Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Hmm..that looked abit disappointing

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat – The Bloody First >> Hmm..that looked abit disappointing Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 2:08:10 PM   
wodin


Posts: 10115
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
I was hoping the series would return to CC2 levels of infantry survivability. However just a couple mins in t became apparent it wasn't the case. Such a shame. I do hope their survivability is something that can be modded.

_____________________________

Post #: 1
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 3:12:00 PM   
Wiggum


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/4/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline
Yes it looked disappointing.

Graphics look cartoonish. Infantry seems to have no survivability at all (looks like a bad casual RTS) and worst of all, i get the feeling that the AI is as bad as in the old titles. Seems like its just rushing its units towards the units of the player in a straight line most of the time and getting killed in the process. If there was one thing that should have been improved it was the AI since the AI was awful in all previous Close Combat titles. Also, in the Stream it looked like the AI was on the defense....but what does it do ? Running out of defensible positions right into the kill zone just like the old AI...

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 2
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 3:57:22 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 1133
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: online
Infantry in cover are extremely survivable, but out in the open they are (quite rightly) in trouble. That said, we agree that the balance isn't quite there yet, and are still tweaking how easy it is to spot and engage the enemy. That said, we certainly don't want to make infantry into unrealistic bullet sponges .

Cheers

Pip


_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to Wiggum)
Post #: 3
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 5:34:19 PM   
Wiggum


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/4/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline
What i saw in the stream looked like every german squad on the map running in file formation towards the americans. First two germans get killed, other germans kepp running, crawling towards the enemy with...next two guys get killed...rest still pushes forward in the same formation. I saw no effect of suppression, no taking cover, just mindless running towards the americans. I really hope this is not representative for the AI.

(in reply to PipFromSlitherine)
Post #: 4
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 5:42:04 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 1133
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: online
There are a number of AI settings we use during development. It is possible that the AI was set to be hyper-aggressive to ensure there was more predictable action going on for the stream. I wouldn't try and dissect the AI behavior from this demo is I guess what I would suggest.

Cheers

Pip

_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to Wiggum)
Post #: 5
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 5:58:32 PM   
Steve McClaire

 

Posts: 3883
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
Keep in mind that the scenario shown on Twitch was set up to show action: US troops in cover behind hedgerows and the Germans were making an attack on that central victory location. So yes, the attackers were running in the open and many were cut down. The US unit in the stone farm house on the VL was engaged in several close range fire-fight / grenade exchanges and took a few casualties, but they survived.

Steve


(in reply to PipFromSlitherine)
Post #: 6
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 7:10:02 PM   
Wiggum


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/4/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline
Honestly it did not look like the germans were the attackers. The US troops were on the bottom of a slope and there was a hill with a building. German troops came running from everywhere towards the americans while the us player talked about how he needs to secure the objective (the building on the hill.

Now if you set the AI to be "hyper aggressive" which made it act like the Age of Empires AI then i would say it was probably not a wise choice since your fanbase wants "realistic" (to some extend) combat. Also, the AI was THE weakness of all previous CC titles so again, maybe not wise to set it to "rush the enemy" for the stream.

Greetings

Also, it looks like there is no "reverse" command for vehicles. Is this true ?

< Message edited by Wiggum -- 6/4/2019 7:23:23 PM >

(in reply to Steve McClaire)
Post #: 7
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/4/2019 11:42:01 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 1133
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: online
The stream is a first look to talk in general about the game while seeing it running. It's not a real Let's Play, so trying to infer real behaviours from the demo isn't useful. With only a short time to show it, as said, the scenario was set up to show action. There will be plenty chances to see actual scenarios as we approach release.

Cheers

Pip


_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to Wiggum)
Post #: 8
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/5/2019 1:29:34 AM   
wodin


Posts: 10115
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
Obviously not bullet sponges..certainly don't want that. Harder to actually hit though, that's the way to do it. Take Stalingrad for instance. Casualty rate is known as very high. Now lets take the Pioneer attacks in the Factory district. During a whole days fighting if a company of say 100 men lost 20 soldiers during the day killed and wounded that would be considered extreme attrition. In games casualty rates are way over the top. One reason I think is due to them being hit way to easily. Lots of others like self preservation etc.

Anyway to maybe get as close to historical casualties make them much harder to hit and kill but pinned and suppressed more to slow game down and make up for lower casualties. That's how I prefer to see it. Certainly dom't want soldiers with health bars, one max two hits and out of the game is what I want. Just make it much harder to hit.

_____________________________


(in reply to PipFromSlitherine)
Post #: 9
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/5/2019 7:07:41 AM   
Wiggum


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/4/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline
@wodin the same can also be said about Combat Mission 2, the casualties in these games are also extremely high.

I just really hope that the AI is not as bad as the old AI.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 10
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/5/2019 10:25:19 AM   
wodin


Posts: 10115
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
I agree. Same with all games. However some are worse than others. CC2 had it right out of all the CC games. Then they went and changed it in later games.




quote:

ORIGINAL: Wiggum

@wodin the same can also be said about Combat Mission 2, the casualties in these games are also extremely high.

I just really hope that the AI is not as bad as the old AI.



_____________________________


(in reply to Wiggum)
Post #: 11
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/5/2019 12:46:29 PM   
AFANAS

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 2/27/2019
Status: offline
I've just see that https://youtu.be/gt5kZi3NrR8
Man, its looks cool but:
1. most important impression that the soldiers and landscapes is from different parts of game. I mean, no interactive of soldiers with ground and its elements. It is looks too schemathics. Soldiers walk through walls of buildings and through stone fences. Its looks like soldiers is levitate off the ground. When your soldiers come in to the building not by door in side there enemy have their position, but another side through the wall, its not looks like tactisc realism. Fog after shell hit is huge and have bad detalisation. Its 2019, not 2001!
3. Tracers is too thick, looks rude.
4. Fire and smoke of destroyed vechicles - again 2001. Man, last parts of CC have incredible visual effects! Super explosions, super smoke! Do it like that please!
I do not saying anything about AI because I not have understanding by this video.
All is my IMHO :)
Thanks. Best regards.

PS Sorry for bad English :)

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 12
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/5/2019 3:15:20 PM   
Steve McClaire

 

Posts: 3883
Joined: 11/19/2007
Status: offline
Casualty rates are super high in games for many reasons. The player tends to have perfect knowledge about what is going on and perfect control over his units, accelerating the action to a pace far beyond reality.

Casualty rates will be high if you order your troops to attack across open ground against prepared defenses at close range, as in the video in question. They'll be lower if you're more cautious. It's up to the player to decide how to play the game.

Steve



(in reply to AFANAS)
Post #: 13
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/5/2019 9:16:05 PM   
Kilovski

 

Posts: 43
Joined: 11/27/2012
Status: offline
Saw the twitch stream. Interesting. Taken that this is an early beta iteration with the AI set to hyper aggressive for stream purposes, these are all things that can be worked on and any wrinkles sorted out. One other thing struck me however, the b&w skull graphic that appears when a soldier is wounded/killed. This, in my opinion, makes it look a bit arcadey. This might be great for newer players, but for old timers, it just looks a bit meh. One possible way around this would be to make it a clickable option that can be turned on/off like soldier outlines etc.

(in reply to Steve McClaire)
Post #: 14
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/6/2019 10:41:23 AM   
wodin


Posts: 10115
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: online
Still wish you'd bring it to CC2 level. There are reasons it's touted as the best CC released.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire

Casualty rates are super high in games for many reasons. The player tends to have perfect knowledge about what is going on and perfect control over his units, accelerating the action to a pace far beyond reality.

Casualty rates will be high if you order your troops to attack across open ground against prepared defenses at close range, as in the video in question. They'll be lower if you're more cautious. It's up to the player to decide how to play the game.

Steve






_____________________________


(in reply to Steve McClaire)
Post #: 15
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/6/2019 7:32:30 PM   
Wiggum


Posts: 135
Joined: 11/4/2010
From: Germany
Status: offline
Not really in the hands of the player if the AI always attacks in a straight line over open ground frontal no matter the odds or overall situation ;)

(in reply to Kilovski)
Post #: 16
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 6/6/2019 8:05:30 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 1133
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wiggum

Not really in the hands of the player if the AI always attacks in a straight line over open ground frontal no matter the odds or overall situation ;)

I guess we should have clarified that the AI here only did that because the map was specially set up and it was using a special AI mode.

Oh wait...

Cheers

Pip

_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to Wiggum)
Post #: 17
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 9/21/2019 1:51:01 PM   
Duck Doc


Posts: 616
Joined: 6/9/2004
Status: offline
Agree completely about excessive casualty rates in CC and CM. Very helpful thread. Seems to be hard for games and their AI to get silicon soldiers to survive by seeking cover. This elementary tactic should be the starting point but, sadly, it is ignored and it becomes impossible to suspend disbelief while playing.

Whatever...

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

I agree. Same with all games. However some are worse than others. CC2 had it right out of all the CC games. Then they went and changed it in later games.




quote:

ORIGINAL: Wiggum

@wodin the same can also be said about Combat Mission 2, the casualties in these games are also extremely high.

I just really hope that the AI is not as bad as the old AI.





< Message edited by Duck Doc -- 9/21/2019 3:25:13 PM >

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 18
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 9/22/2019 10:51:07 PM   
Bradley62


Posts: 125
Joined: 6/29/2006
Status: offline
From what I've seen in a few vids the kill rates are quite good. There are more wounded but I'm liking inf toughness in general. Waiting to see more.

(in reply to Duck Doc)
Post #: 19
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 9/23/2019 12:04:55 AM   
zasgard

 

Posts: 139
Joined: 6/5/2007
Status: offline
The Das Tactic video was disappointing. A Sherman tank missed a halftrack at damn near point blank. Took something like 6 or 7 shots. The AI is a concern.

(in reply to Bradley62)
Post #: 20
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 9/23/2019 3:05:07 AM   
Rosseau

 

Posts: 2392
Joined: 9/13/2009
Status: offline
I have duly bought every CC since Cross of Iron, and I also enjoyed Modern Tactics. But in general, the improvements from game to game were pretty minimal, and I am not going to buy on release like I usually do.

Yes, the new game is 3D, but that means nothing to me without better game play, AI and the same modding capabilities as the other games. In addition to addressing the issues that long-time gamers have been talking about for years.

I am a 100% supporter of the franchise to the tune of several hundred dollars. But they can no longer squeeze any more out of the old game and engine, and I think new code and engine is beyond the scope of the developers. I hope I am proved wrong.

(in reply to zasgard)
Post #: 21
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 10/1/2019 12:31:57 AM   
drummer93

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/2/2018
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: zasgard

The Das Tactic video was disappointing. A Sherman tank missed a halftrack at damn near point blank. Took something like 6 or 7 shots. The AI is a concern.

yep, I saw like 4 or 5 situations on different gameplays where AT cannons and tanks missed ridicusly several times at short range (between 100 and 200 mts). Looks very very frustrating and unrealistic.

< Message edited by drummer93 -- 10/1/2019 12:37:23 AM >

(in reply to zasgard)
Post #: 22
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 10/1/2019 9:51:19 AM   
Surtur

 

Posts: 386
Joined: 8/6/2013
From: The Netherlands
Status: offline
This is something we are looking into

_____________________________

- Slitherine Group Producer -
Twitter
Steam

(in reply to drummer93)
Post #: 23
RE: Hmm..that looked abit disappointing - 10/2/2019 2:59:59 AM   
surfcandy

 

Posts: 107
Joined: 8/21/2005
Status: offline
I didn't find the game to look so overwhelmingly and a definite buy at least for me. I won't be purchasing unless there is a decent discount (not with a new release most likely). So for me now it's a no buy and if I ever buy from Matrix/Slitherine it will definitly be on Steam so I can refund if I don't like it with no problems or issues from Steam.

(in reply to Surtur)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat – The Bloody First >> Hmm..that looked abit disappointing Page: [1]
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

0.145