Looking for a player - Any CM 2

[cplkrotz]

Hello:

I would like to play a Combat Mission 2 game. I have all of the World War II versions of Combat Mission. I have all of the modules and the updates. I will play any scenario that you would like using any version of CM 2 that you may like. However, before we begin let's make sure we are module compatible - see below.

I was trying to play a scenario from the Scenario Depot called Hill 621 with another player but the game bugged out at the 10 minute mark when reinforcements arrived. The player did not have Fire and Rubble, which has led me to the conclusion that Hill 621 was not working because of this. At the start, I informed my opponent that I had all and was updated with of the CM 2 World War II games. I assumed they had the same when we started. When Hill 621 did not work, we agreed to set up a meeting engagement, but it did not work because he did not have Fire and Rubble. Anyway to end this story, I told my opponent to create a scenario using their own version of Red Thunder but I have not have heard back from them.

I have been hoping for a scenario of the month but the organizers for that ladder have not set one up yet. Maybe Cat or Raz will do so soon. I guess it depends if all of the Blitz members are engaged. So, I am back trying to find an opponent.

As a player, I put myself in the middle of the road because I have played 12 scenarios. I am  generally still at the novice level, although I think I will be an okay competitor for medium players.

Usually, I can do about 3 turns + a week. This depends on both player's scheduling though.

Again, If interested please let me know.

P.S. I am debating getting COM Cold War or CM Shock Force. If you have either please let me know which one you think of them. I would be tempted to buy one of the version if there was a particular game you wanted to play.

I have been hoping that Battlefront would make a Pacific Theater version of CM 2. I suppose they could roll North Africa into Fortress Italy. Gazala, Tobruk and El Alaamein would all be interesting.

[LuckyLlama]

Hi

I sent you PM

[Westland]

@cplkrotz

The Pacific and Africa are selling poorly.In the Pacific, the weak land material of the Japanese.
In Africa there are too few tactical options because of the terrain. Infantry dies faster there than in other CM modules.
And tanks have fire control computers in the new CM games, at least 99% of the time they hit with the first shot.
Instead, grenades are now deflected by branches and leaves.Bizarre.Since there are no trees in the desert, tanks will go up in flames even faster.

[cplkrotz]

@cplkrotz

The Pacific and Africa are selling poorly.In the Pacific, the weak land material of the Japanese.
In Africa there are too few tactical options because of the terrain. Infantry dies faster there than in other CM modules.
And tanks have fire control computers in the new CM games, at least 99% of the time they hit with the first shot.
Instead, grenades are now deflected by branches and leaves.Bizarre.Since there are no trees in the desert, tanks will go up in flames even faster.

Do you know this information from attempting to produce it? What do you mean by selling poorly?

I suppose they could include a Banzai feature for the Japanese. It is not like the Japanese were pushovers. Guadalcanal was a close thing. In China and Burma they did quite well until the end. It may be that Japan would always be on the defensive though although that was not always the case in China, Burma, Philippines (etc). They could go so far as to model Bataan or the Battle for Manila for both sides.

In North Africa, I suppose there is much desert, but then again Tobruk was not all desert nor was El Alamein (such as the El Taqua Plateau). Gazala had strategic "boxes" so I agree there was little in terms of natural defenses when the Germans attacked. I think there is room for a North Africa Campaign, but then again they could roll North Africa into Fortress Italy. I suspect if you are aware that the old CM 1 had a North African stand alone version and it may be what you have said sold poorly.

Are you saying that the tanks of WW II would have fire control computers? I doubt they would simulate that for a North Africa game. I would guess for Shock Force 2 the computers are there but not for WW II. So, these are two completely different issues. It would be a computer game designer modeling issue for North Africa World War II (i.e. where the tank or anti-tank shell hits the tank). On a side note, I am surprised Battlefront has not done CM Iraq or Afghanistan and that Shock Force 2 is based solely on a hypothetical war.

I would imagine that any game to do with North Africa or the Pacific theater during the Second World War could be based on after action reports that do not always give one side a clear cut win

[Westland]

@cplkrotz

But most of the fights with the Japanese are in the jungle.That means little tanks only pure artillery and infantry fighting.
And the little heavy material used by the Japanese is scrap.This has already been tried in other strategy games with Japan (Sudden Strike 2, Men Of War 2 MP, Steel Panthers).Most of the players turned down Japanese forces.

That’s exactly what I mean. CMAK had already tried to make the African theater more palatable in 2003.But it failed, and most players refused, preferring to play the 1943-45 Italian front.

By "fire control computer" I meant that in CMBN,FI,FB,RT all tanks hit better, more precisely, further and faster than in the old CM games.As if all of a sudden they all had modern fire control computers.That would make an Africa scenario even more pointless.
Since you cannot camouflage or hide units in CMx2 anyway and all units are recognized very quickly (despite houses, trees, forests, hedges). So infantry would have 0% chance of somehow approaching in the desert.

[WhiteWolf65]

I have all the CMx2 game titles with the exception of Shock Force 2. The United States and NATO units simply outgun everything that the Syrian or insurgent forces can muster. The same can be said about Black Sea. Russian vs. United States is a joke, especially at night. I did a little experiment once when I had a complete Russian armoured battalion with T-90AM go against one platoon of the M1A2 SEPv2 (APS) Abrams. The Abrams were killing the T-90s at ranges in excess of 2000 meters. Only one Abrams was tracked. All of the T-90s were turned into junk within five minutes of game time. The United States has far better equipment than the Russians do and the Russians have far better equipment than the Ukrainians. As for Cold War, it is a little more balanced than Black Sea. My absolute favorite CMx2 title is Fortress Italy/Gustav Line/Rome to Victory.

I noticed that someone mentioned the Japanese and Afrika Korps. Don't hold your breath for either of these games to be released as CMx? games. I am fairly confident that the next games/modules will either be an update for Final Blitzkrieg or the a big update for NATO units in Cold War or Black Sea.

Chris.

[Westland]

@WhiteWolf65

Indeed, the T-90 are inferior to most NATO tanks, as was evident in the game Steel Panthers 2 as early as 1996.
In any case, only the Leopard 2 made it against the M1A2. Back then I had all tanks compete against each other extensively from different epochs.
In the 1950s, the Russians excelled with the T-55 and T-10.Only the English Conqueror (FV214) could have a say.
In the 1960s the Russians still dominated with T-62 and T-64.The English Tank Chieftain could keep up a bit.
In the 1970s the Russians were at the height of tank building with the T-72.All other countries were able to crack the T-72 with their tanks, but only with self-abandonment. Then at the end of the 1970s the Russians lost their tank quality with the M1A1, Leopard 2 and Merkava.
From the 80s onwards the M1A1 and later the M1A2, Leopard 2, Merkava, Challenger 2 dominated.
I wasn't that happy with the French Leclerc against T-90.