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

  Survey
TRIVIA: Are soldiers credited for killing surrendered troops?

Yes
No
Unsure



Results
Polls

Votes 3124
Comments: 2

  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 - $10.00
12/29/2020

Anonymous - $1.00
11/06/2020

ZAPPI4 - $20.00
10/10/2020

ZAPPI4 - $20.00
10/10/2020

__Creeper__ - $10.00
07/08/2020

Bazookajoe - $25.00
06/02/2020

Pete - $25.00
04/11/2020

Anonymous - $10.00
03/08/2020

m2carbine - $20.00
02/14/2020

Dima - $25.00
01/26/2020

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



Search for at
Close Combat Series Advanced Search


 Author
Message
 
panzerfutz




PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 8:03 pm Post subject: Differences in cover from other versions Reply with quote

Hi. I just bought CC3:CoI (I already had CC2 & CC5) and I've noticed a big difference between this game and the others. When I play, I usually set up to have the team status icon display the unit's level of cover. I find this helps greatly in determining whether a position is defensible or is really just a deathtrap. In CC5, infantry units in buildings are usually shown as having moderate to good cover, which makes sense to me because they're harder to spot and have some protection from enemy fire. In CC2, there are no team status icons but the principle seems to be the same; units in buildings seem to fare better than units out in the open, particularly when coming under small arms fire.

In CC3:CoI, this principle seems to have been stood on its head. Whenever I move units into buildings, they display their cover status as being poor. Can anyone explain this to me? Did people in Russia live in glass houses during WW2? Or is it just another one of those strange Close Combat anomalies that drive me crazy? (Like the super-accurate AI mortars vs the wildly-sprayed player mortars, with "lucky first shot" variant.) This problem has a flow-on effect which really bugs me, too. When a unit in CC3:CoI comes under fire, they immediately stop moving towards their ordered destination and start seeking cover. (This is also different from the other games; in my experience with the other versions, units only stop moving towards an ordered destination after coming under sustained, heavy or accurate fire.) The problem I have with this change in behaviour is that, in conjuction with the change in level of cover given by buildings, my units will often flee the relative safety of a building after coming under sporadic and inaccurate fire. They will then make their way outside, only to be picked off by MG or mortar fire. Rolling Eyes Who thinks this accurately represents human behaviour? I sure don't. I would be interested to hear anyone's comments regarding this subject, particularly if they have some way to fix it.

P.S. I think CC5 is best engine of the series because of its inclusion of artillery and air-support, which makes the outcomes of battles more historically accurate. Both CC2 and CC3 suffer for the lack of it. In CC2, it is impossible to lose as the Germans and difficult to win as the Allies because, the overwhelming material superiority enjoyed by the Allies in air power and artillery supply is nullified. The reverse is true for the Germans in the early campaigns of CC3; it is impossible to lose as the Russians and difficult to win as the Germans. The KV-1 and the T-34 wouldn't be such a headache, when playing as the Germans, if I could blast them with an air strike from a Ju-87 or Ju-88.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
nihl18

Rep: 0.1


PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 3:08 am Post subject: Reply with quote

glass houses? nah.. just houses constructed differently , most 'peasant' houses made out of wood will not even stop machine gun bullets, let alone some kind of shell. There are some stone houses(grey walls), but even stone will not stop a continuous barrage of 82mm mortars or a well placed tank shell.
As far as soldiers coming out of cover when under fire , I have encountered this annoying bug too , i guess its the realistic unit behavior in CC trying to say to the soldier, "im in cover but i cant get a clear shot , so ill scoot around a bit and maybe get shot at in the process until i can see the enemy", in short , you deploy a squad inside a house facing a wall , some can see the enemy , this is probbably because half the squad has found holes/windows to shoot out of (invisible to the players eye) , but some are hugging pure wall and dont have x-ray vision. It just a random dice roll I guess , who can shoot out of a house and who cant. General rule of thumb , the larger the squad, the less amount of soldiers will be able to shoot at any given time.

There are some mods for CC3/Cross of iron that feature artillery observers and air strike controllers, sadly I dont recall any in der ost front or gross deutschland, I know for a fact west front and commonwealth summer have these special units to help out your weak shermans combat the heavy panzers. Also poland 39 mod has arty spotters and air controllers for both sides, though you dont actually see any planes fly , their bombs are damn accurate.

oh and about early war germans lacking penetration for t-34/kv's, I noticed even an early war stug has a chance to immobilise/damage, etc. a soviet heavy if ordered enough shots , even if they complain about 'we cant penetrate that armor'. I surprised myself recently in gross deutschland , when my weak and puny 37mm pak'door knocker' shot continuously ( about 20 shells Rolling Eyes ) at a kv2's side, and actually managed to immobilise it!

German side; 41, possible AT power to use against soviet armor :
-50mm PAK AT cannon = if possible, buy this above all else, this is the best chance to take out t34/kv's until heavier weapons come along
-Stug = despite having a weak short barelled 75mm cannon, it still has a chance to knock out a kv if given the opportunity to have enough ammo and place enough shots
- Mark 3 panzer with 50mm short barrel = can work in a pinch against a t34 and a kv if given side shots
- flamethrower teams (best infantry at counter early on)= if given the possibility to sneak up to a t34/kv, a couple salvos can destroy it or make the crew panic and abandon the vehicle. Watch out for those rear MG's on the kv's though! Time the tank/turret rotation for best results
-infantry teams with molotovs/grenade bundles/magnetic mines = effective , but unreliable , as you do not know which soldier in the squad has the at weapon, and they miss half the time. infantry/engineers with explosive charges miss the targeted tank 90% of the time, making the charge go off NEAR the tank, with a chance of immobilising it, or not. Compared to the soviet 14.5mm PTRD at rifle, the panzerbusche 39 at rifle is a lot weaker.


"Only happy people have nightmares, from overeating. For those who live a nightmare reality, sleep is a black hole, lost in time, like death." - Guy Sajer, The Forgotten Soldier
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
panzerfutz




PostPosted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:58 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the response but I think you missed my point. The only way a house doesn't provide better cover than being out in the open is if it's made of glass. It's my understanding that, when using a house for a defensive postion, it's common practice to rip up the floor, sandbag the walls and dig a trench around the inside of the sandbags. Ok, so a unit which has just taken a house doesn't have time to prepare it to that extent but, being inside a building still makes spotting the unit more difficult. This means a unit inside a house, even one made of wood, should have at least moderate cover. Yes, it's not proof against tank shells or mortar rounds, but nothing short of a reinforced-concrete bunker will give you that sort of protection. As for not every soldier being able to fire at the same time, that can be an advantage. It allows you to rotate men out of the line of fire and conserve ammunition.

My point is that the designers of CC3:Cross of Iron have significantly changed the way the game plays in a way which is, to my mind, totally unrealistic. Given a choice between seeking cover in a building or being out in the open, most people will chose the building. It's only when the building is obviously being targetted with heavy, sustained or accurate fire that leaving the building makes sense. But the way this game plays, the enemy AI only has to pop off a few loose rounds and my units turn tail, like a bunch of chickens, and flee what should be a good defensive position for the "safety" of a completely exposed position. That's just wrong and the designers obviously buggered it up on this point. I'm just wondering whether anyone has come up with a patch to fix the flaw.

[quote]Artillery conquers and infantry occupies.

J.F.C. Fuller
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
schrecken

Rep: 195
votes: 15


PostPosted: Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:52 am Post subject: Reply with quote

It hasn't been changed from CC3 AFAIK
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website GameRanger Account
 
panzerfutz




PostPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:15 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry if my last post created the impression I was comparing CC3:CoI to the original CC3. I meant to say that CC3:CoI plays very differently from CC2 and CC5. When exposed to sporadic or inaccurate fire, my units in CC3 run like a bunch of cowards away from perfectly good buildings to seek cover out in an open field. This doesn't happen in CC2 or CC5. I think this behaviour makes CC3 a fairly crappy version by comparison. I mean, who wants to play a game where your units retreat every time someone takes a potshot at them? I could understand if this behaviour was confined to Russian conscripts, but to see German regulars behave that way contradicts everything I have ever seen or heard about the Wehrmacht. Also, being told that a solid-stone, multi-story building can only provide poor cover from light arms fire while an open field gives moderate cover just doesn't cut it for me. I stand by my opinion that the designers buggered it up on that score.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
nihl18

Rep: 0.1


PostPosted: Wed Dec 24, 2008 10:51 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Are you keeping a commander with large enough radius close to the troops when they take fire? Because even if their experience is good, a squads morale may drop at any second in battle due to a number of reasons , 1 being if they are shot at/bombarded, and so they may panic and do something rather rash like what you said.


"Only happy people have nightmares, from overeating. For those who live a nightmare reality, sleep is a black hole, lost in time, like death." - Guy Sajer, The Forgotten Soldier
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
 
 
Post new topicReply to topic printer-friendly view Close Combat Series Forum Index -> Close Combat Cross of Iron


 
   
 


Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum




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!