Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Request\Wish list

 
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 >> RE: Request\Wish list Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/9/2020 5:04:26 PM   
Markowicz

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 10/3/2019
Status: offline
Why doesn't Slitherine just hire ineffable???

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 91
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/10/2020 2:52:39 AM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
Anybody can stand on the sidelines and toss good idea grenades into the fray. Bashing the code out of one's head to make them happen is orders of magnitude more difficult.

Besides, after investing tens of my hard-earned dollars into this enterprise, I believe the consortium of Matrix/McClaire/Slitherine is now working for me.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to Markowicz)
Post #: 92
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/10/2020 3:19:56 AM   
Markowicz

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 10/3/2019
Status: offline
Well I guess you clarified that. All I know is that far as great ideas go, you have quite a few of them and somebody over there needs your enthusiasm...

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 93
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/10/2020 7:01:23 AM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
Not being contentious here but we owe just about everything since Road to Baghdad to Steve 'The Blood' McClaire's enthusiasm for CC. From his early days as an itinerant classic CC tool maker and downright pitiful player, to now, nobody has invested more enthusiasm into this game. By rights TBF's full title should be "The Blood's: The Bloody First". It's just that as high-functioning individuals on the scale, the dev team isnt always capable of showing recognizable human emotion.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to Markowicz)
Post #: 94
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/10/2020 8:06:09 AM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
That reminds me - req. smoke barrages as support missions.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 95
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/11/2020 6:01:07 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
A unit icon should appear above nearby icons when selected. Selected unit icon below remains at the bottom of the pile.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 96
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/15/2020 4:57:48 AM   
v1jcm

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 1/10/2020
Status: offline
Please bring back the flee/retreat -button from the olden Close Combats!

I keep playing as axis, and in some cases the game can't go on until I am beaten. However I am too weak to win, and too strong to be wiped out. So, then, as the time runs out I start the groundhog day again and again. I would be happy to be out of that situation by using a tactical
retreat, and fighting another day. Just press the flee-button, and the whole map is surrendered to the enemy, and the campaign continues in the next map.

Love the game, though. I have been waiting for this for 15 years...

(in reply to Saturnian)
Post #: 97
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/17/2020 1:24:10 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
Gear and Sub-unit icon limitation -

There is a display limit of 8 gear and sub-unit icons on the top row of the selection screen. Any additional icons only get displayed when the icon count is reduced below 8. Could this display limit be increased to take advantage of the extra space on that part of the selection screen?

Also, Im curious why the Extra Ammo upgrade has been made unavailable (-1)? It seems to work ok for each nation (0, 1 & 2). Pity that only mods would offer this neat little nugget.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by ineffable -- 1/17/2020 1:25:18 PM >


_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to Markowicz)
Post #: 98
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/25/2020 3:07:09 AM   
firecaptain

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/28/2015
Status: offline
Edit soldiers names. Get real immersive.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 99
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/27/2020 1:42:55 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
Allow scenario files to make multiple upgrades of a given type available instead of limiting upgrades to one of each kind.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to firecaptain)
Post #: 100
RE: Request\Wish list - 1/28/2020 8:55:45 PM   
CGGrognard


Posts: 583
Joined: 10/3/2013
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: v1jcm

Please bring back the flee/retreat -button from the olden Close Combats!

I keep playing as axis, and in some cases the game can't go on until I am beaten. However I am too weak to win, and too strong to be wiped out. So, then, as the time runs out I start the groundhog day again and again. I would be happy to be out of that situation by using a tactical
retreat, and fighting another day. Just press the flee-button, and the whole map is surrendered to the enemy, and the campaign continues in the next map.

Love the game, though. I have been waiting for this for 15 years...



Provide the option on the battle debrief screen to "Fall Back". Whereas the force will abandon the current map and fall back to the next friendly map if available. Currently as the Axis, the only option is to Defend and fight it out on the map until the force morale collapses, the force is destroyed or all the VLs are taken. My option of creating a "fall back" situation is to deploy only one squad/team away from the VLs and hope they survive.

_____________________________

"The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting." - Sun Tzu

(in reply to v1jcm)
Post #: 101
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/1/2020 7:37:33 PM   
WileyKojote

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 7/3/2019
Status: offline
Anyway you can make the camera movable in regards to elevation? Its stuck at that 45 degree angle. Make seeing topography way easier.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 102
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/1/2020 9:28:14 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WileyKojote
Anyway you can make the camera movable in regards to elevation? Its stuck at that 45 degree angle. Make seeing topography way easier.


The L key toggles between 40, 60, and 90 degrees. The K key toggles from the current view angle to a 90 degree overview. Go into game options and check 'Free Camera' which is then used by clicking and holding the scroll wheel while moving the mouse.

Camera limits in \Close Combat The Bloody First\Data\MapView.txt can easily be edited using Notepad.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to WileyKojote)
Post #: 103
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/3/2020 2:37:01 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: offline
You can also change the camera pitch with SHIFT+UP/DOWN.

Cheers

Pip


_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 104
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/3/2020 11:02:43 PM   
KnightWolf1000

 

Posts: 3
Joined: 2/3/2020
Status: offline
The possibility to create linked maps and battles to created Operations/Campaigns with Germans, Italians and Americans, but played from the axis side. Sorely missed.

Since it was announced I could not understand that change in the play-ability of the game with this edition. There had always been campaigns playable by both sides in all the previous editions of this game. I understand the historical limitations in this respect with the "theme" of this edition, but there could have been from the beginning a "What if" type of campaign that would allow the games to play from the side of the Germans (and even eventually Germans/Italians), or at the very least, the possibility mentioned in my fist paragraph.

Some of the other requests I have were already mentioned by other players, and some of the most pressing issues seem to be on the way to being/already addressed.

Thanks in advance and carry on the excellent work.

(in reply to Saturnian)
Post #: 105
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/4/2020 12:23:00 AM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
The TBF campaign can be played as the Axis. But due the POV chosen by design (focus on the 1ID), its just not as tailored as the US campaign. A tailored Axis campaign would have required ~twice as many maps and scenarios (+ playtesting) and a non-trivial bit of additional coding. Posssible to create an Axis focused campaign now, and a tailored Axis campaign when the content creation drop arrives.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to KnightWolf1000)
Post #: 106
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/4/2020 4:18:40 AM   
STIENER

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline
I totally agree with KnightWolf.....There had always been campaigns playable by both sides in all the previous editions of this game. [ except CC3 and COI which are linear like TBF ]

as ineffable says...The TBF campaign can be played as the Axis....but that's not what knightWolf is getting at. what is needed is a strat map so you can play a real strategic H2H game with both sides.

IMO this is the #1 priority for the next CC installment.

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 107
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/4/2020 2:32:36 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
CC3 and COI had linear campaigns playable by both sides. CC1 had a linear campaign. CC2's campaign consisted of linked, linear operations. Just because linear campaign arent you're cup of tea doest mean they're not campaigns.

FYI - as I've demontrated elsewhere on this forum, TBF's campaign is not linear. Every battle can have a A-B branch option for the US to advance to. Steve has indicated that this can be coded for the Axis as well. Every battle can have a retreat to map other than the map the US advanced from. Multiple scenarios can be created for every map. (See Djebel Keddab and Defense). This provides the capability to create large new non-linear ops/camps.

My response to KW1000 was based on what's possible for creating new ops/camps in TBF now not for some future release. In fact I posted a ready to play FJ campaign a month ago for players to use as a template for creating their own ops/camps. Linking custom scenarios with new main forces together into a new op/camp is simply a matter of editing the \Close Combat - The Bloody First\Campaigns\MAIN\DATA\ battles, operations and campaign files in Notepad. That's how a custom Axis campaign can easily be created today.

I strongly disagree that adding an area movement strategic layer is the #1 priority for the next CC release. CC's strength has always been the micro tactical, play to it. Multi-story bldgs without an automatic elevator up, soldier selection, custom unit and soldier names in battle, destructible terrain beyond shell holes and small arms dust. The content creation drop. Player awarded promotions, medals and skill badges. The rest of 1ID's war in Europe. These are all higher priorities for me than another afterthought strat level where, with a clear road, it takes days to motor on from XXX Corps jump off to Arnhem.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to STIENER)
Post #: 108
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/4/2020 7:03:57 PM   
STIENER

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline
WOW......its like your the only one with an opinion.

your right [ I never had CC1 ] CC3 and COI had linear CG you could play from both sides....I never said they didn't. IMO...obviously not yours...TBF still has a linear GC....yes it can have different out comes....I didn't say it doesn't....but its not a movement strategic layer that a lot of us like. I say a lot of us like, because im active in the CC community and I read the threads and I talk to other CC players. some of us much prefer the movement strategic layer. TBF cant be played by the germans like it can be by the allied. some of us like having a GC that can be fully played by both sides.

its nice that you posted a ready to play FJ campaign a month ago for players to use as a template for creating their own ops/camps. lots of players don't like to edit there games.they don't have the skills and / or they don't want the headaches...I don't no...but they don't like to edit there games. they want a game they don't have to mess with. its great that you can edit this game and mod it tho.

its your opinion that adding an area movement strategic layer is not the #1 priority for the next CC release...but its mine tho.
IMO its ONE of CC's strengths... the micro tactical play, but not the THE strength. I think it needs the movement strategic layer as a priority and a full GC playable from both sides.

"These are all higher priorities for me than another afterthought strat level where, with a clear road, it takes days to motor on from XXX Corps jump off to Arnhem" LOL...that's a funny one for sure, I like it...but not an after thought strat level, the strat level was never an after thought. it works great and we like it.

your intitled to your opinions and so am I, you have some good ideas for improvements to TBF but so do others, and I agree with KnightWolf.




(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 109
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/4/2020 7:13:03 PM   
STIENER

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline
oops....your right I did kinda say that CC3 and COI had linear GC's you couldn't play from both sides. poor choice of words on my part in that part of the thread. you know what I meant tho....LOL

(in reply to STIENER)
Post #: 110
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/19/2020 7:40:18 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
quote:

TBF cant be played by the germans like it can be by the allied.


Yes it can. See the above referenced FJ Campaign. BTW, and speaking of 'headaches' - its Steiner.

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to STIENER)
Post #: 111
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/19/2020 7:49:22 PM   
STIENER

 

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline
LMAO....don't be a dick just because we don't agree........

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 112
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/23/2020 6:36:59 PM   
jo005597

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 3/29/2014
Status: offline
Played the game all the way through twice now. All in all I totally enjoyed it. For me the 3D worked. The terrain is amazing, and the deployment process requires a lot more thought as to how you will fight the battle. The in-game mechanics seem to work very well indeed too, and the sound is just plain awesome.
Artillery and mortar support in this game is the best we've had. I'm cowering under my desk when the shells start raining down! Very well done here. Airstrikes I'm not so sure about. I've had very limited success with airstrikes but maybe that's just me.
So - what would I change? I miss the ability to preview a map before fighting on it. All previous CC games had this ability, and if it's there in TBF I just couldn't find it. It's frustrating having no visibility to the terrain you're about to enter when picking your forces. It almost looks as if this was meant to be included on one of the manila folder tabs during briefing and just never got finished?
There's a few bugs still hanging around too. In Normandy if you draw or lose a map with days still remaining in the operation it consistently ends the campaign for me. I thought you would get pushed back to the previous map or hold your existing positions. In one instance I had days remaining and intentionally held my position expecting to make a dawn attack with artillery support the next day, only to be told the campaign was over and I lost. Why?
Multiple people have requested multi-floor buildings PLEASE add this. If you move units into a building give us an option - ground floor, top floor, and they will deploy accordingly. I placed MG team in a church and instead of being able to see the entire map as in previous CC games, they couldn't see past the hedge outside the window!
Not sure why people are asking for surrendering soldiers to be added back? I've had numerous cases of Germans surrendering and not a few where my own guys do too. Surrendering mechanic seems to work very well for me.
I would like to see units be able to use undamaged captured equipment, and would like for infantry units to be able to requip a friendly undamaged field gun whose crew were killed or abandoned it. They may not be as accurate with it, but at least let them 'have a go'.
One of the things I liked about 'Panthers in the fog' and 'caan' was the ability to tow guns, and carry infantry. I would like to see this returned. Ambushing with a field gun, dropping smoke, then relocating that gun was very handy - especially playing against people not AI. They never really knew how many guns you had!
Another feature I'd like to see added is when building your force. It would be ideal if you could attach teams to leaders, and then on deployment they are always placed together, allowing us to then fine tune their deployment. I often have a mortar HQ unit managing my mortar teams, but finding them on the map during deployment is not always easy. At least on the team view, sorting the units by leader, and then attached would be great - in a tree like view. This way you could issue commands to the team, or the group, or your entire force.
The addition of resupply vehicles would be cool too. When units run out of ammo we have two choices right now. Sit tight and hope, or flee to a safer location. With a vehicle we could have the added tactical decision, of risking the vehicle for rapid resupply of front line units, or moving units back to meet a supply vehicle.
All in all - I think you're taking the franchise in the right direction. We had to wait a long time, but the wait, for me was worth it. Each map I felt I was there with the squads and the game was immersive. Can't wait to see what future patches provide. Thanks for giving us a chance to make suggestions.


_____________________________


(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 113
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/23/2020 7:03:32 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
Map preview was added in v.1.0.9. See the Steam forum thread. The last 3 beta versions are only available on Steam, although Pip has mentioned how to get a Matrix version of TBF updated on Steam.

The complaints about surrendering were before that issue was fixed in v.1.0.7 IIRC.

Good idea about creating groups in Force Selection similar to selecting units then pressing CTRL + #.

I'd bet S.McClaire has expended more than a few brain cell working on an elegant solution to multi-level bldgs

_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to jo005597)
Post #: 114
RE: Request\Wish list - 2/23/2020 9:11:26 PM   
jo005597

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 3/29/2014
Status: offline
I purchased direct from Matrix. Good to know about the Steam update - I'll try and get an update from there. Thanks for the info.

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 115
RE: Request\Wish list - 3/15/2020 7:09:30 AM   
flapjack484

 

Posts: 16
Joined: 4/20/2019
Status: offline
I'd like to see a few things

First and foremost, actual *close* combat is maddening. It's ridiculous to have a team come up behind an enemy team, order them to fire, and then they spend 5 seconds doing a Chinese fire drill while the enemy team lazily turns around and mows them down. Earlier today I had a sniper with the expert marksman award attack from ambush at about 50 yards. He missed by an incredible margin (by about 45degrees) and then was hit by a hailstorm of bullets. The accuracy of fire feels about right in most cases but very frequently what should be really, really easy shots miss at an unacceptable rate.

Overall I love the game, but that's one thing that's driving me nuts.

Additionally, I think it's been mentioned before, is that there's a fair degree of weirdness in the post battle/soldier screens (Minor victory, but attack failed and enemy pushed you back) along with the text of soldier history not displaying completely, and other strange things I can't remember off the top of my head right now.

As far as wishes, if it's possible, I'd love to see captured equipment available to supply to a unit, and for future releases, a soldier history page that includes all troops you've ever had, living, kia, and pow, that displays visually like CC3/COI.

(in reply to Markowicz)
Post #: 116
RE: Request\Wish list - 3/17/2020 9:55:50 PM   
hellcat7

 

Posts: 17
Joined: 1/17/2020
Status: offline
Would like to see a new option that game player can make a soldier like sniper choose a suitable weapon if the soldier has more than two weapons

(in reply to Saturnian)
Post #: 117
RE: Request\Wish list - 3/25/2020 2:43:30 AM   
Markowicz

 

Posts: 83
Joined: 10/3/2019
Status: offline
This game has a lot of potential but the corporate entity said "**** the users" were all about makin' money....

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 118
RE: Request\Wish list - 4/28/2020 5:19:17 PM   
ineffable


Posts: 408
Joined: 12/13/2019
From: Fishers Ferry
Status: offline
1. Change this script function- SetAllowedOrderUnit(0) -to allow more than one variable, ie. (0,1). Two would let the player act as squad leader, commanding both teams in a squad, while the rest of the player's active force operated under AI control.

2. Would also like the converse of that function- SetDisAllowedOrderUnit(s) -which would prevent the player from controlling any of the units in the Support column. Im thinking specifically of a script function where the player cant use vehicles. While these arent as overpowering against infantry as in classic CC, theyre still a game changer. In battles where the player has ~5 vehicles, the tendency is to spend most of the game controlling them. IRL, armor and infantry tended not to coordinate well once the shooting started, particularly US units.

*3. Most importantly, allow the SetAllowedOrderUnit(n) function to apply to the Axis. All of the other OnDeploy() functions do.

< Message edited by ineffable -- 4/28/2020 9:58:55 PM >


_____________________________

Quid si

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 119
RE: Request\Wish list - 4/28/2020 11:16:22 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 1445
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ineffable

1. Change this script function- SetAllowedOrderUnit(0) -to allow more than one variable, ie. (0,1). Two would let the player act as squad leader, commanding both teams in a squad, while the rest of the player's active force operated under AI control.

2. Would also like the converse of that function- SetDisAllowedOrderUnit(s) -which would prevent the player from controlling any of the units in the Support column. Im thinking specifically of a script function where the player cant use vehicles. While these arent as overpowering against infantry as in classic CC, theyre still a game changer. In battles where the player has ~5 vehicles, the tendency is to spend most of the game controlling them. IRL, armor and infantry tended not to coordinate well once the shooting started, particularly US units.

*3. Most importantly, allow the SetAllowedOrderUnit(n) function to apply to the Axis. All of the other OnDeploy() functions do.

An interesting idea. I will have to see whether it would work with the rest of the game logic.

Cheers

Pip

_____________________________

follow me on Twitter here

(in reply to ineffable)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat – The Bloody First >> RE: Request\Wish list Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
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

0.332