No German Campaign/no strategic map?

[Defiler1964]

Hello guys,
this is my first post ever here on Matrix Games and I am a long term member. (I lover reading, posting not so much;))
I just want to underline the importance of my questions and concerns.
I am German and have been playing strategy games since 1983.
Since the first part, the Close combat series has been one of my favorite strategy games of all time, and with good reason.
You can choose the German side and play without restriction.
Now I have looked at a video about the game and had to realize with bare horror that the German side is here suddenly only the typical opponent.
Can anyone please give me any hope that this will change or be introduced with an addon?
Furthermore, I miss the strategic map to plan operations. Hello people... you want to deliver a Close Combat here, right?
Campaigns in Close Combat are a unique feature of this series! You can't replace them so easy with this one-sided command and conquer style...you name it.

Greetings from Germany
Defiler1964

[Nomada_Firefox]

For the record, not all the CC games had a strategic map and they were good.

According to the developers information told before, you can play the campaign with Germans but you will not save the teams with each battle and you will play each battle with the teams set for the Germans in the battle. We must understand how the campaigns set for the mod are not German operations, the Germans in them were constantely in retreat, launching perhaps some counteroffensive but nothing more. I understand because there is not a German grand campaign. But clearly you can play with them.

About the game itself, it is not a Command & Conquer and I am sure how it will be very fun, very realistic and without lose the essence from the CC games.[;)]

[CGGrognard]

Perhaps Matrix can identify an Axis division to counter the U.S. Bloody First division. I would like to see a Divisions from the Allies and the Axis powers. Add to it the ability to play either would be a great contribution to the series.

[Nomada_Firefox]

ORIGINAL: CGGrognard

Perhaps Matrix can identify an Axis division to counter the U.S. Bloody First division. I would like to see a Divisions from the Allies and the Axis powers. Add to it the ability to play either would be a great contribution to the series.

Perhaps Matrix can identify an Axis division to counter the U.S. Bloody First division. I would like to see a Divisions from the Allies and the Axis powers. Add to it the ability to play either would be a great contribution to the series.

You have understood everything wrong.........or perhaps I have explained it wrong.

There is German campaign and you can play with Germans. The point is how your success and failures would not be reflected in your troops because if one day you played with a Battlegroup, the next you can play with other.

[Defiler1964]

Nomada_Firefox
As I said, I'm german and english is not my native language.
Maybe I have not expressed myself clear enough.
I realize that not all CC had strategic maps and
of course, C&C does not have much to do with CC. I'm a wargamer and we are here at Matrix Games;)
A little cynicism can not hurt to listen to me, you just have to recognize it.
The non-linear campaigns, the strategic map, fully integrated german troops and troop development are an important part of the game and the essence of CC ... Imho
Well, most people hopefully understand what annoys me.

[Nomada_Firefox]

A little cynicism can not hurt to listen to me, you just have to recognize it.
The non-linear campaigns, the strategic map, fully integrated german troops and troop development are an important part of the game and the essence of CC ... Imho
Well, most people hopefully understand what annoys me.

Why should I agree when I know how the game is very fun and never I liked the strategic map? it is not a secret. I am not cynic, I would be cynic if I say how the game is not fun. [;)]

For me the strategic map is not part of the essence of Close Combat and there are german troops in the game. For sure. Strategic map always was a shit which it stopped us from modding the game and when we had it, we could not finish a campaign......any more, at least in reasonable amount of time.

I do not go to say, I will not play anymore with a strategic map but in the old games, it was a piece of shit. However the new game can have somethings which they would make a strategic map some better addition than in the past. But I am very good without it.[;)]

[PipFromSlitherine]

There are always going to be differences in how players best enjoy the game. We know some loved the more freeform strategic maps to the point of asking for a way to skip the battle entirely [:)]. For TBF we decided to go back down to a more intimate scale for the campaign to really get you to care about your troops. Going forward there is always room for sequels or features which meet the demand for more of a freeform campaign.

Cheers

Pip

[Defiler1964]

Nomada_Firefox
I give up...it is only my concern, you have to agree to nothing at all.
The cynical was based on the comparison C&C and CC and nothing else.
I do not care if you like the strategic map or not. I hope you have fun with this game as it is or will be.
Everyone has a different sight on things. I posted my opinion and that's all.
I have nothing more to say on this topic.
It should be clear to everyone what I mean...I hope so.

[CGGrognard]

Close Combat initially followed the 29th Infantry Division for the U.S. and the 352nd Infantry Division for the Germans during Operation Cobra. Which was interesting, but made more so that the game accounted
for the mental state of each soldier.
This made the game more compelling on those two points.
Historically you can review how each side performed, but you couldn't get a sense of how the soldiers performed. And breaking from the tradition of many RTS games of the time, you were now presented with the
possibility that soldiers would not perform as commanded. Therefore with news that you can play as the Axis, it's not as developed as playing as the Allies.

[Nomada_Firefox]

I hope you have fun with this game as it is or will be.

Do not worry, no offense here. I have fun.[;)] Steve is very right at my opinion, in the CC games with many groups of combat, you used troops as if they were pigs going to the slaughterhouse, because with exception from the CC2 & CC3 where you used a points system, in the CC4, CC5, FOG, GTC, you had a big force pool without too limits. With TBF is clear how you must take care of them. At many ways it is similar to Battle Academy games and I like it. I am not turns game fan but BA are one of these few games which I like.

And yes, I can easily imagine new DLC or sequels adding other operations more centered in the Germans and of course mods, the modding capabilities from the game clearly will be very big. Few games in the world add these amount of capabilities, most of them are all restrictions but at TBF, I am sure how ou can make many things with very few and without a very special knowledge.

[LeeChard]

ORIGINAL: Defiler1964

Nomada_Firefox
I give up...it is only my concern, you have to agree to nothing at all.
The cynical was based on the comparison C&C and CC and nothing else.
I do not care if you like the strategic map or not. I hope you have fun with this game as it is or will be.
Everyone has a different sight on things. I posted my opinion and that's all.
I have nothing more to say on this topic.
It should be clear to everyone what I mean...I hope so.

My favorite CC game was the Russian front campaign. It could be played from either side but I don't believe there
was any attempt to make the units historical.
I don't see how that could be done while following a specific division.
I'm still looking forward to this game