wish list

3D version of Close Combat
general_solomon
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 12:05 am

wish list

Post by general_solomon »


Let me be the first to congratulate matrix and team on bringing cc to the modern era.

1. make this game mod friendly.
2. offer a scenario editor along with a map editor.
3. larger maps
4. smarter AI
5. keep all the good things from the current series and add to it.
6. destructible environment

I will let others take it from here.
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: wish list

Post by wodin »

I second everything General Solomon has said.

Keep it feeling like a CC game. (It will be pointless if it was just another 3D WW2 game I think Graviteam Tactics has that 3D view all tied up, so keep it top down).
Make Inf as survivable as they where in CC2.
Sea Invasions and Paradrops.
Add as much moral states and Inf states as possible..love seeing "clearing jam"..or "Running scared" etc etc..I'm sure CC2 had alot more states than the later versions. It gives an attachment to your pixeltruppen and gives them a personality.
Indepth ballistic model.
Clever Tac AI.
User avatar
SteveMcClaire
Posts: 4303
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:31 pm

RE: wish list

Post by SteveMcClaire »

ORIGINAL: general_solomon
1. make this game mod friendly.


Thanks for your feedback. There are some issues with Unity and loading 3D models dynamically, but that is something we are trying to find a way to support. Things like sounds, textures, game data, etc. will all be moddable.

2. offer a scenario editor along with a map editor.
3. larger maps

There will be a scenario editor with an integrated map editor. Typical Map sizes will be comparable to the existing game.

4. smarter AI

The AI code is getting a total re-write, and I have some specific improvement planned.

5. keep all the good things from the current series and add to it.

This is the core concept for The Bloody First. Despite the new engine, players familiar with the current game should immediately know you're still playing Close Combat and know how to play it.

6. destructible environment

There will be some of this (at least as much as the current CC) but it is a HUGE job to have a really detailed, fully destructible environment. We'll do what we have the time and resources to do, though.

Steve

general_solomon
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 12:05 am

RE: wish list

Post by general_solomon »



since you guys are creating this game from the bottom up , why not expand the multiplayer aspect of the game.

here is my pitch:

allow 10 players or more per side. lets take the 10 player example.

there is a team commander that has access to map that shows all of his squads. each squad will be controlled a live player. The commander will be able to issue order to each squad leader via headsets or commanders from the map. Each leader will control his/her squad.

the game will have an option to play vs other live player ( clans) or player vs IA.

end of pitch.

your base game engine should be built to accommodate ww2, cold war and modern armies. This way the community would grow.

also you company could pitch the game to our military to train their commanders. its a win - win for everyone.

general_solomon
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 12:05 am

RE: wish list

Post by general_solomon »


Squad LOS:

provide an option to select a squad and visually show what they can see. maybe have the squads their view stay clear and everything else they can not see turn blurry.

cover:

add a cover system depending on the type of cover. this would include the tac AI being smart enough to line up on corners and get to cover when on open ground. also, smart enough to take cover from the last know thread.
RD_Knights_X
Posts: 172
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:32 pm
Location: California

RE: wish list

Post by RD_Knights_X »

Wow Steve. These guys don't much in this new version [X(] Anyway, good to see another project on the "drawing board." Let me know via email if I can help.
thesock
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 12:17 pm

RE: wish list

Post by thesock »

It's the simple stuff done well that I like.
I like the mortar system in PitF.
In addition I would like a tank, a/tank in ambush with a round loaded ready to fire, rather than go through the load cycle on the fire command.
And a option on what floor level your squad is on. At the moment you can't use multistorie houses if the other guy can pound them from afar with direct fire.
An end to waltzing matilda tanks. Nothing worse than a tank turning side on when you have told it to reverse.
And most of all I love than I can arm each and every guy with any weapons I choose. Re-construct squads. That I can change the Forcepool and Battlegroups.
What would be really great would be if you could reconstruct the maps in user scenario. Not the topograghy or the roads. You know, add a building here, remove a house there, add or move some bunkers. A few changes like that could rejuvinate a map.
User avatar
SteveMcClaire
Posts: 4303
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:31 pm

RE: wish list

Post by SteveMcClaire »

Team multi-player has been discussed many times, and I agree it could be really cool. It's not going to be in The Bloody First but perhaps sometime down the road.

The 'show what a unit can see' feature has been requested many times, and is something I want to look into for TBF. It's a matter of having the time to do it well, and do it without a huge performance hit.

There will be an integrated map editor, so you will be able to adjust maps to your heart's content.

Steve
User avatar
Hexagon
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 8:36 am

RE: wish list

Post by Hexagon »

For me one of the most wanted things for CC is NOT another west front 1944 title, really, if you want reanimate CC serie search other front, why not The Pacific, North Afrika, Berlin 1945 or pre-post WWII wars??? if you see the mods for CC5 are a lot of good and interesting options out of the overexploited combo Normandy-Bulge.

Apart this, yes, the option of teamgames is great but for multy add the option to save a game when you need it could be a great add to dont limit battles to 15 minutes fights, with this you can fight in same map lets see... a pair of hours with reinforcements arriving and a dinamic and less rigid fight.

Other interesting add is that finally squads on map deploy as squads and dont move as chickens with no head where they are unable to use proper terrain and cover.

User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: wish list

Post by wodin »

I agree..please not another West front game...if you want to do a popular theater first do East front..you've done West front to death recently.
User avatar
Kanov
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: México

RE: wish list

Post by Kanov »

I will just say that I wish you guys luck. [:)]
Hard-core Spectre
User avatar
Kanov
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: México

RE: wish list

Post by Kanov »

If possible, try to come up with more statistics. These are fun to see and can help to balance a mod and help you with how you play it:

-Kills and loses per type of unit and BG
-Deaths inflicted by weapon, type of ammo etc, differentiating friendly fire incidents
-# Rounds fired, # rounds that hit, # rounds missed. Per type of ammo, weapon, unit, BG
- # of prisoners, # VL taken per battle, per day, per BG. Maybe show a graphic of sorts.
Hard-core Spectre
User avatar
Kanov
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: México

RE: wish list

Post by Kanov »

Steve and also other people involved, from the last post you made in the other thread it seems that you already have a better idea on what this game is going to be. Could you give us a more precise insight about the direction you are planning to take this game and what will it be capable of so we know what would be inside the realm of possibilities to ask for and not look like pipe-dreamers when pitching out ideas or wishes?

Thanks! [:)]
Hard-core Spectre
User avatar
SteveMcClaire
Posts: 4303
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:31 pm

RE: wish list

Post by SteveMcClaire »

Hi Kanov,

I've discussed some of the high-level design decisions (like the concept for the campaign system) in a few places on this forum. Yes, there is a design document with a lot of specifics about how I plan to have things work, but right now it is still a little early to commit to more detail than that.

Steve
steelwarrior
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:19 pm

RE: wish list

Post by steelwarrior »

Make XP more visible and let it count in battle - always love RPG effect - so XP gain should do great - maybe even leveling troops up manually so I can form sepcialists for scouting or tank busting or supression?

Let us upgrade units to better equipment in mega campaigns spanning several years of the war - also love that aspect of RPGs ;-)
Tejszd
Posts: 3466
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:32 pm

RE: wish list

Post by Tejszd »

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire
The 'show what a unit can see' feature has been requested many times, and is something I want to look into for TBF. It's a matter of having the time to do it well, and do it without a huge performance hit.

What is the target hardware?

Dual cores are pretty much entry level.
Quad cores are probably the majority
Six to Eight are the higher end

Video (graphics cards and Monitor)
cards pretty much all have 1GB+ of memory
Monitors are all 1024x768 or higher
User avatar
SteveMcClaire
Posts: 4303
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 9:31 pm

RE: wish list

Post by SteveMcClaire »

The exact requirements are still TBD. They will be somewhat higher than for Panthers in the Fog, but despite going to 3D, our more distant top-down perspective is easier on the graphics card than a crazy-detailed first person game. So I don't think many recent PCs will have a problem with The Bloody First.

Steve
User avatar
Stwa
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 6:05 am

RE: wish list

Post by Stwa »

OK,

For once, I am really pumped for this project. I really hope this game will completely obsolete CCMT. I heard this game was going to be Modern? [:D]

How will the maps differ, will the game still play out on 2d maps like now? I know this questions seems stupid, because the first thing you think of, is that each map will be generated by the 3D engine during execution?

If there are 3d maps, then 3d (explodeable) structures will popluate the maps?
SapperAstro_MatrixForum
Posts: 216
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2002 9:05 pm
Location: Penrith, Australia

RE: wish list

Post by SapperAstro_MatrixForum »

Everyone else has just about covered what I would like.

One more thing...

How about coding it in SDL so that it can be played across multiple operating systems? More money/markets for you, more choice for us.
User avatar
Kanov
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 2:02 pm
Location: México

RE: wish list

Post by Kanov »

I would like an improved sense of continuity in battles, which is already very good with things like the terrain gained in previous battles and the carry-on of damage on maps as well as wrecks of vehicles destroyed previously. Also would like an improved logistic system. What I mean with this:

Continuity:
-Teams surrounded after battle ends (that is, can't trace a path towards a friendly exit VL) start with whatever weapons and ammo they ended the battle with, even scavenged enemy weapons. Can't be removed from active roster and can't be repositioned next battle.
-Instead of fixed time in turns, make it like CC2 in which you could choose how long to wait for next battle. The least amount of hours chosen among the two sides is the time in-game that the next battle will take place. More time = more reinforcements, rest, ammo and fuel for you and your enemy.
-Now with 3D Would be cool if active teams showed some kind of visual representation of continuous battle, like worn out dirty uniforms and helmets and worn out paint or rust/mud on tanks etc.
-Continuous real time, if a battle starts at 5:00am and lasts long enough you get to see the sun rise slowly.


Logistics:
-You get a limit of whatever measure unit, percentage or whatever you want to call it of ammo and fuel (could add more things like actual number of men for reinforcements, water and food if you want to get real grognard) and after each battle you units expend a certain amount of ammo and fuel. You then decide how to distribute your remaining reserves among them. This reserve of ammo and fuel could be static or can be replenished over time. e.g. Operation 1 starts and you get 20 units of ammo and 20 of fuel, first battle is very hard and you end up with expended teams, each rifle unit for example needs 0.5 units of ammo to be at full and each truck unit needs 1 fuel to be full but tanks need 1.5, since you have more days ahead to accomplish your objective you must plan carefully if you want them to replenish them full next battle or just at some acceptable level to save for a counterattack by the enemy or a full on attack by you later. These ammo and fuel measure units or percentages can be static and set for the whole OP or they can be restocked on certain days, like how replacement ratios are managed in PiTF. Teams expend their share of ammo and fuel in real time, if you move a tank a around, it wastes more fuel than a vehicle that stays stationary for the majority of battle, if you use a lot of suppression fire or artillery then your ammo level drops dramatically.
Hard-core Spectre
Post Reply

Return to “Close Combat – The Bloody First”