CMSF Ripped from the headlines

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
I am looking at what is going in the mideast and North Africa and seeing a lot of very plausible scenarios:

Libya intervention by Egypt is as plausible, or maybe more so, as US invading Syria. We have most of the parts, if you use older M1A1s for frontline Egyptian tanks and move the timeline forward even just a few months for Libya to intergrate its new T72s and T90s into its frontline. Even without that, older T72s, T62s, and T55s could still be used. The NATO module gives you all kinds of oddball stuff that are used by both sides, like AIFVs and M113s. Both still use BMP1s and some BTR60 knockoffs. It would require quite a bit of fiddling with experience and motivation to make it work.

The other neat scenario might be a NATO intervention in Libya to seperate the two sides or push Egypt out. You could end up with M1 against M1 or Leopards in a plausible scenario. I think you could sub in the Leopard C2 as a plausible substitute for some Italian armor.

This is one of those things where I wished BFC had finished CMSF to make it easier to do stuff like this. Other than that, SPMBT is the only way to do it.

I am hoping the droves of CMSF scenario builders out there jump on this idea.

All countries involved have decent air forces and defense systems to make air superiority at least not a given for the US. And with the US still keeping an eye on Iraq, Astan, and Korea, it might even be plausible that NATO goes in with only logisitcal support from the US.
 

Palantir

Member #86
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
4,877
Reaction score
1,706
Location
The Heartland
Country
llUnited States
I do see your points but-
As far as BFC finishing its stuff in CMSF- never going to happen.

The "military" possibility of Libya vs. Egypt is completely uninteresting to me (and also will not happen, ditto for NATO bothering to get involved) but for the "droves" of CMSF scenario designers have fun with it.
 

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
Frankly, CMBN just doesn't float me right now. I see too many possibilities in CMSF for modern conflict with the NATO module finally being added to CMSF.

As far as WW2 goes, CM does most of what I want except Pacific. That is why CMSF still holds some sway over me. I find modern combat arms a little fresher than rehashing WW2 again.
 

Quellist

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
202
Reaction score
7
Location
Nowhere
Country
llCuba
These days they seem to be geared more towards selling episodic content to a smaller customer base that mostly enjoys playing singleplayer and thus they need to make sure that any single base game/module only keeps the customers interest for so long.

For example, if they only allowed reading scenario parameters/results to/from XML stuff like CMC and the different meta campaigns would be feasible without back breaking efforts. And that feature would be ridiculously easy to implement if they wanted to.
 

wengart

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
238
Reaction score
3
Location
Knossos
Country
ll
Actually, I was meaning to play a quick QB game based on Qaddafi massing troops in Tripoli. Large city with Syrian Militia and regular mech. troops defending against a hodgepodge of regulars and irregular fighters. Shortly afterwards I remembered QBs are broken as all hell.


These days they seem to be geared more towards selling episodic content to a smaller customer base that mostly enjoys playing singleplayer and thus they need to make sure that any single base game/module only keeps the customers interest for so long.
Although there appears to sufficient content within the CM:SF family to represent all forces involved or at least decent facsimiles of them.
 

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
Yeah, the only way for me to play this out is by by hotseat. I just can't be bothered spending days building AI plans with the limited toolset BFC gives you. And QBs just plain don't work for getting any where near forces you want. I hope BFC really doesn't wonder where all the community scenarios are.

As I started building this, I am reminded once again how horrible the OOB selection process is again. I can't believe that BFC actually thinks this is user-friendly in any way. Its barely usable.
 
Top