Welcome to Close Combat Series
  Login or Register Home  ·  Downloads  ·  Forums  ·  Combat Camera  ·  Help  

  Survey
Do incapacitations count as a soldier's kills?

Yes
No



Results
Polls

Votes 1212
Comments: 1

  Shout Box!!

Only registered users can shout. Please login or create an account.

  Main Menu
Articles & News  
    Help
    Player`s News
    Site News
    Multiplayer
    Terrain Challenge
    Boot Camp
Community  
    Forums
    Downloads
    Combat Camera
    MOOXE @ Youtube
    Statistics
Members  
    Private Messages
    Your Account
    Logout

  Donations
Anonymous - $25.00
08/15/2022

Anonymous - $25.00
08/15/2022

Anonymous - $25.00
12/18/2021

Anonymous - $100.00
11/08/2021

Anonymous - $15.00
04/09/2021

Anonymous - $100.00
04/05/2021

Anonymous - $20.00
02/20/2021

Anonymous - $10.00
12/29/2020

Anonymous - $1.00
11/06/2020

ZAPPI4 - $20.00
10/10/2020

Find our site useful? Make a small donation to show your support.



Search for at
Close Combat Series Advanced Search

Search found 282 matches
Close Combat Series Forum Index
 
 
Author Message
  Topic: Mooxe Says AI Performs Poorly in Matrix Forum
Troger

Replies: 143
Views: 89228

PostForum: Close Combat Modern Tactics   Posted: Sun Jun 05, 2016 6:00 am   Subject: Re: Mooxe Says AI Performs Poorly in Matrix Forum
Stwa's hobbies include: playing Close Combat AI, napping, and watching paint dry.  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing  Laughing
  Topic: CCS Sucks!
Troger

Replies: 32
Views: 25056

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:52 am   Subject: Re: CCS Sucks!
US_Brake wrote (View Post):
Oh ya, I forgot that CB_Trout joined KG. I played him all the time.


Wow, that screenshot of the Zone is crazy.  What is really funny is that the Zone (from the NINETIES) is a better matchmaking tool than what came with any of the post-CC5 releases.
  Topic: CCS Sucks!
Troger

Replies: 32
Views: 25056

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2015 4:50 am   Subject: Re: CCS Sucks!
platoon_michael wrote (View Post):
What a F-n Joke CC has become


You can say that again.  It's a utter mess.  And it's thanks to all those who got hold of the code and ruined good parts of CC and utterly failed to improve on the game.
  Topic: Fury
Troger

Replies: 67
Views: 49088

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2015 7:02 pm   Subject: Re: Fury
Fury was a pretty lousy movie.  Terrible acting, terrible plot.  I'm not sure what it was trying to be.  Typical junk you see from Hollywood.  

If you want to see a good WW2 flick, check out Generation War.
  Topic: patch 1.02 live
Troger

Replies: 8
Views: 13378

PostForum: Close Combat Gateway to Caen   Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2015 8:00 am   Subject: Re: patch 1.02 live
Pzt_Crackwise wrote (View Post):
Anyway, we'll see if it is fixed or not eventually.


Yes, we shall see very soon. hehe
  Topic: A custom (relatively balanced) campaign for you to try
Troger

Replies: 10
Views: 13193

PostForum: Close Combat Gateway to Caen   Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2015 6:33 am   Subject: Re: A custom (relatively balanced) campaign for you to try
Thanks for doing this crack, the stock game is in need of some balanced H2H operations.  I haven't fired your operation up yet but I'd like to note that some of the GTC maps are way too open (which we all know doesn't work that well in CC), so an operation that centers around maps that have towns in them is a huge plus.  I'll give this a go with the first willing combatant, maybe it will make GTC playable!

Crackwise--I remember when you once said "ich bin immer kampfbereit".  I'll play against other opponents until you find that part of yourself again.  Hehehehe
  Topic: Gateway to Caen v1.01 Patch + Bug Reports
Troger

Replies: 50
Views: 53243

PostForum: Close Combat Gateway to Caen   Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:27 am   Subject: Re: Gateway to Caen v1.01 Patch + Bug Reports
The Combat Mission games are great, but much more of a combat "simulator" than Close Combat ever was (saying that because some of those Slitherine people think Close Combat is some hardcore, realistic combat simulator--which is laughable).  The other problem with the Combat Mission games are that they hard to play in real-time.  There is just too much going on, graphically it's a lot of take in and process in real-time (hence why they were originally turn-based only).  

I think Men of War: Assault Squad is the closest thing to a 3d Close Combat.  It's more gamey, but with some alterations could easily be the "3d Close Combat".

I'm younger and am still in the camp that think this game doesn't even need to go to 3d, 2d works fine so as long as the game is refined and there are gameplay features added.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2014 6:22 pm   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
Pzt_Crackwise wrote (View Post):
Yeah Stwa, good luck honing your skills on that *ultra-über-mega* smart and competent AI!  Even the noobest human in the world would put up a better fight than the CC AI. I realize you (and similar single-player lovers) have fun carrying out search and destroy missions on static AI soldiers deployed as stupidly as possible, lol. No proper attack/defense objectives, no tactical withdrawal, no smoke screen usage... idiotic deployment...  However, this is not a thread to discuss the merits of multiplayer vs singleplayer. We have talked about these a lot before.

You know, many people on this forum would not criticise these Matrix guys as much if they kept the multiplayer like shit as it is, BUT instead improved the single-player so much that playing against the AI is actually fun and realistic! This is not the case, so I don't understand how you can support Matrix behavior in this context.

And CC was never a hardcore simulator, anyway. It is a mixture of arcade and simulation elements. And a game needs to find a good balance between realism and historical accuracy to be playable and enjoyable at the first place, whether simulation or arcade. As an example to illustrate my point, consider the following concept: In reality it is said mortars and artillery were the Nr.1 cause of infantry casualties in WW2. It means if implemented like that, the in-game HE support would be yet even more devastating, rendering the game much less fun (due to the unrealistic small deployment areas). There are already many abstractions and plenty of things toned down in this game, which makes it far from a simulation.


Precisely.

Even the greeniest of human players would have put up a defense that would have stopped or inflicted heavy causalities on Mooxe's charge in his video demonstration.  In case you missed it, Mooxe's video demostration was to show how worthless the "AI" is.  If you're playing the AI, you're probably close to being on your death bed or of a lower mental capacity (or you're new to the game, in which case it's OK).  Very Happy

And as Mooxe pointed out, crippling the human player so the single-player playing dolts can have "fun" against the AI is NOT the way of going about fixing any sort of perceived issue.  I hate even acknowledging these incoherent junk posts but anyone who claims that the mutliplaying population is 1% is just an ass.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:23 am   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
Stwa wrote (View Post):

The countless threads at this site alone reveal this utter lack of consensus as to what features constitutes a valid Close Combat game. It would be better for developers to follow their own ideas regarding the development of additional CC releases.


These guys doing whatever they want to do?  We're already getting that and look how far that's gotten us.

So, uh, yeah, I think YOU are in the minority with your opinions, especially this one.  Great games weren't created by a couple "big thinkers" alone, they are developed through feedback, and lots of it from a community of players.  The only reason they have the code is because of this community.  

As for the girly soldiers.  A majority of players do not like it.  All this talk about it countering "ramboing" is utter nonsense.  That was never problem in Close Combat. Like has already been said, since there are "all" those people that love the girly soldiers, the amazing "night" feature, restrictive BGs, watching paint dry, etc., make it an OPTION to play with it or without it.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 5:30 am   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
schrecken wrote (View Post):
Is Jim still on the team? ... he was against any fixes


What a bastard.  How is it that someone like him gets the say of what can/cannot happen?

Now it's Iain at Slitherine who is calling the shots, and I don't trust his judgement at all--he's goes on how about Close Combat is a "realistic combat simulator", and calls those of us posting online and active in mutliplayer 1% of the CC-playing population.

Schrecken, I know guys like you put  a lot of work into things, but I don't understand your trolling of those of us who posted against the releases and calling them out for what there were.  I remember you defending the only noticeable addition to Cross of Iron, the now famous and STILL present girly soldiers ('enemy spotted', 'redeployment adorted' ad-fucking-nausem).  How could you defend that crap?  It's ruined every release since.  Whose idea was that anyways?

johnsilver wrote (View Post):
I liked the F/Pool system pretty much from the outset of CC5 over the style CC3 had and thought it was a vast improvement, getting rid of the forced resting of individual troops that both CC3/COI have, along with restrictive purchase points. CC4 was getting that way and the maps were sweet also.


I like CC5's BG-based system more too, but CC3's point-based had its merits. I liked the point-based aspect itself, the ability to refit troops, didn't love resting them but it's not technically forced and I suppose there is some realism in that.

You can't argue for one or the other, you really can't, or at least you shouldn't.  They are both great and I think they both deserve a place in this game.  I really wish both would be present.

schrecken wrote (View Post):
pvt_Grunt wrote (View Post):

I am dissapointed because I want CC5 fixed and added to with ALL the features available. Turn them off in the background if they are not needed in the version. Matrix wont properly plan and run CC projects, and I think this is a deliberate decision by their managers.


That was indeed the plan and why in WaR the features had switches... what happened after i became sidelined is anybody's guess.

Also planned was for new releases to become all part of one game.. you just chose which scenario wou wanted to play, War, tLD,ABTF etc... this was the genesis of thew /D switch.

Theoretically if you had purchased an update you could then tweak your own game by turning various features on and off.. eg adding night turns and bridge blowing to WaR, parachute drops to tLD etc ... following this path any bugs would be eventually eradicated with each new release as it was a development of the one set ogf code.

Unfortunately this did not happen


Interesting.

WaR is the only re-release I don't have, I didn't know there were more toggable options.  The direction of going to more toggable on/off options (night battles, etc.) is great, and the only way any new feature shoulds have been implemented.  Give the players the control.  

Anyways, good posts by Michael, dj, Johnsilver, Grunt, Mooxe, Crackwise, Tejszd.  As crackwise said, make your voices heard on GTC's Steam page and Matrix, you never know.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Fri Sep 26, 2014 4:41 am   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
mooxe wrote (View Post):
Troger wrote (View Post):
Lol, LostTemple made this.  The laughs I'm getting from it help deal with the pain and frustration.



The granddaddy of them all from igotmilk, he made this one either in 2006 or prior,,,,



Lol, oh man.  I was conflating this one and LostTemple's.  I think a part of this was aimed at the random people who were making incredibly bizarre requests for things (medics, uber-soldats) that were definitely outside the scope of this game.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Thu Sep 25, 2014 3:31 am   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
Lol, LostTemple made this.  The laughs I'm getting from it help deal with the pain and frustration.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Thu Sep 25, 2014 3:17 am   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
LostTemple wrote (View Post):

Matrix Games: Hey guys, our last two rereleases are total junk.  Should we patch and fix them?
Matrix Dev team: Nah...but why don't we make a new intro instead?
Matrix Games: Sounds good.  You can proceed.  

This gaming moment of idiocy and fraud was brought to you by the thieving people at Matrix Games.



LOL, that's pretty funny shit. Where is LostTemple? Didn't he make that hilarious mock Close Combat advertisement?
  Topic: Historical realism mod :)
Troger

Replies: 166
Views: 227820

PostForum: Close Combat Gateway to Caen   Posted: Thu Sep 25, 2014 3:09 am   Subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
Seriously Dima, gives us a time-frame.  I take back all those things I said about Russia.  Smile  

If we don't get some sort of small fix, my money that I spent on Gateway to Caen will really be a waste.
  Topic: Disenchanted
Troger

Replies: 191
Views: 97252

PostForum: The Mess   Posted: Thu Sep 25, 2014 2:49 am   Subject: Re: Disenchanted
Look at the posts that were made almost four years ago in just this thread alone.  It says a lot.  

It's groundhog's day every release with these type of people.  I say these type of people because it's technically been three different "developers" (CSO, Strategy 3 Tactics, Slitherine).  And yet all three groups seem to treat those of us in the community the same way.  It's like they are trained to be that way.  Instead of actually putting work into the game to make it what it can be, they go out of their way to deflect ALL criticism and constructive comments.  All the while, they haven't actually improved this game.

The worst part of it is, these "development" teams (CSO, Strategy 3 Tactics, Slitherine) are former CC modders/mapmakers--which is also the reason that they are unable to actually develop a proper game.  

Many of us argued that those re-releases would hurt the game, and what has happened since the release of Cross of Iron?  The community has slowly died, and it's on it's last legs. Remember when the CSO "developers" and affiliated cronies were flaming and belittling those of us voicing our legitimate concerns before and after the Cross of Iron release?  Look where all those weasels are now, no where to be seen.  

These guys we have now have already went out of there way to point out that The Bloody First will basically be a shell of a game, without features some of us consider core to the game.  I can see their recipe already, add one stupid feature every game (for instance maybe the groundbreaking, brand new idea of an integrated matchmaking forum), make seemingly random change to a fundamental feature people like, charge $50, and then rinse and repeat!
  Topic: mediocre
Troger

Replies: 21
Views: 29526

PostForum: CC5 Stalingrad   Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:55 am   Subject: Re: mediocre
Dima wrote (View Post):
Pzt_Crackwise wrote (View Post):
By the way, I really would like to see Stalingrad made also available for TLD.  @Manoi and Dima: Have you guys stopped working on Angriff (the new Stalingrad mod) altogether? I hope the project is not dead : (

I believe Stal will not work in TLD due to GS - will probably be impossible to assault houses and fighting inside.


I think you are sadly right comrade Dima!

The girly soldiers (GS) of Cross of Iron, Wacht am Rhein, The Longest Day, Last Stand Arnhem, Panthers in the Fog, Gateway to Caen are not up to the task of Rattenkrieg.
  Topic: mediocre
Troger

Replies: 21
Views: 29526

PostForum: CC5 Stalingrad   Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 7:51 am   Subject: Re: mediocre
johnsilver wrote (View Post):
Myself and some others?


Who are these others?  Very Happy  

johnsilver wrote (View Post):
Just work within the current parameters of the game as to how to use them, the current inherent weaknesses of them and just understand it's nearly impossible to move them under fire, or while under attack to a better position to "fling" explosives, unless through a building onto a tank under cover.


Working within the current parameters?  Well, it's been 6-7 (lost count now) releases since CC5, I think we deserve better.  That "just take what you can get" attitude is old school, and it's what these "developers" are taking advantage of. We pay a lot of money (especially when you compare it to other games) and haven't really gotten any improvements.

Plus, you can't tell me that infantry didn't ASSAULT tanks with AT-weapons in WW2, it happened.  We should be able to re-create that and not have to wait for the exceedingly rare opportunity a tank strolls unaccompanied right next to your unit.
  Topic: should i purchase this?
Troger

Replies: 6
Views: 8687

PostForum: Close Combat Gateway to Caen   Posted: Mon Sep 22, 2014 3:18 am   Subject: Re: should i purchase this?
Not worth it.
  Topic: mediocre
Troger

Replies: 21
Views: 29526

PostForum: CC5 Stalingrad   Posted: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:14 pm   Subject: Re: mediocre
vobbnobb wrote (View Post):

russian anti tank teams were terrible.


In what sense? Teams won't assault and/or ineffective weapons?  I remember playing Stalingrad and having very difficult time using the German anti-tank teams with any effectiveness.  But, anti-tank teams that have handheld weapons (i.e., ones that require the soldier to be close to the tank) have always been hard to use in Close Combat.  Infantry in Close Combat seems to be coded to take cover (crawl) when a tank is in close proximity, and that makes assaulting a tank with a infantry team designed to assault it VERY difficult.  It's why I have argued for a an assault command that commands troops to assault with almost-reckless abandon.
  Topic: CCV new uniforms mod
Troger

Replies: 9
Views: 7188

PostForum: Close Combat The Longest Day   Posted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 11:05 pm   Subject: Re: CCV new uniforms mod
ANZAC_Lord4War's "RegXtra" mod made squad sizes much larger and changed uniforms (among other things).  I can't find it here on CCS or CSO, nor my personal backups.  Mooxe might have it, but you'd have to message him (or wait till he sees this thread) to find out.
 
 
 
Page 1 of 15 Goto page : 1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15  Next
Time synchronized with your computer time
Jump to:  




Forums ©





In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited and
found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some of the great Close Combat
mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank all the members of our volunteer staff that have
helped over the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!