Close Combat Series :: View topic - Classic CC4 GC

Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page 1, 2 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> Close Combat 4: Battle Of The Bulge

#1: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: mooxe,

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 2:51 am
—
Michael and I are playing out the original CC4 Grand Campaign. You can follow the battles on the CCS Youtube channel @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ewAUnFlLQM&list=PLeiWfPrs4jBURx-Q4D3fwzsIC8utFVBQ0

Some things I have re-learned about CC4..

1. Its a polished version of CC. Everything seems complete, no major bugs, nothing to worry about multiplayer wise like in CC5 (crashes and freezes).
2. Maps are SMALL. Very small, 250m wide for some of them. This makes battles intense and makes for lots of close combat.
3. Nowhere to hide on these small maps. Don;t even think about deploying into the obvious three story house that overlooks everything, you will just get pummeled to death.
4. Panthers are a menace. I am happy enough to get immobilizing hits. I have only destroyed one so far, damaged a bunch of others though.
5. Ammo for bazooka and mortar teams is low. Mortars only get 20 bombs.
6. Locked forcepools speed the game up. No waiting in the selection phase for nit pickers, or guys trying to get high ranked teams. I feel like locked forcepools go hand in hand with small maps. Larger maps give you more opportunities to try different tactics with different units. CC4 throws you into an MMA cage with what you see is what you get attitude.
7. The focus is on the tactical level, not the strategic level. Theres almost nothing to be distracted by in the strategic phase except supply and assigning support. Combined with locked forcepools, CC4 is pure close combat.

#2: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 6:17 am
—
Well said. - It is the red haired step-child of the CC world, but the small maps and locked forcepools which made it so disliked by some were what I enjoyed.

Enjoy the game, I'll be watching and NOT taking sides ..................... much Wink

#3: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2014 5:25 pm
—
I agree,

And because most of the maps are heavily obstructed, you can ususally live with the smaller maps.

Also, when Yuma released his modified set, I believe he said he found it difficult to get the German tanks through the campaign using the original maps. So, he obstructed the maps even more by adding more trees. So I suppose they wouldn't get shot up by the American AT Guns.

You can also try those maps, except apparently Yuma and Ernie were real fans of flammables and explosives. I have seen some maps where every woodpile behind a house was coded as flammable. Yuma liked to put explosives on the bridges. The bridges didn't blow, they just wasted everyone in a 50 meter radius and set both ends of the bridge on fire. Laughing

#4: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 3:32 am
—
The Vehicle pathing so far has been very difficult for me.
Now granted it's been what 5-6 years since WAR came out.
That's pretty much when I last played CCIV.
In many cases im putting down 10+ way points for them.

Trying to remember where all the best LOS was has also been difficult.

The fixed force pools are indeed speeding up the game,but I was bummed out at Schnee Eifel East when I had two AT_Guns.
No need for them on a heavily wooded map when your attacking.

Defiantly would say I'm very rusty in the H2H department.
To be honest the last GC I played online was back when I was in the AA Clan,and I'm sure that was a Team GC.

But eventually I think the Fuhrer will be pleased. Laughing

#5: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2014 11:34 pm
—
Fortunately, you are playing H2H, otherwise the vehicle pathing for the AI might be unaccaptable based on what you see in WaR.

I remember the initial release of CC4 could cause large vehicle gaggles, complete with spinny disease, and vehicle magnatism.

I think they (Atomic) followed the initial release, with a quick update.

Unless, I am just messing around, I don't allow more than 2 vehicles per side. I enjoy the games alot better that way. Heavy and medium tanks are usually the best behaved vechicles, while scout cars are liable to take off for the next VL regardless of circumstance.

#6: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Ivan_Zaitzev,

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 12:23 am
—
When LSA came out, it was impossible to make tanks cross some bridges. Rolling Eyes

#7: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 12:50 am
—
But did you ever figure out why that was. Was it related to pathfinding or something else. Question

I have WaR, for instance, and the vehicles (including those of the AI), are able to cross bridges.

#8: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Digs, Location: Ontario, Canada

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:01 am
—
I'm glad to see all these videos being uploaded to YouTube by CCS members. The only problem is, it's hard to the time to watch them all.

#9: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Ivan_Zaitzev,

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 1:33 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

But did you ever figure out why that was. Was it related to pathfinding or something else. Question

I have WaR, for instance, and the vehicles (including those of the AI), are able to cross bridges.

Yes, the pathfinding was messed up, they even released a video to say "Look! The pathfinding is actually working now!": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ_TNFykvyo

But, let's not derail this topic anymore. Laughing

#10: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:10 am
—

Ivan_Zaitzev wrote (View Post):

When LSA came out, it was impossible to make tanks cross some bridges. Rolling Eyes

In LSA they tried to improve path finding over WAR/TLD to avoid tanks/vehicles getting stuck in small areas so they made them avoid tight areas. This change was patched into WAR/TLD but unfortunately that made constricted areas, like some of the bridges, impossible to move over/through as the path finding AI no longer believed were big enough. You could even place tanks/vehicles on those same bridges as it was a passable area/terrain that was big enough for them to be placed but then they would not move.

Example; TLD pegasus bridge which even today has not been widened to fix the issue though it was posted in the Matrix forums. For LSA since it was newer I believe they recoded bridges making them a bit wider to fix the issue.

#11: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 2:37 pm
—
At the 08:50second mark, a 3 man rifle team takes out a panther at 10m from the front.

Link

What weapon did they use?

#12: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 3:14 pm
—
A panzerfaust or maybe a C-ration.

#13: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2014 6:27 pm
—
The Panther was probably killed by a rifle grenade, they are quite effective in CC4 if you leave the team on defend. I once killed a King Tiger with one!

At 5:53 he captured the south VL without being seen..... nice

Mooxe - nice try for the VL rush at the end!

#14: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: dgfred, Location: N.C., USA

Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2014 2:09 pm
—
Really enjoy your comments during the games mooxe Cool

.

You are doing fine Michael, bad luck with that one disband IMO.
I was worried your knocked out HT/AC would block the bridge on that one map Shocked

.

I have watched them all. Nice fighting guys.

I even tried to load my old CC4 disk... but it will not work for some reason. Dang it.

I snickered when Michael typed 'ouch'... I do the same thing in my games Wink

#15: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 1:14 pm
—
Look, it happened to me too. Exclamation

#16: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 5:09 pm
—
I like those shoulder patches.
What's the Germans look like?

#17: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 6:24 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Look, it happened to me too. Exclamation

Surely that deserves a medal.

#18: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:11 pm
—
There are no medals awarded in CCMT.

#19: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:55 am
—

platoon_michael wrote (View Post):

I like those shoulder patches.
What's the Germans look like?

In "WW2 Tactics" both ARMY and OPFOR use modern rank insignia. ARMY=American and OPFOR=German.

BTW, I edited these and made them thinner. I do have versions that aren't so edgie, but they look blurred. Confused

Last edited by Stwa on Mon Apr 07, 2014 2:19 pm; edited 2 times in total

#20: Re: Classic CC4 GC - MOOXE vs Platoon_Michael Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2014 11:08 pm
—

Tejszd wrote (View Post):

So, which bridges are messed up in WaR. I got WaR in 2013 (for the maps really), it came with v 450-14. Does this version have the screwed up AI (for bridges). I don't really play it at all, but now I am worried that the game sucks because of the bridge thing. Shocked

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat 4: Battle Of The Bulge

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Goto page 1, 2 Next :| |: Page 1 of 2