etc.

Our systems are constantly under attack, and we know that most come from servers in Russia or China. All it will take is one day they figure out how to crash our financial system or turn off the power to a major part of the country (maybe already done in the past?), or penetrate our satellite communications... (And of course we are doing the same thing, constantly searching for vulnerabilities.)

They don't have to do it, just prove that they can do it and we lose the "war." We are in a world where the civilian pop is really left in the dark about what is really going on. No company or nation will admit they have been penetrated (unless for some reason it is undeniable).

Our wonderful conventional forces are really only good vs third-world countries these days, and have been the equivalent of the "Maginot Line" for some time now.

[ChrisND]

They don't have to do it, just prove that they can do it and we lose the "war."

Until we plug the gap and then the "war" continues. And vice versa for them.

[vincere]

Good post.

I have to say though, the idea of the US and China fighting a major war with each other is ridiculous. They both rely on each other to keep their economies afloat. Potshots over the border or a few naval clashes is as hot as it will ever get even if relations take a dramatic turn for the worse.

.

Agreed that it's a good post. Disagree that it's rediculous- depending on the time frame.

There are plenty of possibilities that we can think of; and most likely the next big war will be the ones we won't.

In 1985 who would believe that Russia would be soft helping NATO fighting in Afghanistan. With Polish and Estonian and all the other less publicised contingents. Africa, unlikely yes; but possible. Chinese soveriegn fund is investing heavily there expanding influence for securing scarce resources. Their approach is attractive- we invest without the interference in internal government that you get with the west. Somewhere other than N Korea or Formosa could get the conflict started in an area where people think it can be limited.

I'll have to be in a minority. Probably also a minority in thinking that China may not stay the long course to become the overwhelming super power that the US was.

[LongLeftFlank]

Well, proxy wars are a bit of a different animal than head-to-head battlefield confrontations between superpowers.

And while there's ample room for argument on this point, it was easy enough to see the storm clouds brewing in Europe in 1910 and in 1935 -- many did. Not so today.

And if you push your epic confrontation any further than about 5 years into the future to allow for the needed socioeconomic disruptions, regime changes, etc. (China or America wouldn't become a militant dictatorship overnight), you then need to consider whether the armies themselves won't be quite different then (e.g. robot tanks, ED-209, whatever). And that all becomes science fiction quite rapidly -- might as well roll in the Space Lobsters.

I'm not sure many of the CM core market would be up for that. I know I wouldn't be. One man's view.

[Erwin]

"it was easy enough to see the storm clouds brewing in Europe in 1910 and in 1935 -- many did. Not so today."

Don't know if it was easy - harbingers of doom were ignored (eg: Churchill). Nobody wanted to hear about it. Also, the issue is what gets done about it. Nothing was done in 1910 or until the mid-thirties, and little is being done now cos we've brainwashed everyone (in the US) that we're such a supreme power that nothing can touch us. The truth is that our system is very fragile.

The financial and economic crisis devastated millions and the real fallout has barely begun.

[vincere]

Well, proxy wars are a bit of a different animal than head-to-head battlefield confrontations between superpowers.

And while there's ample room for argument on this point, it was easy enough to see the storm clouds brewing in Europe in 1910 and in 1935 -- many did. Not so today.

And if you push your epic confrontation any further than about 5 years into the future to allow for the needed socioeconomic disruptions, regime changes, etc. (China or America wouldn't become a militant dictatorship overnight), you then need to consider whether the armies themselves won't be quite different then (e.g. robot tanks, ED-209, whatever). And that all becomes science fiction quite rapidly -- might as well roll in the Space Lobsters.

I'm not sure many of the CM core market would be up for that. I know I wouldn't be. One man's view.

Touche. Another good post. Yep agreed keep it in the near future. Catastrophic economic collapse would shuffle things about a bit. Some strategic error like Bin Ladin's 9/11. I doubt this though because the Chinese are rational, long view players and like I said they have to keep one eye formly inwards. but who knows...

One thing's for sure: things can't keep going on like they have been for past 15- 20 years. It'd be worth reading some serious analysis. The US is not KO'd yet; and China is not past the first rounds so we'll have to see.

To be honest, as far as hitting the buttons for me, Russia does that more; but if China comes first maybe we'll have Russia to look forward to.

[LongLeftFlank]

Of course, since it's only a game we can just suspend disbelief and spin any backstory we please, while heaving a sigh of relief that the spectre of good looking American kids and good looking Chinese kids killing each other en masse is pretty unlikely. But in that case, my earlier point that you're likely to have a lot of Chinese players. Besides wanting to see themselves as the good guys as opposed to anonymous yellow hordes, they will also be deeply offended by any kind of "untermensching" of their forces, real or imagined. Stuff like inability to split squads like white boys won't fly no matter what doctrine Steve cites. It's Pandora's box.... If you don't beleive me, try criticizing the Chinese growth model on any investment discussion site and see what happens. They take it as an affront to their national pride and literally shout you down.

One man's view, again.

[LongLeftFlank]

But if you want to war-game tomorrow's headlines, check out what's going down in Pakistan..... The next Islamic Republic in the making there. With the Bomb.

Gigantic CMSF potential there, with the arid/mountain terrain set perfectly relevant. Start with a brutal Red vs Red campaign as the Indian Army plows clumsily into Pakistan. My guess is after about 48 hours of conventional armoured warfare the Pakistani army goes largely Uncon Fighter, but with more ATGMs. Of course the Indians take a slightly dimmer view of ROE once a bunch of their kids burn to death in their tanks...

Meanwhile, in addition to wiping out the PAF and any missile forces, the US/NATO has to secure the Pakistani nuclear arsenal before they either press the button or ship them to Iran or worse, AQ. And occupy the rest of lovely hospitable Pushtunistan (aka NWFP). Meet the new Tora Bora, infidel b*tchez, with OBL sitting on a Hiroshima nuke ticking away next to his dialysis machine hoping to take a bunch of Crusader spec ops forces with him to Paradise....

So you now have all the deep airborne commando raid scenarios you can possibly imagine, badly outnumbered, surrounded and outgunned except for air support with Ffailure Not an Option. Challenging stuff.

A little too much like Syria for BFC to do a module, methinks. At the end it would still be a superpower killing Muslims asymetrically in a sandy rocky place. But all the tools are there.

[meade95]

But if you want to war-game tomorrow's headlines, check out what's going down in Pakistan..... The next Islamic Republic in the making there. With the Bomb.

Gigantic CMSF potential there, with the arid/mountain terrain set perfectly relevant. Start with a brutal Red vs Red campaign as the Indian Army plows into Pakistan. Meanwhile, in addition to wiping out the PAF and any missile forces, the US/NATO has to secure the Pakistani nuclear arsenal before they either press the button or ship them to Iran or worse, AQ. And occupy the rest of lovely hospitable Pushtunistan (aka NWFP). Meet the new Tora Bora, infidel b*tchez, with OBL sitting on a Hiroshima nuke ticking away next to his dialysis machine hoping to take a bunch of Crusader spec ops forces with him to Paradise....

So you now have all the deep airborne commando raid scenarios you can possibly imagine, badly outnumbered, surrounded and outgunned except for air support with Ffailure Not an Option. Challenging stuff.

A little too much like Syria for BFC to do a module, methinks. At the end it would still be a superpower killing Muslims asymetrically in a sandy rocky place. But all the tools are there.

+1 - Would love this addition / mod with CMSF or as a mod to CMSF-2, more likely.

Pakistan, since the Musharraff gov't fell has gone from a quasi-ally to now being a strategic liability. That is a huge game changer. Some would suggest it has always been the latter. Though, others would contend, and I would be one to agree, Mush ties within the ISI were worth more than most gave credit to.

[LongLeftFlank]

Which is almost inevitable given that the PAF officer class is heavily mountain tribesmen, from ultraconservative Muslim backgrounds. These were the same guys who overran India under the (Turco-Iranian) Mughals way back when. They don't represent the more secular urban Pakistani middle class, but they have the guns. And the birth rate. The moderate Indianized Islam of Jinnah and Bhutto is on the run. Bad things will happen.

[meade95]

Bhutto clain is as corrupt as any that have ever ruled in Pak - Especially the husband - Sans any true allegiance from within the ISI. Terrible combination at this stage for both Pak and the world outside of it.

The sh*tty reality is.....The Pak's have as they see it a "good" and "bad" Taliban. Problem is for us, we have more then helped them with their choosen "bad Taliban" but it is their "good Taliban" that we truly need taken out....that are most assoicated with AQ/AQ mimics.

Yet they see this "good Taliban" as their first line of defense Vs India and as their proxy influence going forward in a developing Astan...... There is no great surprise that HVTs of Pak's "bad Taliban" are routinely taken out within these lawless border regions (by us). The HUMINT is clearly provided.....yet HUMINT on good Taliban / AQ elements is non-existent.

The time has long passed now though, where we need to tell them come hell or high water, XY and Z individuals / elements are going to be taken out.....They would be best to be fully on board.......after / as that is accomplished they can still maintain their "good Taliban" (with new leadership and without AQ assoication) for reasons they see fit....

Our only other option, is to find our own young, meanest, baddest, knuckle dragging Pastun MFer and give him all the butter, guns and gold treasure he desires as long as he brings us scalps from this region...

[dan/california]

Of course, since it's only a game we can just suspend disbelief and spin any backstory we please, while heaving a sigh of relief that the spectre of good looking American kids and good looking Chinese kids killing each other en masse is pretty unlikely. But in that case, my earlier point that you're likely to have a lot of Chinese players. Besides wanting to see themselves as the good guys as opposed to anonymous yellow hordes, they will also be deeply offended by any kind of "untermensching" of their forces, real or imagined. Stuff like inability to split squads like white boys won't fly no matter what doctrine Steve cites. It's Pandora's box.... If you don't beleive me, try criticizing the Chinese growth model on any investment discussion site and see what happens. They take it as an affront to their national pride and literally shout you down.

One man's view, again.

I just don't think games in this genre have any Asian market to speak of, Something Steve has mentioned numerous times. Would a US-Chin aCMSF2 change that much? I have no idea.

[dan/california]

I would, love a game/module based on Pakistan coming unglued, more than a little relevant. More unglued would probably be more accurate. Arguably it is a little too relevant.....

Tunisia seems to be in the process of demonstrating that tipping points are very hard to see until they are in the rear view mirror.

[LongLeftFlank]

I just don't think games in this genre have any Asian market to speak of, Something Steve has mentioned numerous times. Would a US-Chin aCMSF2 change that much? I have no idea.

Interesting. But including Asian armies in the game might change that quickly. AFAIK, Military history sells no worse in Asia than it does in the West. This based on my perusing the local language books in bookstores in Asia.