Matrix Games Forums

Space Program Manager Launch Contest Announced!Battle Academy 2 is out now on iPad!A closer look at rockets in Space Program ManagerDeal of the Week - Pride of NationsA new update for Piercing Fortress EuropaNew screenshots for War in the West!Pike & Shot is now available!Server Maintenance Battle Academy 2 gets updated!Deal of the Week: Advanced Tactics Gold
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: wish list

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Coming Soon and In Development] >> Close Combat – The Bloody First >> RE: wish list Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: wish list - 6/1/2014 9:00:00 PM   
Troger

 

Posts: 29
Joined: 8/1/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire
In other situations a specific soldier can earn an award/bonus by achieving something noteworthy, and this may include a weapon. For example, causing X enemy casualties in one battle with your rifle might award a sharpshooter title, and a scoped rifle.


That sounds a bit arcade-ish. What's to stop someone giving the men of a squad each a machine gun or sniper rifle? That would just take away from the realism. I could see different units/loadouts being available at different times ('42 BAR squad versus '43 BAR squad), and/or something that is already done now in CC: same unit type (e.g., a BAR squad) with different variations in terms of number of men and weapon loadouts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire
Some other comments:

The zoom system in the new engine is done via the camera in the 3D engine, so it can be set to any arbitrary level between the minimum and maximum camera heights. The minimum height will get you a closer look than the existing engine, but you will not be able to get right down to ground level. Lost weapons are also a little small to be easily visible. They're tied to the soldier who was carrying them, ala the existing game.


Will you be able to rotate the camera?




< Message edited by Troger -- 6/1/2014 10:00:41 PM >

(in reply to Steve McClaire)
Post #: 91
RE: wish list - 6/1/2014 9:27:21 PM   
Nomada_Firefox

 

Posts: 312
Joined: 11/12/2001
From: Spain
Status: offline
quote:

In other situations a specific soldier can earn an award/bonus by achieving something noteworthy, and this may include a weapon. For example, causing X enemy casualties in one battle with your rifle might award a sharpshooter title, and a scoped rifle.

I like it a lot and it remembers me to the CC3 where you upgraded your teams after battles.

quote:


Will you be able to rotate the camera?

Steve has told before how you can not rotate the camera and it is not a bad idea. I can say you how the poorer graphics cards usually do not accept this type of movement very well.

(in reply to Troger)
Post #: 92
RE: wish list - 6/17/2014 3:57:19 AM   
Saturnian

 

Posts: 25
Joined: 12/7/2013
Status: offline
These are complaints I have about the current engine that I hope don't carry over into the new engine.

1)It really annoys me when the force pool says I have, let's say, 3 tanks and when I choose that platoon I get 1 tank(or squad, or whatever). That makes no sense. I understand there is some sort of "logical" reason for it, but really it just is annoying. At least in cc3 it made sense where you are responsible for everything you have and everything you put into battle.

If I only get 1 tank, don't tell me I have 3, you know what I mean? I'll select a company from my force pool which has 3 units but I only get 1 of them, or even NONE! what is that?! just makes no sense. maybe this is a difficulty setting thing. personally I don't want to mess around with it but if it is that forgive me. But even so, if I only get one tank, don't tell me I have 3.

Also, when I choose a new platoon for some reason sometimes it draws from my support. Why would that happen? I'll click on a company(or platoon, or whatever they are) to fill my roster and I'll lose support squads. But I am not using any of those support squads in that company I chose, so why did I lose them from my support? It seems like it is because I am drawing too much from one company(or whatever) and somehow that isn't allowed, but it isn't like they are even the same units so i don't see what difference it makes. they aren't doing anything but sitting around along with hundreds of other men while 25 or so men do the fighting on a huge map. like, what? seriously? Am I missing something?

2)Enemy is not aggressive enough. makes a little push in the last 5 minutes of the battle but it is ridiculous. Enemy is just not aggressive enough and that makes it predictable and boring. I understand it is being cautious, but most of the time its cautiousness is not enjoyable and ISN'T intelligent because it is not taking the map even if it is on the offensive.Maybe there should be different commander styles for enemy battlegroups, some more aggressive than the others?

3)There are not enough troops per battle considering the size of the maps. This is one of the most absurd things about the games. If you have literally hundreds of men in a battlegroup and that group is SOLELY committed to that map, then why do we only fight with 3 companies(or platoons or whatever you want to call them)? The survival of the WHOLE battlegroup is at stake in a single battle and there are sometimes dozens of tanks available but I only get like 2 or three? how does that makes sense one bit? There are times where an entire battlegroup will be lost when only a tiny fraction was committed to a HUGE map. I mean, where are these soldiers?! they are just sitting around sipping tea? PUT THEM TO BATTLE! It makes no sense to lose a whole battlegroup like that. If you are going to have huge maps you should put more soldiers to battle.

4)Also, CC3 had it right. It recorded EVERY KILL and EVERY MEDAL of EVERY SOLDIER through the WHOLE GAME. It had a top category of total kills and it had a bottom one most recent. it also had a little ribbon for every campaign fought in so you knew how old they were. and are soldiers even promoted anymore? maybe they are but it isn't even noticeable anymore. soldiers have no more identity yet despite that battles feel very small. that makes no sense. Close Combat 3 already perfected soldier history, so why are soldiers histories sabotaged in all the recent games? Is it so difficult to just keep the soldier stats for the whole game? that is one of the things that made the game cool! So why is that not there anymore!??! is the game better without it? no, it is WORSE!!!!

5)And here I will say it again: You may as well equip vehicle crews with WHITE FLAGS instead of guns because all they do, if they do anything other than run around like idiots, is SURRENDER. They NEVER use their guns so why do they even have them? I know some people don't like the idea of being able to command a vehicle crew, but if all they are going to do is run around like an idiot and into enemy fire and not even use freaking GUNS they have, then you may as well just make them panic a moment and then, after a few seconds, rally and go under command of the player. This is a SERIOUS problem with the game not to be overlooked . there is NO reason to make vehicle crews as stupid as they are and if you can't get them to act realistic then just put them under the command of the player when their tank gets blown up. or just issue them with white flags and make them surrender right off the bat or just drop dead because it cheapens the game play to have them act the way they do.

6)And finally: the game is too easy. the enemy needs to be much more aggressive. I understand the enemy is being cautious but it is cautious to a fault. even if it is on the offensive it barely does anything and that is just not challenging. so it is better to make the enemy risk itself than to be too afraid to make a move.

hope i wasn't too much of a jerk!

thanks.

(in reply to general_solomon)
Post #: 93
RE: wish list - 6/17/2014 3:11:26 PM   
Steve McClaire

 

Posts: 2975
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Troger

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire
In other situations a specific soldier can earn an award/bonus by achieving something noteworthy, and this may include a weapon. For example, causing X enemy casualties in one battle with your rifle might award a sharpshooter title, and a scoped rifle.


That sounds a bit arcade-ish. What's to stop someone giving the men of a squad each a machine gun or sniper rifle? That would just take away from the realism. I could see different units/loadouts being available at different times ('42 BAR squad versus '43 BAR squad), and/or something that is already done now in CC: same unit type (e.g., a BAR squad) with different variations in terms of number of men and weapon loadouts.


That would be silly, I agree. Which is why you won't be able to get more than one of any given award.

Steve


(in reply to Troger)
Post #: 94
RE: wish list - 6/17/2014 3:13:40 PM   
Steve McClaire

 

Posts: 2975
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Saturnian
hope i wasn't too much of a jerk!


Not at all. Thanks for your feedback.

Steve

(in reply to Saturnian)
Post #: 95
RE: wish list - 6/17/2014 6:35:37 PM   
Kanov


Posts: 199
Joined: 5/21/2012
From: México
Status: offline
quote:


3)There are not enough troops per battle considering the size of the maps. This is one of the most absurd things about the games. If you have literally hundreds of men in a battlegroup and that group is SOLELY committed to that map, then why do we only fight with 3 companies(or platoons or whatever you want to call them)? The survival of the WHOLE battlegroup is at stake in a single battle and there are sometimes dozens of tanks available but I only get like 2 or three? how does that makes sense one bit? There are times where an entire battlegroup will be lost when only a tiny fraction was committed to a HUGE map. I mean, where are these soldiers?! they are just sitting around sipping tea? PUT THEM TO BATTLE! It makes no sense to lose a whole battlegroup like that. If you are going to have huge maps you should put more soldiers to battle.


Agree on this.

What use is to have supposed control over sometimes a full battalion (3 companies, meaning 9 platoons) when you can only field 2 platoons + support units? What are the other guys doing? why can't they come in and reinforce me? why can't I command more than 21 units if I want? why the AI can't help me in managing another 21 unit force to overwhelm isolated enemy units?

Glad its going back to company level command but please don't use pitf/gtc unit selection. Much prefer the CC2/CC3 points, but I would really like it to be better, I don't have any ideas right now but I'm sure that system can be improved.

_____________________________

Hard-core Spectre

(in reply to Steve McClaire)
Post #: 96
RE: wish list - 6/20/2014 12:24:43 AM   
Rick

 

Posts: 12368
Joined: 4/20/2000
Status: offline

This may not be something that current CC fans think is needed, but it might attract others to the game if there was a mechanism to save a game during a battle was possible, rather than having to complete a battle.

There really are a fair number of folks that need to be able to save a battle and continue at a later time.

Thanks
Rick

(in reply to Kanov)
Post #: 97
RE: wish list - 6/20/2014 4:47:49 PM   
Kanov


Posts: 199
Joined: 5/21/2012
From: México
Status: offline
Yeah, a mid-game save feature would be nice.

_____________________________

Hard-core Spectre

(in reply to Rick)
Post #: 98
RE: wish list - 8/24/2014 2:06:11 AM   
Huragan


Posts: 1
Joined: 8/24/2014
Status: offline
There is so much good stuff mentioned here, that even if only a small fraction is included in the new engine, it will revitalize interest for so many veterans who have lost their way and bring in a boat load of new recruits.

My vote is for multiplayer capability (2-3 per side) on bigger maps (a concept dreamed of by most die hard fans)

(in reply to Kanov)
Post #: 99
RE: wish list - 8/29/2014 5:31:22 PM   
FrankerMN

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 8/29/2014
Status: offline
Hi I have been playing since CC first came out.. somethings I would like to see are:
A Series of connected maps lets just say the equivalent of 6 PitF maps for example, cut up in halves so that an operation for a company sized unit would be to seize and hold some feature maybe 3 maps in (intermediate Victory areas would be added to break things up for play-ability) , in your force pool would be something matching the TOE by year by army .. attachment of support platoons as scenario design and/or a function of difficulty (an option to make a full custom force could be on or off depending on the player choice at game start}. During game play, bring back the retreat command, hitting that shifts you back a half map or a full map depending on your force moral and damage. If moral forces a retreat by one force a comparison of moral levels would dictate the number of half maps to retreat, a joint cease fire would be handled pretty much as it is ... but you could add a time of cease fire- so resupply and reinforcement would be a function of time. I would suggest a moving "minimum" time depending on moral and damage, so that the "winner" could pick a shorter time than the "loser" and keep the pressure on. This way one could essentially play a "campaign" covering a few days, and deal with counter attacks that were common as small units wrestled or some land feature, or town or road net.
Last I vote for a CC or more appropriately a NECC (New engine)Covering Guadalcanal since the terrain can be mapped accurately historical units strength is known, its nearly all infantry fighting with some arty support... and it allows for some "what if" variants based on the resupply of forces, for example if Japanese transports got though, or the US resupply did not...
Good luck with your project I look forward to see it.

(in reply to Huragan)
Post #: 100
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [Coming Soon and In Development] >> Close Combat – The Bloody First >> RE: wish list Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.078