[HogansHeros]

I've heard complaints to the effect that every close combat game adds three new features and removes two from previous games (or is it the other way around). I'm curious what you miss most from the older versions of the games.

This may make me sound like a real bean counter, but I miss the logistics from A Bridge too Far--was really disappointed that Last Stand Arnhem didn't have anything like it. Having to think "Who should get the air-drop tonight. The 1st airborne need it more and will have to hold out longer before linking up with XXX Corps but I can hold their drop zone another day or two and I don't think the 82nd will have a chance to hold theirs any longer. Better take advantage of this last opportunity to give them extra supplies/points for a day or two."

[vobbnobb]

On the newer ones, I would have to say not having another zoom-in level like the past had. Sometimes you need to see what one individual guy is doing, that guy could have a special weapon that is key to the team or another teams survival. If the guy with the mg is repairing/unjamming, unconscious or cowered you can't send your team ahead because there would be no cover fire. Also is that individual guy with the mg behind good cover or can you move him into better cover before another team advances. Also it helps with who is under and who is not under best troop command circle.

[Pzt_Kanov]

[DoktorPaj]

Maybe not an old feature, but I liked the reinforcement idea in COI where I can save any survivor from a beat up squad instead of having everyone removed because only one or two survived the battle.

[mooxe]

The mission editor from Modern Tactics and Marines.

The even more powerful mission editor from CC:AT.

[Troger]

[Vandoo]

My favorite feature of older CC games is that they were not owned by matrix\slitherine !

Gateway to Caen is the first one I bought since cc5 and I regret it now.

I kinda HATE having the feeling of "You bought it haha we had you suck*r"

Well its not gonna happen again matrix !

Good riddance.

[Schmal_Turm]

I guess maybe I am too easy to please as I am happy to get to play any and all of the games. I am willing to put out the money to buy all of the games at the full price, except for MT, which I wasn't sure I really wanted anyway as there are no campaigns you can conduct. Yeah sure, I swear at the fact that some of my units don't do what I program them to do and sometimes the programmed info makes units do ridiculous things. But what the heck, what commanding officer gets exactly what he wants from his men. CC to me, in spite of the nagging problems is still the best of the wargames out there and with all the mods that generous players provide free of charge still makes it the most cost effective. So I really don't like to hear all this shit about Matrix sucks! etc, as at least they managed to keep the CC system going with new games. That has got to be worth something, doesn't it?

As far as keeping with the general subject line of this thread, I miss that when a unit is in trouble it use to be that you could click on the message and the unit would be highlighted. Makes it much easier to see which unit is in trouble or has spotted the enemy.

[DoktorPaj]

The new "feature" with 21 teams is something I would have liked to see for the older games. I wonder what it is that has been changed for the latest two releases that was impossible to do in the old games? I recall people asking about it years ago, with no results. The ability to chose any team from the force pool to your bg instead of fixed platoons was one of the main features IMO, I think fixed units makes it pretty dull. I hear this is changeable through modding, but that's not really an excuse for it since Matrix could (should?) have done it from the start.

Also what are the real improvements with 32 bit graphics over the old ones except for hindering backwards compatibility? Same for the new screen layouts, and the battle screen layout. After having pretty much the same looks for every release since CC5  (except COI) there was no real need to redesign everything with new toolbars/monitors and a zoomed perspective. Especially not for battles set in the green fields of France (which we've also already seen so many times before) where combat distances are far and maps are huge.

And now that they're completely abandoning the top down view system for some 3d stuff it means that more or less everything will be restarted and the wishlist and ideas for a CC game based on what people actually wanted has completely swirled down the shitter. We're back on square one with a completely new game occupying an old name to at least give the illusion that the Close Combat genre will go on.

[mooxe]

[Pzt_Crackwise]

The guys from Matrix consistently focused on unnecessary things instead of first trying to fix the major gamebreaking bugs. It is 2014, GtC is out and still there are random crashes during multiplayer games. (truce button and in-game air support increases the risk)

If it is gonna be crashing like this, and you cannot fix it, then at least put an in-game save (preferably with autosave) option! I am really tired of rebuilding battles every 3 games.

[Antony_nz]

@DoktorPaj
Yea, There are a long list of things. The 3D argument is a cop out and a crutch.  IMO

[dj]

[Tejszd]

A couple features from LSA;
1) a 2nd BG adding units to an attack (either the same entry VL or from a 2nd VL if the BG came attacked from a different map)
2) assigning points to a single battle in the scenario which was enforced when playing. Not sure why they didn't add a button to the interface as a bet very few people know you can hold a key and click on map to set the points per BG to play like CC3/COI....

From CC3/COI the ability to add single maps to the game. This has been suggested multiple times to Matrix that even with a strat layer they could easily have added a new directory for single maps and added button in the editor to select these single maps when creating custom single battles....

[Tejszd]

The 21 team issue could have been overcome at anytime but it was not a priority for Matrix. I do not know the details, so I'm just guessing here, but I think the most effort was updating the user interface and all the graphic objects (resize them and set the x/y for them all).

For each game Matrix probably sets the $ and or ## hours of development and then determines a pecking order on what to change. The priority has to be the new maps/setting to make a new game and then code a feature or two for that specific battle.

WAR = increased number of BG's and maps. Plus a lot of CC5 bug fixes and the data files converted to text for easier modding.
TLD = paratroop drops,  night fighting, multiple countries/languages and expanded BG list to display 25 units
LSA = blown bridges, river crossing maps/points, multiple BG's due to all the adhoc small German units and BG stacking
PiTF = 32bit graphics, fog, larger map and vehicle graphics, more realistic mortar targeting and added riding in vehicles/towing guns
GtC = dug-in/camouflaged anti-tank guns or tanks and rolling barrages

Note: WAR and TLD with the latest patches applied are mod compatible!