- East Africa, 1930s (Abyssinian War; early WW2 Italy vs GB) - Spanish Civil War (lots of equipment, and units from different countries) - Anything involving the Japanese (lots of enemies and decades to choose from)
Korea wouldn't be that far off, between Red Thunder and Final Blitzkrieg, we have most of the eastern and western weapons and vehicles already made. If treated like Italy, you could realistically depict the entire conflict using expansions.
I keep hoping for an early war game, operation Barbarossa or battle for France timeline. The early development of tanks really makes that time shine for a history perspective.
Yes a Barbarossa Game would be very nice. When excluding the first few months (which were so onesided that they probably wouldn't be much fun to play) a Barbarossa Game could start with the battle of Moscow, cover rzhev and Case Blau and end with Stalingrad. For the Germans it would all be about preserving their forces while achieving Victory whereas the Soviets need to inflict maximum casualties, no matter the cost
It’s mentioned elsewhere but I would love to see it go to Korea next. Everything from Task Force Smith to the loss of Daejeon, the defense of the Busan perimeter, Chosin, any of the 4 battles for Seoul would be great scenarios. Plus it gives way to see a lot unique factions including China, North Korea, United States, UK, Turkey and a bunch of other banners under the UN command. I think the British/Dutch/Indian/Chinese fight against the Japanese in Southeast Asia deserves more attention as well.
that would be awesome, I was thinking Vietnam but people mention they cant put helicopters in the game and tunnels. There is a mod for it i havent tried though
"Recent events seem to indicate otherwise". Sums it all up really. For years in the Arma community we have been complaining about the AI walking down the middle of the road, driving over blatant landmines, driving AA vehicles off of bridges and into the sea, infantry not reacting to contact instead choosing to lie down in the middle of the road and just stare at the enemy etc. Turns out that all along the system has been perfectly simulated and we just didn't know it yet.
I don't think that conflict has changed anyones mind though, and the people who think it's relevant is entirely missing the point of the complaints. I've only ever seen two arguments made. One is that Redfor units set to equivalent training and motivation with equal equipment should not magically preform worse then Bluefor units. The other is that some Redfor vehicles are underperforming, but that's harder to tell compared to the first argument. That's why videos of poorly trained and badly lead conscripts derping around only seems relevant the uninformed or otherwise.
It's so wild seeing how far these games have come. I remember the first Combat Mission game coming out when I was a kid. Back at the start of Covid I was messing around with the Afghanistan demo, which was a lot of fun. Now, after weeks of playing the Black Seas demo, I finally grabbed the full game, and it's been a blast!
Quite a long time ago, CM was trying to develop an operations campaign that carried over from battle to battle, with an operations map for moving forces and logistics. They gave up on it, but I wish they would give it a second look. Beyond that, I wish they would do an Afrika Korps upgrade from the older game engine.
Worth to note Battlefront has great and quite knowledgeable community - average age there must be something like 60, which is almost unprecedented in gaming. There is phantastic topic there (currently standing at 2200+ pages) about current war in Ukraine, if somebody is interested in checking how events and trends unfold. Really helps you understand war from "behind the curtains".
If only they had someone who could code a modern engine with an interface control scheme that ventures past the late 90s. I ain't knocking them, the games are terrific in content, but the software is painful to use.
I'd assume the guy making the games just likes the engine because he's literally been using it 20+ years. How do you really switch over to something new at that point? It's like Bethesda. You'd really think in the intervening decades they'd have put a small team on the side making a new engine for the future. But the games work and nothing really simulates a battlefield quite like the games.@@serch3ster
Combat Mission Beyond Normandy will always be my favorite since it's my Grandfather's theater of war. I'm very happy it's getting a battle pack expansion, but I always hoped it would get expansions to completely flesh out the war in 1944 France and the low countries: Uncon units representing French partisans, allied OOBs reflecting the overlord beach assault teams, DD tanks, tank riding infantry, dedicated Free French units.....it's one of the most popular TOW in wargaming, and I just wish they would squeeze all the available goodness out of it.
I absolutely loved playing as the Italians in CMFI with their clunky squad system and tankettes. Would kill to to see a Spanish Civil War CM. I know it would not sell very well at all, but one can always dream.
If they did do North Africa, we’d probably get Operation Torch first, since BF likes to lead with the Americans, then expand the timeframe backwards to add the British. It would be interesting to see the Vichy French as a faction in an Operation Torch module.
My first Combat Mission is the Cold War one. Still getting used to the vehicle combat there, with the early incarnations of ATGMs and all round high lethality of it. A kickass game tho, love to learn the intricacies of it. Maybe the next one I'll get is Battle for Normandy one
This is super helpful. I'm often down on RUclips's algorith, but this week the algorithm brought me to your channel (and thus introduced me to Combat Mission). I've been jamming with WARNO, Wargame, Steel Division, and Men of War, but this looks like the next step up from those. This is super helpful as a means of getting up to speed on the franchise, and your other vids are super exciting teasers of what I have to look forward to!
What's interesting is the Soviets most likely wouldn't rush the Fulda gap, instead going north through the Dutch zone and go for the ports on the North sea. Wouldn't change too much, but always thought it was interesting how fixated the NATO was on Fulda.
Might be more accurate to say that there's a lot of focus on the Fulda Gap because that was where US forces were going to fight- certainly the Soviet main effort was going to be further north
@@usuallyhapless9481 Exactly right. Fulda was the focus for Americans. From the NATO perspective overall, the biggest danger was faced by the British Army of the Rhine covering the flat North German plain. Due to a quirk of how WWII ended, the British -- the weakest of the major NATO Cold War armies -- was tasked with defending the most dangerous and exposed avenue of advance.
Poles were supposed to go for Denmark and northern West Germany together with East Germans, eventually coming to Netherlands with whatever remained + Soviet seconda strategic 'wave'. Fulda was absolutely on the table though
This was an interesting video! I haven't played a CM game since the original three games, and I was interested in them again now that a WW2 CM has finally been released. I'm just a simple guy who loves strategy games, not a wargaming buff, so it was nice to see the modern titles being discussed in a clear manner here. Thanks!
I would also like to give a shout-out to Combat Mission: Afrika Korps, and Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin. They do an excellent job of filling the gaps in what the CMx2 engine has yet to cover, to a point, with Afrika Korps covering everything from the beginning of the fighting in North Africa in 1940 up to and beyond where Fortress Italy picks up. Barbarossa to Berlin covers the entire eastern front, and is great for getting in everything that comes before the setting of Red Thunder. The one downside is that they are using the previous generation Combat Mission engine, CMx1, which is noticeably not as good as the CMx2 engine used by every Combat Mission game since 2007. But I'm happy to overlook that, on the grounds that the CMx1 engine is still the second best game engine in the world after only the CMx2 engine. Another downside is that, even going back to the CMx1 titles, there is still no Combat Mission game covering the really early operations of WW2, from the Invasion of Poland to the Battle of France.
For some reason, I just had a lot more fun playing CM1 than CM2. Last year sometime, I cranked up CM1 and it still worked on my computer but the visuals were really basic. CM2 visuals are just so much superior to CM1. I imagine gameplay would still be superb with CM1 though.
I would like to see a modernised version of Combat Mission Barbarossa and Afrika Korps. I liked in that game the maps were truly dynamically created depending on the settings you put in beforehand. No two maps were alike. For some reason the games that followed got rid of this ability to randomly generate maps which I find puzzling. Another thing is I keep having issues downloading the games on steam. I downloaded Shock Force a year ago and it would not start so I returned it.
Having only played CMBS, I can say it's a lot of (quite intense) fun. Thinking of getting one of the WW2 titles next, trying to decide between Fortress Italy and Red Thunder. Fortress Italy seems to have the most variety and flavour (lots of factions and covers a very lengthy time period), plus it's a very under-explored theatre of WW2. Red Thunder showcases the Eastern Front, which I personally find the most interesting. I wish they would add more countries to Red Thunder though, like the Romanians, Hungarians and Poles (both Armija Krajowa and Armija Ludowa). Especially since the Romanians would be on the Axis side until August '44, but in the late missions would be Soviet allies going up against the Hungarians + Germans.
Great overview! When I saw the time (13:16) on the video, I was doubtful you could cover them in any meaningful depth. But you packed a ton of useful information into a short format. Thanks for doing this.
IMO: Objectively probably Battle for Normandy or Fortress Italy, however my favorite settings are Red Thunder and Final Blitzkrieg. Guess I just like snow and tank riding.
I got Fortress Italy because of interest in the theater, and it's a great game, but it does get tiring having mission after mission of frontal assaults up mountains under artillery cover. Like I get that's what the Italian theatre was, but after playing it, it's even more insane to me that the allies wasted 3 years and thousands of lives in that effort.
I think I was a part of the comment chain that inspired the video, either way happy to see you feel the same way I do about Battle for Normandy being a good game to learn the ropes in! As for modern Blue vs Red balance, I don't think that conflict has changed anyones mind, and the people who think it's relevant is entirely missing the point of the complaints. I've only ever seen two arguments made. One is that Redfor units set to equivalent training and motivation with equal equipment should not magically preform worse then Bluefor units. The other is that some Redfor vehicles are underperforming, but that's harder to tell compared to the first argument. That's why videos of poorly trained and badly lead conscripts derping around only seems relevant to those missing the point.
All the CM titles I own (1st and 2nd generation) have given me years of solid single and multiplayer gameplay and entertainment . I definitely feel I got my money’s worth with each title & DLCs. If in doubt try their demos.
I do advocate giving Combat Mission: Afghanistan a try. It's just a really interesting mix of forces. It's noticeably less asymmetric than CMSF2 (in CMSF2 I can routinely achieve loss ratios of 10:1, 20:1, or sometimes even 30:1, while in CMA I tend to fall more in the range of 3-10:1), even though by all rights it really should be more asymmetric than CMSF2 (the Mujahideen have no armored vehicles, no artillery or air support, and a large proportion of their rifles are old bolt-action rifles (some mix of the terrain, the old 1980s Soviet technology, and shortcomings in Soviet force structure seems to be closing the gap somewhat)). Before CMCW was released this was the only title that gave us access to the Soviet forces of this era, which are really interesting. Now that CMCW is released I think it makes for an interesting side-story/expansion to CMCW (see how the same Soviet forces perform in a completely different environment against a completely different opponent). In practical terms I think it's a good game for easing your way into modern combat if you're accustomed to the WW2 titles (technology is at a good halfway point between WW2 and modern, you are facing a weaker opponent, and you still get some sense of how best to use newer weapons (probably better than jumping right into high intensity peer to peer combat with CMCW, where you will be in for a painful learning curve if you are still used to WW2)).
Now that CMBN is out I guess its a good video. Can't wait for what you will say in the video. I personally want that Fortress Italy and Final Blitzkrieg come out on steam next.
I hope that its FI or FB BUT with the volkssturm module (the one u mentioned extending the war to 1945) You already know that I'm a bit if an insurgent myself
My first one was CM Shock Force 2 which is amazing and when on harder difficulty can be challenging but since its so advanced and everyone having radios and so forth it kills the games mechanics a bit for me. Hoping to get Battle Normandy next.
I think with how the AI works as to which i mean they will follow orders without a large amount of leeway in diverting from those orders is what makes CM:RT the most realistic towards how a soviets would act during that time
I have played the three modern titles exclusivly up until now, didn't even know the game existed until it hit steam, and just got Battle for Normandy as it released on steam. And I'm not going crazy right? The pixeltruppen seem considerably quicker on their feet and tire less quickly, right? I guess they carry less gear so it makes sense, but still, it's a weird first thing to notice when it's such a shift in gear and organization from modern-era and my first impression is "Gosh, these guys can actually sprint!".
I like that Red Thunder covers 1944-45. Most Eastern front wargames focus on 1942 or 1943 and even then usually only on either Stalingrad or Kursk. Stalingrad in particular is way overdone in general. Still I do hope we get some combat mission games covering the early and mid war someday.
I would like to see a video that maybe highlights some of the features in Combat Mission Professional versus in the commercial games, if that’s still a thing that has any meaningful differences
The thing I'm going to say is that CM has a very... interesting understanding of how the level of warfare they want to simulate (just throw a battalion into battle) vs. granularity (I'm going to split off a scout team off this squad and tell it to pick up a Panzerfaust from an APC). Plus, with the modern titles, it seems like the map sizes remain unchanged without accounting for the fact that modern sensors and weapons can reach out and touch someone far further out. Another thing is that CM is still not very user friendly. No mouse-over popups to explain anything, you have to go into manuals for everything including the tutorials, and setting up quick battles never says how many points you'll get, giving you instead abstract measurements like "tiny" or "average". It gets worse if you want to build an army for quick battle as you invariably have to cut it down from, like, a battalion size unit to a platoon without being able to remove the top level HQs, so depending on the game, you may end up dragging along two-three HQ units with nothing to do. And of course, the unit stats/composition aren't shown during this force building exercise, so you have to look at the manual. Something you don't have to do in games ranging from SPMBT to Armored Brigade to Flashpoint Campaigns. So I'd say the WW2 titles are better off!
And this is why I've never gotten into the 2nd generation of Combat Mission titles. I +loved+ the first generation of Combat Mission games. Barbarossa to Berlin was one of the best wargame experiences I've ever had. But when I tried to move up to Shock Force, I found that each turn required so much decision-making across so many levels of command that the scenarios were incredibly time-consuming. Either I focused at higher levels and made faster decisions, but then sacrificed a lot of avoidable casualties, or I micro-managed each squad and element. But doing that at battalion scale with the incredible lethality of modern warfare was too time-consuming for the enjoyment I received. YMMV.
I have CMSF 2 and Black Sea but have not had time to play. I got them because I loved the older Afrika Korp and Barbarossa games. Going on leave for the whole of December and it looks like I won't be bored
My first foray into CM was shock force 2 and battle for Normandy. One modern, and one not. And I built my collection around those two. In hindsight I would have probably gone for Black Sea/Cold War first instead of CMSF2 purely because the campaigns are toe to toe conventional forces. Where as in SF2 the campaigns are a bit one sided in terms of equipment etc.
It really comes down which theatres interest you the most. You can set up peer-peer fights in Shock Force, just as Red vs Red or Blue vs Blue. Black Sea and Cold War have their own problems.
"Shock Force 2 is the only Combat Mission game so far to feature unconventional forces" This is not strictly true, as Red Thunder's Fire and Rubble expansion also added partisans to the mix.
True. Unconventional game mechanics might be more what I meant. There's no mechanism for partisans to hide amongst the population like there is for the Uncons in SF2
No way that they have the Brazilian forces in fortress Italy I had no idea! I'm into the modern titles, and was thinking to get battle for normandy now, but guess fortress Italy plus the pack are my scope now.
Be careful, CMFI is a difficult game compared to other ww2 CM games. US squads in 1943 have no SMG's and many guys still have M1903's. This makes it very difficult to fight on some of the mountain warfare maps when you're going against MG-42's with Springfields and BARs.
No mention of the CMx1 games :P I would actually recommend those first to people who either 1) don't have a gaming PC or 2) don't yet feel motivated to spend $60 to buy one of the CMx2 games, assuming they don't mind the old-school graphics. They're still a ton of fun to play multiplayer, especially if you play with TCP/IP using Hamachi (so you can get through a full game in an hour). As for future games, I most want to see a Combat Mission: Taiwan, depicting a hypothetical Chinese invasion of Taiwan facing off against Taiwanese and US forces. After that, I'd be interested in a module for Black Sea depicting the use of the technology used in the Ukraine war (e.g. drones), CM: Vietnam (Vietnam War), CM: Korea (Korean War). And new-settings aside, I would love some kind of engine update that let players play in a mode that restricted the player's view to first-person and used voice recognition and AI/ChatGPT to give orders to subordinates, so we could have the holy grail of a combination of the immersion of Arma and the tactical satisfaction of Combat Mission.
Great vid! Combat Mission was my favourite game of all time….(until I discovered Operation Flashpoint). I didn’t even know it was still being developed! Can you still play multiplayer by email?! Thise were the good ol days! 😊 …hearing some of those sound effects gave me some real flashbacks!
@@glennpeterson1357 Well, OK... just kinda seemed off-topic. Like, "Man my favorite food of all time was pizza, until I discovered downhill skiing!" Not criticizing you, I just expected you to mention a game that was vaguely analogous. Carry on. :-)
@@mercster ok…well, not really because I set the topic of “ my fav game of all time”. If someone posed the question, what’s your favourite thing to do, and they said “it’s a toss up between eating pizza and downhill skiing”, then that would be fair, wouldn’t it? Unusual, but still relevant.
Can't remember if mentioned in the vid, but for those play SP, it's worth checking out which title has the greatest support in terms of user-made scenarios
My approach to deciding which Combat Mission game to play is: All of them It almost doesn't matter which time period or theater Battlefront chooses to cover, it is as certain that I will purchase and download it as it is that the Germans will counterattack.
Hi so not trying to post "erm ackshually 🤓" but while your point about black sea SEEMS true, the annexation of Crimea was 2014, meaning by your dates it clearly was based on current events. By the way, keep up the good work, this franchise seems difficult to penetrate and youre doing a great job. Ive seen bigger indie franchises have less dedicated creators EDIT: creator responded, read response for clarification
Ackshually, :P , if you want to stretch it, you can argue this one both ways. To quote Battlefront: "Sometime in 2009, we determined the setting for Combat Mission: Black Sea: a fictional future conflict between NATO, Ukraine, and Russia in the year 2017. A few years later, the details of this conflict were fleshed out and work began on creating the unique military formations and equipment that would participate in such a conflict. In the midst of development, the unthinkable happened, and conflict actually came to Ukraine during the spring of 2014. After much internal discussion we decided to move forward with the development of Combat Mission: Black Sea. We prefer that our Combat Mission releases cover historical or fictional modern topics, and in that regard Black Sea is still a fictional story. However, the previously written back story for the game was slightly altered to take into account 2014's real life events. To be clear: Combat Mission: Black Sea is a hypothetical conflict between NATO and Russia set in 2017, not a depiction of present day events such as the Crimean Crisis or the War in Donbass." Also thanks! I've often wondered how the channel would develop if I diversified into something less niche than CM but nothing's ever gripped me in the same way.
@@usuallyhapless9481may i recommend Call to Arms: Gates of Hell ostfront? While not a perfect game by any means, you may enjoy the tactical flavor that game has. Other than that, yeah i think CM is one of a kind for better or for worse. I really wish it wasnt $60 hard to justify
I think we really need a Vietnam War title from them. There aren't many Vietnam War strategy games out there. The developers can make a really good game with their professionalism.
Fantastic video mate, very informative for a newcomer to the series. Just a tiny bit of constructive criticism however, maybe next time dial back the combat sounds compared to the Voice over. I found it difficult at times to understand what you were saying because the game sounds were overpowering your voice.
Another vote for Matrix to release a game based in Korea and/or Vietnam. Right now I'm mainly interested in cold war/modern era, so very much appreciate what Matrix has done on these subjects. Otherwise too burnt out on the WWII European front to get involved there.
Fortress Italy looks neat with it's lenghtier lifespan and diverse factions. I hope the terrain isn't much of a noobkiller otherwise I'll settle with Battle for Normandy, for now modern warfare looks a bit too much for me.
Personally my biggest issue with CMFI is that CM scenario design is effectively a cottage industry that's very reliant on the interests of the individual designers. Italy is a bit of a niche front comparatively and I think the scenarios suffer on average when compared to say, CMBN, which covers one of the most popular theatres of all time. That being said I love all the CM titles and can't imagine regretting picking any of them up.
I llayed the hell out of CMBO, CMBB and CMAK including hours in map maker. Now, I have a PC that can lmay the new games but i am undecided. I want Normandy or Cold War. I cannot decide. I also wish we got early war Eastern Front up to Stalingrad. Early war Eastern Front is chaotic. And for Asia/Pacific, I would personally love a focus on China and Southeast Asia and the Philippines.
Great video, is thinking of buying one down the line One question tho, does all the Combat Mission installment have detailed tutorial or it's learn as you go with youtube vids and stuffs?
They all have tutorial campaigns, but there isn't any in-game hand-holding: the walkthrough for the tutorials is in the manual. That's ok for some people, your mileage may vary as to whether you prefer other methods.
For North Africa, you can just about manage late Tunisia with early Fortress Italy, providing you stick to the earliest time period and desert-like terrain. There is a mod floating around for the Pacific, but it's just a reskin/texture mod.
I would be more interested in CM:RT if the timeframe covered Operation Citadel and the Battle of Kursk. Starting off with Bagration feels like it’s missing an important part of the war in the east. It’s a shame that CM:BS isn’t getting its expansion. I like the idea of more symmetrical modern combat that you get with SF2.. Maybe Battlefront could repackage the game to cover a fictional Russian invasion of an equally fictional country, the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Freedonia or something.
Yeah i love the symmetrical and asymmetrical warfare, I'll be honest I think they should have merged the games together all the WW2 entries. Cold War combined with Afghanistan or even other locations regarding the game's time period. Shock Force 2 with Black Sea (could easily have time periods like 2000s and 2020s) By the way the theme of a fictional nation doesn't sound like a bad idea lol, Arma did it and it worked. I think even a real life opfor name like Krasnovia would work (imagine actually seeing those modified KVT variants of the M1 Abrams tank, which looks like a T-72 or T-80 in disguise lol)
@Usually Hapless Just wanted to say I have thoroughly enjoyed your videos over the years. I have learned so much watching them! Please keep making them!
My favorite Combat Mission game is Shock Force 2. While it is one of the easier games (at least on the NATO side), the biggest selling point is the campaigns. I've been sadly disappointed with the length of the campaigns in the other games of the series. As a essentially single-player player, I've really appreciated just how much campaign content is in Shock Force and it's modules.
The reasoning is: the game only models from the Invasion of Sicily onwards. The Italian forces defending Sicily were poorly equipped, second line formations with older vehicles. There were obviously more, better equipped Italian formations on the mainland, but many of these were reconstituting after the North African campaign and were anyway disarmed by the Germans when Italy surrendered to the Allies. Of course, it would be nice to have M13/40s so we could play in the desert properly...
I think it would be really cool if they made a Korean war title.
Also ww1. Tbh with their realism they could make anything and I would play it.
- East Africa, 1930s (Abyssinian War; early WW2 Italy vs GB)
- Spanish Civil War (lots of equipment, and units from different countries)
- Anything involving the Japanese (lots of enemies and decades to choose from)
Korea wouldn't be that far off, between Red Thunder and Final Blitzkrieg, we have most of the eastern and western weapons and vehicles already made.
If treated like Italy, you could realistically depict the entire conflict using expansions.
The most overlooked war
Make a medieval Combat Mission with horses and people running around with armor and swords and trebuchets while we are at it
I keep hoping for an early war game, operation Barbarossa or battle for France timeline. The early development of tanks really makes that time shine for a history perspective.
You order a Char2C into battle. The game crashes. Your PC catches fire.
@@JcDent It also couldn't see the Germans sitting 20 metres right in front of it.
I totally agree. Bt-7s, Early Pz. IIs, Pz 38s and so on. Also the early french and british tanks would be great.
Yes a Barbarossa Game would be very nice. When excluding the first few months (which were so onesided that they probably wouldn't be much fun to play) a Barbarossa Game could start with the battle of Moscow, cover rzhev and Case Blau and end with Stalingrad. For the Germans it would all be about preserving their forces while achieving Victory whereas the Soviets need to inflict maximum casualties, no matter the cost
Yes, or something like the Pacific War
It’s mentioned elsewhere but I would love to see it go to Korea next. Everything from Task Force Smith to the loss of Daejeon, the defense of the Busan perimeter, Chosin, any of the 4 battles for Seoul would be great scenarios. Plus it gives way to see a lot unique factions including China, North Korea, United States, UK, Turkey and a bunch of other banners under the UN command. I think the British/Dutch/Indian/Chinese fight against the Japanese in Southeast Asia deserves more attention as well.
that would be awesome, I was thinking Vietnam but people mention they cant put helicopters in the game and tunnels. There is a mod for it i havent tried though
Korea would be a great cm game
CM: Korea would be awesome.
CM French in Vietnam would be great.
As a Brit I would love to be able to play the "Glorious Glosters" (Gloucestershire Regiment) at the Battle of Imjin River.
"Recent events seem to indicate otherwise". Sums it all up really. For years in the Arma community we have been complaining about the AI walking down the middle of the road, driving over blatant landmines, driving AA vehicles off of bridges and into the sea, infantry not reacting to contact instead choosing to lie down in the middle of the road and just stare at the enemy etc. Turns out that all along the system has been perfectly simulated and we just didn't know it yet.
I don't think that conflict has changed anyones mind though, and the people who think it's relevant is entirely missing the point of the complaints. I've only ever seen two arguments made. One is that Redfor units set to equivalent training and motivation with equal equipment should not magically preform worse then Bluefor units. The other is that some Redfor vehicles are underperforming, but that's harder to tell compared to the first argument. That's why videos of poorly trained and badly lead conscripts derping around only seems relevant the uninformed or otherwise.
@@sproge2142 you miss the /s
@@kettelbe what a clever reply, you must have thought very hard and long to come up with that, really outdoing yourself, well done.
Lmao brilliant.
@@sproge2142someone's butthurt... lol
It's so wild seeing how far these games have come. I remember the first Combat Mission game coming out when I was a kid. Back at the start of Covid I was messing around with the Afghanistan demo, which was a lot of fun.
Now, after weeks of playing the Black Seas demo, I finally grabbed the full game, and it's been a blast!
Does the demo work because when I download it it does not have any scenarios and I can't fight custom battles
@@frantisekcenek1199 try to download it again
Quite a long time ago, CM was trying to develop an operations campaign that carried over from battle to battle, with an operations map for moving forces and logistics. They gave up on it, but I wish they would give it a second look. Beyond that, I wish they would do an Afrika Korps upgrade from the older game engine.
Worth to note Battlefront has great and quite knowledgeable community - average age there must be something like 60, which is almost unprecedented in gaming.
There is phantastic topic there (currently standing at 2200+ pages) about current war in Ukraine, if somebody is interested in checking how events and trends unfold. Really helps you understand war from "behind the curtains".
If only they had someone who could code a modern engine with an interface control scheme that ventures past the late 90s. I ain't knocking them, the games are terrific in content, but the software is painful to use.
@@mercster I agree. The Series is hugely held back by its heavily outdated engine and control scheme.
I'd assume the guy making the games just likes the engine because he's literally been using it 20+ years. How do you really switch over to something new at that point? It's like Bethesda. You'd really think in the intervening decades they'd have put a small team on the side making a new engine for the future. But the games work and nothing really simulates a battlefield quite like the games.@@serch3ster
Combat Mission Beyond Normandy will always be my favorite since it's my Grandfather's theater of war. I'm very happy it's getting a battle pack expansion, but I always hoped it would get expansions to completely flesh out the war in 1944 France and the low countries: Uncon units representing French partisans, allied OOBs reflecting the overlord beach assault teams, DD tanks, tank riding infantry, dedicated Free French units.....it's one of the most popular TOW in wargaming, and I just wish they would squeeze all the available goodness out of it.
I absolutely loved playing as the Italians in CMFI with their clunky squad system and tankettes. Would kill to to see a Spanish Civil War CM. I know it would not sell very well at all, but one can always dream.
What's so odd about their squad system?
@@MandolinMagi as far as i remember you cant split them up properly, at least not as much as other nations squads
@@Heinz0Fiction That's correct
I do hope we get CM game based on North (and possible east) Africa campaign in future.
That would fit pretty well as a Fortress Italy expansion imo. A lot of the units and force structure overlaps
If they did do North Africa, we’d probably get Operation Torch first, since BF likes to lead with the Americans, then expand the timeframe backwards to add the British. It would be interesting to see the Vichy French as a faction in an Operation Torch module.
My first Combat Mission is the Cold War one. Still getting used to the vehicle combat there, with the early incarnations of ATGMs and all round high lethality of it. A kickass game tho, love to learn the intricacies of it. Maybe the next one I'll get is Battle for Normandy one
I have really enjoyed the Cold War game.
This is super helpful. I'm often down on RUclips's algorith, but this week the algorithm brought me to your channel (and thus introduced me to Combat Mission). I've been jamming with WARNO, Wargame, Steel Division, and Men of War, but this looks like the next step up from those. This is super helpful as a means of getting up to speed on the franchise, and your other vids are super exciting teasers of what I have to look forward to!
What's interesting is the Soviets most likely wouldn't rush the Fulda gap, instead going north through the Dutch zone and go for the ports on the North sea. Wouldn't change too much, but always thought it was interesting how fixated the NATO was on Fulda.
Might be more accurate to say that there's a lot of focus on the Fulda Gap because that was where US forces were going to fight- certainly the Soviet main effort was going to be further north
@@usuallyhapless9481 Exactly right. Fulda was the focus for Americans. From the NATO perspective overall, the biggest danger was faced by the British Army of the Rhine covering the flat North German plain. Due to a quirk of how WWII ended, the British -- the weakest of the major NATO Cold War armies -- was tasked with defending the most dangerous and exposed avenue of advance.
I always thought the French tanks where less armoured and les suited to fight Soviet Armour than the British tanks.@@christopherjohnson529
Poles were supposed to go for Denmark and northern West Germany together with East Germans, eventually coming to Netherlands with whatever remained + Soviet seconda strategic 'wave'. Fulda was absolutely on the table though
This was an interesting video! I haven't played a CM game since the original three games, and I was interested in them again now that a WW2 CM has finally been released. I'm just a simple guy who loves strategy games, not a wargaming buff, so it was nice to see the modern titles being discussed in a clear manner here. Thanks!
I would also like to give a shout-out to Combat Mission: Afrika Korps, and Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin. They do an excellent job of filling the gaps in what the CMx2 engine has yet to cover, to a point, with Afrika Korps covering everything from the beginning of the fighting in North Africa in 1940 up to and beyond where Fortress Italy picks up. Barbarossa to Berlin covers the entire eastern front, and is great for getting in everything that comes before the setting of Red Thunder. The one downside is that they are using the previous generation Combat Mission engine, CMx1, which is noticeably not as good as the CMx2 engine used by every Combat Mission game since 2007. But I'm happy to overlook that, on the grounds that the CMx1 engine is still the second best game engine in the world after only the CMx2 engine. Another downside is that, even going back to the CMx1 titles, there is still no Combat Mission game covering the really early operations of WW2, from the Invasion of Poland to the Battle of France.
For some reason, I just had a lot more fun playing CM1 than CM2. Last year sometime, I cranked up CM1 and it still worked on my computer but the visuals were really basic. CM2 visuals are just so much superior to CM1. I imagine gameplay would still be superb with CM1 though.
I would like to see a modernised version of Combat Mission Barbarossa and Afrika Korps. I liked in that game the maps were truly dynamically created depending on the settings you put in beforehand. No two maps were alike. For some reason the games that followed got rid of this ability to randomly generate maps which I find puzzling.
Another thing is I keep having issues downloading the games on steam. I downloaded Shock Force a year ago and it would not start so I returned it.
Having only played CMBS, I can say it's a lot of (quite intense) fun.
Thinking of getting one of the WW2 titles next, trying to decide between Fortress Italy and Red Thunder. Fortress Italy seems to have the most variety and flavour (lots of factions and covers a very lengthy time period), plus it's a very under-explored theatre of WW2.
Red Thunder showcases the Eastern Front, which I personally find the most interesting. I wish they would add more countries to Red Thunder though, like the Romanians, Hungarians and Poles (both Armija Krajowa and Armija Ludowa). Especially since the Romanians would be on the Axis side until August '44, but in the late missions would be Soviet allies going up against the Hungarians + Germans.
Great overview! When I saw the time (13:16) on the video, I was doubtful you could cover them in any meaningful depth. But you packed a ton of useful information into a short format. Thanks for doing this.
I wish they made a title covering early Eastern Front
You're certainly not alone in that
IMO:
Objectively probably Battle for Normandy or Fortress Italy, however my favorite settings are Red Thunder and Final Blitzkrieg. Guess I just like snow and tank riding.
I got Fortress Italy because of interest in the theater, and it's a great game, but it does get tiring having mission after mission of frontal assaults up mountains under artillery cover. Like I get that's what the Italian theatre was, but after playing it, it's even more insane to me that the allies wasted 3 years and thousands of lives in that effort.
Fortress Italy has got some cool tanks now if only the full game isn’t 100 bucks
I think I was a part of the comment chain that inspired the video, either way happy to see you feel the same way I do about Battle for Normandy being a good game to learn the ropes in!
As for modern Blue vs Red balance, I don't think that conflict has changed anyones mind, and the people who think it's relevant is entirely missing the point of the complaints. I've only ever seen two arguments made. One is that Redfor units set to equivalent training and motivation with equal equipment should not magically preform worse then Bluefor units. The other is that some Redfor vehicles are underperforming, but that's harder to tell compared to the first argument. That's why videos of poorly trained and badly lead conscripts derping around only seems relevant to those missing the point.
Great video! Just covered Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy on the channel and thinking about picking up Shock Force 2! Really helpful video
I saw that- it was a good round-up!
@@usuallyhapless9481 thanks really hooked and haven't played them for years. So will defo deep dive the content 🚀
Really glad you made this video, I’ve already got 3 but looking at picking up Normandy next
All the CM titles I own (1st and 2nd generation) have given me years of solid single and multiplayer gameplay and entertainment . I definitely feel I got my money’s worth with each title & DLCs. If in doubt try their demos.
I do advocate giving Combat Mission: Afghanistan a try. It's just a really interesting mix of forces. It's noticeably less asymmetric than CMSF2 (in CMSF2 I can routinely achieve loss ratios of 10:1, 20:1, or sometimes even 30:1, while in CMA I tend to fall more in the range of 3-10:1), even though by all rights it really should be more asymmetric than CMSF2 (the Mujahideen have no armored vehicles, no artillery or air support, and a large proportion of their rifles are old bolt-action rifles (some mix of the terrain, the old 1980s Soviet technology, and shortcomings in Soviet force structure seems to be closing the gap somewhat)). Before CMCW was released this was the only title that gave us access to the Soviet forces of this era, which are really interesting. Now that CMCW is released I think it makes for an interesting side-story/expansion to CMCW (see how the same Soviet forces perform in a completely different environment against a completely different opponent). In practical terms I think it's a good game for easing your way into modern combat if you're accustomed to the WW2 titles (technology is at a good halfway point between WW2 and modern, you are facing a weaker opponent, and you still get some sense of how best to use newer weapons (probably better than jumping right into high intensity peer to peer combat with CMCW, where you will be in for a painful learning curve if you are still used to WW2)).
I will try this as soon as i have finished cmbo. Still enjoying after almost 25 years.
Seeing this recap of the original CM also reminds me of the old Close Combat from the 90s which first started me in WW2 computer war gaming.
Now that CMBN is out I guess its a good video. Can't wait for what you will say in the video.
I personally want that Fortress Italy and Final Blitzkrieg come out on steam next.
Should be one of those next
I hope that its FI or FB BUT with the volkssturm module (the one u mentioned extending the war to 1945)
You already know that I'm a bit if an insurgent myself
My first one was CM Shock Force 2 which is amazing and when on harder difficulty can be challenging but since its so advanced and everyone having radios and so forth it kills the games mechanics a bit for me.
Hoping to get Battle Normandy next.
Great video, perfectly answers any and all questions
I think with how the AI works as to which i mean they will follow orders without a large amount of leeway in diverting from those orders is what makes CM:RT the most realistic towards how a soviets would act during that time
I have played the three modern titles exclusivly up until now, didn't even know the game existed until it hit steam, and just got Battle for Normandy as it released on steam. And I'm not going crazy right? The pixeltruppen seem considerably quicker on their feet and tire less quickly, right? I guess they carry less gear so it makes sense, but still, it's a weird first thing to notice when it's such a shift in gear and organization from modern-era and my first impression is "Gosh, these guys can actually sprint!".
Light infantry can sprint but also die very fast
Yeah. I'm sure they'd rather have body armour than be able to run fast
I like that Red Thunder covers 1944-45. Most Eastern front wargames focus on 1942 or 1943 and even then usually only on either Stalingrad or Kursk. Stalingrad in particular is way overdone in general. Still I do hope we get some combat mission games covering the early and mid war someday.
A Pacific theatre would be awesome
im at a loss as to why battlefront is still using this ancient engine. It makes the stalker xray engine look modern.
Hope to see some more newbie content for CMBN! Thanks Hapless 😊
I would like to see some good mission from cold war with the early Bundeswehr and NVA
I would like to see a video that maybe highlights some of the features in Combat Mission Professional versus in the commercial games, if that’s still a thing that has any meaningful differences
The thing I'm going to say is that CM has a very... interesting understanding of how the level of warfare they want to simulate (just throw a battalion into battle) vs. granularity (I'm going to split off a scout team off this squad and tell it to pick up a Panzerfaust from an APC). Plus, with the modern titles, it seems like the map sizes remain unchanged without accounting for the fact that modern sensors and weapons can reach out and touch someone far further out.
Another thing is that CM is still not very user friendly. No mouse-over popups to explain anything, you have to go into manuals for everything including the tutorials, and setting up quick battles never says how many points you'll get, giving you instead abstract measurements like "tiny" or "average".
It gets worse if you want to build an army for quick battle as you invariably have to cut it down from, like, a battalion size unit to a platoon without being able to remove the top level HQs, so depending on the game, you may end up dragging along two-three HQ units with nothing to do.
And of course, the unit stats/composition aren't shown during this force building exercise, so you have to look at the manual. Something you don't have to do in games ranging from SPMBT to Armored Brigade to Flashpoint Campaigns.
So I'd say the WW2 titles are better off!
And this is why I've never gotten into the 2nd generation of Combat Mission titles. I +loved+ the first generation of Combat Mission games. Barbarossa to Berlin was one of the best wargame experiences I've ever had. But when I tried to move up to Shock Force, I found that each turn required so much decision-making across so many levels of command that the scenarios were incredibly time-consuming. Either I focused at higher levels and made faster decisions, but then sacrificed a lot of avoidable casualties, or I micro-managed each squad and element. But doing that at battalion scale with the incredible lethality of modern warfare was too time-consuming for the enjoyment I received. YMMV.
O how I wish for the return of CMAK
You can sort of pull of late Tunisia in early CMFI, but it's not really the same
I have CMSF 2 and Black Sea but have not had time to play. I got them because I loved the older Afrika Korp and Barbarossa games. Going on leave for the whole of December and it looks like I won't be bored
My first foray into CM was shock force 2 and battle for Normandy. One modern, and one not. And I built my collection around those two.
In hindsight I would have probably gone for Black Sea/Cold War first instead of CMSF2 purely because the campaigns are toe to toe conventional forces. Where as in SF2 the campaigns are a bit one sided in terms of equipment etc.
It really comes down which theatres interest you the most. You can set up peer-peer fights in Shock Force, just as Red vs Red or Blue vs Blue. Black Sea and Cold War have their own problems.
Great guide, thank you very much!
"Shock Force 2 is the only Combat Mission game so far to feature unconventional forces"
This is not strictly true, as Red Thunder's Fire and Rubble expansion also added partisans to the mix.
True. Unconventional game mechanics might be more what I meant. There's no mechanism for partisans to hide amongst the population like there is for the Uncons in SF2
No way that they have the Brazilian forces in fortress Italy I had no idea! I'm into the modern titles, and was thinking to get battle for normandy now, but guess fortress Italy plus the pack are my scope now.
Be careful, CMFI is a difficult game compared to other ww2 CM games. US squads in 1943 have no SMG's and many guys still have M1903's. This makes it very difficult to fight on some of the mountain warfare maps when you're going against MG-42's with Springfields and BARs.
No mention of the CMx1 games :P I would actually recommend those first to people who either 1) don't have a gaming PC or 2) don't yet feel motivated to spend $60 to buy one of the CMx2 games, assuming they don't mind the old-school graphics. They're still a ton of fun to play multiplayer, especially if you play with TCP/IP using Hamachi (so you can get through a full game in an hour).
As for future games, I most want to see a Combat Mission: Taiwan, depicting a hypothetical Chinese invasion of Taiwan facing off against Taiwanese and US forces. After that, I'd be interested in a module for Black Sea depicting the use of the technology used in the Ukraine war (e.g. drones), CM: Vietnam (Vietnam War), CM: Korea (Korean War). And new-settings aside, I would love some kind of engine update that let players play in a mode that restricted the player's view to first-person and used voice recognition and AI/ChatGPT to give orders to subordinates, so we could have the holy grail of a combination of the immersion of Arma and the tactical satisfaction of Combat Mission.
Great video and analysis.
Great vid! Combat Mission was my favourite game of all time….(until I discovered Operation Flashpoint). I didn’t even know it was still being developed! Can you still play multiplayer by email?! Thise were the good ol days! 😊 …hearing some of those sound effects gave me some real flashbacks!
Oh yeah, Play-By-Email is still the best way to play ;)
Wait, Operation Flashpoint is an action shooty-shooty game, right? And this is a tactical wargame?
@@mercster yes….?
@@glennpeterson1357 Well, OK... just kinda seemed off-topic. Like, "Man my favorite food of all time was pizza, until I discovered downhill skiing!" Not criticizing you, I just expected you to mention a game that was vaguely analogous. Carry on. :-)
@@mercster ok…well, not really because I set the topic of “ my fav game of all time”. If someone posed the question, what’s your favourite thing to do, and they said “it’s a toss up between eating pizza and downhill skiing”, then that would be fair, wouldn’t it? Unusual, but still relevant.
Very surprised we don’t have a North Africa theater game.
wasnt there a dlc for fortress italy planned? or was it a mod?
I have all the games and all the DLCs. love them all
Can't remember if mentioned in the vid, but for those play SP, it's worth checking out which title has the greatest support in terms of user-made scenarios
Having served in Germany during the height of the Cold War, that module interests me greatly 👍
Hopefully we will see West and East Germany
My approach to deciding which Combat Mission game to play is: All of them
It almost doesn't matter which time period or theater Battlefront chooses to cover, it is as certain that I will purchase and download it as it is that the Germans will counterattack.
Hi so not trying to post "erm ackshually 🤓" but while your point about black sea SEEMS true, the annexation of Crimea was 2014, meaning by your dates it clearly was based on current events.
By the way, keep up the good work, this franchise seems difficult to penetrate and youre doing a great job. Ive seen bigger indie franchises have less dedicated creators
EDIT: creator responded, read response for clarification
Ackshually, :P , if you want to stretch it, you can argue this one both ways. To quote Battlefront:
"Sometime in 2009, we determined the setting for Combat Mission: Black Sea: a fictional future
conflict between NATO, Ukraine, and Russia in the year 2017. A few years later, the details of
this conflict were fleshed out and work began on creating the unique military formations and
equipment that would participate in such a conflict. In the midst of development, the
unthinkable happened, and conflict actually came to Ukraine during the spring of 2014.
After much internal discussion we decided to move forward with the development of Combat
Mission: Black Sea. We prefer that our Combat Mission releases cover historical or fictional
modern topics, and in that regard Black Sea is still a fictional story. However, the previously
written back story for the game was slightly altered to take into account 2014's real life events.
To be clear: Combat Mission: Black Sea is a hypothetical conflict between NATO and Russia
set in 2017, not a depiction of present day events such as the Crimean Crisis or the War in
Donbass."
Also thanks! I've often wondered how the channel would develop if I diversified into something less niche than CM but nothing's ever gripped me in the same way.
@@usuallyhapless9481may i recommend Call to Arms: Gates of Hell ostfront? While not a perfect game by any means, you may enjoy the tactical flavor that game has. Other than that, yeah i think CM is one of a kind for better or for worse. I really wish it wasnt $60 hard to justify
Id love to be able to pitch a Cold War army against WW2 army in a hypothetical collection/ remaster.
Agreed, bundle them together
“combat mission Sf2, CW, and BS are the last of the modern titles”
CMA: am i a joke to you
It's on a different engine so it's never going to get another expansion or have mod support at this point
CMA is kinda barebones barely enough missions
I think we really need a Vietnam War title from them. There aren't many Vietnam War strategy games out there. The developers can make a really good game with their professionalism.
I really wish they update the engine and allow real coop sometime in the future.
Fantastic video mate, very informative for a newcomer to the series. Just a tiny bit of constructive criticism however, maybe next time dial back the combat sounds compared to the Voice over. I found it difficult at times to understand what you were saying because the game sounds were overpowering your voice.
Another vote for Matrix to release a game based in Korea and/or Vietnam. Right now I'm mainly interested in cold war/modern era, so very much appreciate what Matrix has done on these subjects. Otherwise too burnt out on the WWII European front to get involved there.
Yeah, it would actually be interesting to include the third indochina war (Vietnam, China ane Cambodia/Kampuchea)
Combat mission red thunder ❤
I hope they one day they upgrade the graphics of these games.
Same
I wonder what a WWI version of CM would look like?
Fortress Italy looks neat with it's lenghtier lifespan and diverse factions. I hope the terrain isn't much of a noobkiller otherwise I'll settle with Battle for Normandy, for now modern warfare looks a bit too much for me.
Personally my biggest issue with CMFI is that CM scenario design is effectively a cottage industry that's very reliant on the interests of the individual designers. Italy is a bit of a niche front comparatively and I think the scenarios suffer on average when compared to say, CMBN, which covers one of the most popular theatres of all time. That being said I love all the CM titles and can't imagine regretting picking any of them up.
Fortress Italy is way harder in my opinion than Battle for Normandy. If frustration turns you off, you better start with BN
I llayed the hell out of CMBO, CMBB and CMAK including hours in map maker. Now, I have a PC that can lmay the new games but i am undecided. I want Normandy or Cold War. I cannot decide.
I also wish we got early war Eastern Front up to Stalingrad. Early war Eastern Front is chaotic. And for Asia/Pacific, I would personally love a focus on China and Southeast Asia and the Philippines.
Great video, is thinking of buying one down the line
One question tho, does all the Combat Mission installment have detailed tutorial or it's learn as you go with youtube vids and stuffs?
They all have tutorial campaigns, but there isn't any in-game hand-holding: the walkthrough for the tutorials is in the manual. That's ok for some people, your mileage may vary as to whether you prefer other methods.
@@usuallyhapless9481 Ah gotcha
Thanks
Cold War on sale now, might pick it up lol
Barbarossa to Berlin is still the best in the series.
Excellent summary, thanks!
Would like North Africa and the pacific
For North Africa, you can just about manage late Tunisia with early Fortress Italy, providing you stick to the earliest time period and desert-like terrain.
There is a mod floating around for the Pacific, but it's just a reskin/texture mod.
I think Africa could fit so well with how battlefront makes games
I am going to be a contrarian and say the OG trilogy. It might be ancient, but it has a lot of charm 😊
I would be more interested in CM:RT if the timeframe covered Operation Citadel and the Battle of Kursk. Starting off with Bagration feels like it’s missing an important part of the war in the east.
It’s a shame that CM:BS isn’t getting its expansion. I like the idea of more symmetrical modern combat that you get with SF2.. Maybe Battlefront could repackage the game to cover a fictional Russian invasion of an equally fictional country, the former Soviet Socialist Republic of Freedonia or something.
Yeah i love the symmetrical and asymmetrical warfare, I'll be honest I think they should have merged the games together
all the WW2 entries. Cold War combined with Afghanistan or even other locations regarding the game's time period. Shock Force 2 with Black Sea (could easily have time periods like 2000s and 2020s)
By the way the theme of a fictional nation doesn't sound like a bad idea lol, Arma did it and it worked. I think even a real life opfor name like Krasnovia would work (imagine actually seeing those modified KVT variants of the M1 Abrams tank, which looks like a T-72 or T-80 in disguise lol)
Is there a new date for the inclusion of USMC, VDV and DShV in the CMBS?
Postponed indefinitely, as far as we know
@@usuallyhapless9481 ok, thanks
"the weird one" 😅 they're all incredibly weird
Hurr durr us bias
Decade later... Oh...
Could you do a 'which titles' for the strategic command series?
I haven't actually played them, so I wouldn't say I was really in a position to comment
What about Afrika corps
I did try to play CMAK for this, but... it just feels so clunky now. Can't believe I ever had the patience to play CMX1
I own them all and jump from title to title depending on my mood.
Same. Except for CMA.
@Usually Hapless Just wanted to say I have thoroughly enjoyed your videos over the years. I have learned so much watching them! Please keep making them!
Great job, thank you!
WW2 is defi the one for beginner.
For "The German Heer" - "hair" not "here".
Literally never heard of CM:Afghanistan.
Yep. It's very much under the radar
My favorite Combat Mission game is Shock Force 2. While it is one of the easier games (at least on the NATO side), the biggest selling point is the campaigns. I've been sadly disappointed with the length of the campaigns in the other games of the series. As a essentially single-player player, I've really appreciated just how much campaign content is in Shock Force and it's modules.
Is there a conflict, historical or hypothetical, that you would like to see battlefront cover next?
If you want some WW1 action, just play CMFI and choose Italy...
CM: CW demo when?
Would love a pacific war based game
Any mods reommendation? I would love to see this game in the pacific campaign
will there ever be an expansion that introduces italian partisans for fortress Italy?
In your opinion, are the Gustav line and Rome DLC's necessary for the CMFi experience?
Why no M13/40 tanks etc. in the Italian Series?
The reasoning is: the game only models from the Invasion of Sicily onwards. The Italian forces defending Sicily were poorly equipped, second line formations with older vehicles.
There were obviously more, better equipped Italian formations on the mainland, but many of these were reconstituting after the North African campaign and were anyway disarmed by the Germans when Italy surrendered to the Allies.
Of course, it would be nice to have M13/40s so we could play in the desert properly...
Hapless, Can you comment on how you feel the steam release of CMBN was handled?
No matter which game I play the explosions make my screen flash white. HELP.
A while ago I swear to god I thought one of these games were in mobile IOS?? I swear I played this before on my phone?
You're not wrong, but we don't talk about Combat Mission: Touch ;)
I'd assumed Afghanistan is not available. Is there any way to get hold of it? I thought it wan't sold anywhere.
www.battlefront.com/soviet-afghan-war/ ;)
@@usuallyhapless9481 🤣Oh dear, what an idiot. Never thought to look there! BTW thanks for your excellent CM content.
Is it possible to copy units between these games, assuming that you own both?
It is not, unfortunately.
I wish Combat Mission Italy was on STEAM...
Soon (tm), by all accounts
@@usuallyhapless9481 It's out! Got it today! Can you do some new videos on CMFI? Thanks
what if i wanted to play combat mission touch? 😂
Then you get a cookie for esoteric knowledge ;)
Combat mission WW1 when
Combat Mission Spanish Civil War when
what about Combat Mission 2 - Barbarossa to Berlin ?
Which one has the best soviet voice acting?
The default audio is generally adequate, some of the sounds mods for Red Thunder have lines from Red Orchestra 2, which had fantastic voice acting