What happened to this thread over the weekend? It seems that no sooner is nationalism invoked than someone will disinter the moldy corpse of religion so we can all fight even harder!
Ignoring the huge pile of cruddy posts about who invented what, and how America clearly leads the fight against Global Terrorism (I can only imagine the definition of Global Terrorism is Terrorism by the Global Nations against America as they seem pretty disinterested in smiting any other terrorists at present) I want to talk about Real War.
Real War has many bad points. It DOES touch upon logistics - and you can work on many different ways to bring supplies into your base - Air Force, Army and Navy - but it completely ignores most of the logistical concerns of running an Army. Those points are accumulated, spent and refreshed - there is no drain on them from maintaining your existing troops.
In addition the Media war is totally ignored. War should be a matter of accumulating large standing conventional forces to physically hold and defend land and also constructing highly trained strike teams to wage limited offensive war aimed at your enemies logistical or strike capabilities. The side that can maintain logistics, territorial superiority and strike capability whilst also winning the media war wins. That's why wars are fought very carefully these days - it would be possibly to totally win the military side of a war and lose the media side of it, and have your successes made counter-productive.
Real War ignored these truisms - it made you establish and defend supply routes and it made you have to cope with the air threat, but land warfare and naval warfare assets were risible. In addition it allows you to build a nuke - can you imagine a US or Coalition force EVER deploying nuclear weapons against a tactical threat? The possibility is laughable!
Let's leave Real War behind now - as it deserves - and discuss the new FPS being made by the Army.
I think, from what I've seen, that the Military have done a bang up job this time. I haven't seen it running - which is the true test - but it almost doesn't have to be fun. It's a roleplaying game - especially when you add in the 2D strategy game that they're releasing alongside it. The Army only needs to provide a technically competent offering along with real Army flavour, tech and doctrine. If it isn't "fun" that says as much about the player as the game!
EonThis comment was edited on Jun 9, 20:15.