Search found 25 matches

Just to put a bit of oil on the flames... Wink

GJS on LSA would be a major project. Just wondering: would this be worth the time needed to do this?
If so, why would it be worth it? What features of LSA would benefit GJS, and why?

Aye Bartshe,

Nice to see you around!

I might actually give this game another go Wink

Interesting discussion.

I'll add a bit from my own experience, which is also a bit the 'designers' perspective Wink

I played a few H2H GC's. The AI of CC is not very competative to start with, which is why we balanced the GC for H2H play.

When one compares the strength of the two sides, the Germans obviously have a very mixed bag of battlegroups. Some very weak - like the Ost BG's - a fair number of average-strength BG's and a number of elite ones, especially the Panzers. The armor is pretty much concentrated in a few elite BG's.
The Allies on the other hand have mostly average strength BG's, with the advantage that all BG's have a fair amount of armor.

My strategy with the Germans is to hold on to the beaches as long as possible - the battlegroups deployed there are expendable in the first place. Once you're driven inland, those weak Ost-BG's are not of much use holding any point in a defensive line. However if you can confine the first wave of Allied BG's to the beach for the first turn, the second wave of Allied BG's will be delayed for another two turns. Which buy's you valuable time to deploy stronger BG's closer to the coast. The next objective is to keep the frontline as short as possible. That way you can maximize the effect of the better BG's. So I'll always try to dislodge the airborne BG's around Pegasus; if you can get a strong BG on the Pegasus map that will shorten the frontline considerably. Driving the Allies back into the sea is gonna be a hard battle though, I never succeeded in that.

The strategy for the Allies is to go inland as quickly as possible. Clearing the beaches is a job for the second or third wave of BG's. The further you can get inland the first few turns, the more room for reinforcements, and the harder it will be for the Germans to drive you back into the sea.
During the next phase in one H2H campaign I played I relieved the airborne BG's around Pegasus and replaced them with heavier BG's. I kept up the pressure in the centre, while not advancing more than two maps there. I did advance on the flanks however, taking Tilly on the left flank and Colombelles on the right flank. From Tilly I rotated the axis of advance into the direction of Carpiquet. Two weeks into the GC I moved one BG onto Carpiquet, and on the other side of the map I advanced into Caen. Which basically left around 8 strong German BG's (Lehr, 12th SS) in the centre out of supply! Rather sadly we didn't finish the GC, however the battle of attricion at that point surely went my way. (on a sidenote: encircling Caen was one of Monty's ideas)

About winning the grand campaign; sure it's hard to win as Allies. With equally skilled players it's probably impossible to actually conquer the whole strategic map, either as Germans or as Allies. The GC at some point usually turns into a battle of attricion. Still, as I described above, it's quite possible to implement a good deal of strategy to this attricion.
Apart from that, in reality the Allies didn't advance beyond the line Caen-Tilly during the timeframe of GJS. So if the Allied player does manage to advance beyond that line, I considder that a victory.

Actually WWII Online is a first-person shooter, which has nothing to do with ToW. ToW is a real-time tactical game, much like CC. Actually the designers told in an interview they were inspired by CC, which is very well noticable when you play it.

In fact it brings a lot of features the CC-crowd has been wishing for; larger maps, more teams on the maps, infantry and armor graphics to scale. Infantry that can use halftracks. Artillery that can be towed and relocated. Capturing enemy equipment. Ballistics and such are probably better than in CC.

The advantage of 3D, except for eyecandy ofcourse, is that one can actually "read" the landscape. GJS maps like Hill 112 and Bourguebus have hight differences across the map that have a major impact on the tactical picture, but it's hard, if not impossible to make that visible to the player. With 3D you don't have that problem. The main advantage of a 2D game is that it's easier to get an overview of the battle. However with the way control is implemented in ToW it's just as easy to grasp what's happening as it is in Close Combat.

I don't have the time to convert GJS into ToW I'm afraid Wink

Still, I might make an operation or two based on GJS. And yes, it's possible to play operations and campaigns online, although I don't particularly like the stock ops and campaign.

ToW is a memory-hog indeed; you'll need a good computer to run it. My rig comes to a screatching halt when there are more than 15 teams per side on the map...than again, it's interesting to re-create some CC-battles Wink

Lebisey Woods eh...quess that's not gonna happen. CC is nice, time for something new though. I quess ToW comes a long way in what I'd like CC to be; in 3D.

Cagny

An '88 overlooking the town

Pak 40 in ambush

Tiger crossing the railway

Couple of '88s guarding the ridge, shot up Shermans visible near the railway line

View from the other side

Infantry can't enter buildings indeed...I'd considder that a minor issue. Most of the battlefield is outdoors anyways.

What I miss is the true Normandy bocage country though, although I've got hopes that it might be possible to change that with the map editor. Might even get me into modding once more Wink

What did u people not like about Theatre of War?

Just played the demo, and I'd say it has potential. Can't run the demo mission Villers Bocage on highest settings, my rig won't do that. Apart form that, it's fun, and looks great. Took me a few tries to get a feeling for it though; CC is more "plug and play".

I'd love to see some of my GJS maps converted to ToW; shouldn't be that hard actually. Especially maps like Hill 112, Bourguebus and such lend themselves very well for the ToW style of gameplay. Better than CC actually, with realistic gunnery ranges.

The British tested the effect of an artillery barrage on advancing armor using Churchill tanks I believe. A platoon of tanks advanced trough a heavy 25 pdr barrage. The effect on the tanks was neglectable.

A lucky artillery shell could destroy the engine compartiment of a tank. A torn track would be more frequent. An armor-penetrating hit would have been a very uncommen incident.

The effect of an artillery barrage on an armored attack would be enough to force the accompanying infantry to go down. That would leave the armor virtually 'blind', which would in turn be enough to halt the attack.

Check this article out:

http://web.telia.com/~u18313395/normandy/articles/airpower.html

Air-to-ground weapons in WW2 where very inaccurate. Bombs, rockets and such had a very slim chance to hit a relatively small target like a tank is.

Besides, while destroing armor might be hard, infantry is vulnerable to attacking aircraft. Tanks without infantry-support are a much easier target for enemy AT-forces.

For a H2H single game, I prefer limitations on the numbers of tanks.

For a H2H campaign, preferably no limits. After all, the force pool limits the numbers in the long run anyway.

In one of my GC's my opponent decided to do an all-out charge with one of the 21st panzer BG's, deploying like 8 tanks or so. Result: 7 dead tanks, he lost half the tanks available for the entire campaign in one single battle. I like the risk one can take that way; makes a campaign more challenging.

My first wargame...must have been some flight sim on the Atari.

The first real wargame...V for Victory, Gold Juno Sword... Smile

The 15 teams in CC have always represented either a reinforced platoon, or a depleted company depending on how you look at it.

This link might get you underway:

http://users.stargate.net/~mcconmy/probability.htm

Seen that before. Best way to avoid this is to go for a cease-fire before the clock hits zero. That will enable you to continue the GC.

Installing the GJSv4.4 patch will not give you any problems when you continue a running GJSv4.4 campaign indeed.

Which map exactly would this be?

Check out this tread on the GJS forum:

http://www.closecombat.org/forums/showthread.php?t=8009

Just for the record: the Flammpanzer III had it's 50mm gun replaced by a flametrower.


	Login or Register	Home · Downloads · Forums · Combat Camera · Help