Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat The Bloody First

#1: Sooo how is it? Author: Ocelotl, Location: Oceanside California

Posted: Sun May 31, 2020 12:37 am
—
referring to the Bloody First. I was hoping the next iteration would be a complete departure from the older versions of cc, this one seems to be sort of a side step, at least in terms of graphics i.e. the isometric view with 3d shapes. Isometric games are... well as old as the original CC. Regardless, the original games are gems so the potential is there. So whats the verdict on this game?

#2: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: stiener, Location: Gibsons B.C. canada

Posted: Sun Jul 19, 2020 11:30 pm
—
IMO it blows....still got major issues in MP....the MP game timer is the biggest issue. it can be slow...and that wrecks the game completely...even tho ur game system is way above the game requirements.
is matrix listening to us as we play test there FN game again....not really...the usual ..either they don't believe you or they just say we will have a look and then NO feed back.

save your money.....
I quite playing it and went back to LSA / GJS mod....

#3: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: vobbnobb,

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:37 am
—
I own and have played including grand ( not guh rand) campaigns for all of the close combat ww2 games from close combat 1 right on up to bloody first including matrix stuff. Comparing this to all of the older cc games and the other matrix games, I'm sorry I can't get used to it. I love the old style everything including mods. The 1940s meuse mod by tejzd being my favorite mod for cc. There is something about the gameplay that is grossly missing and off or that I am going to have to get used to, Matrix did a great job using it's engine before PITF but something started to die out in panthers in the fog, so I know the older stuff had best gameplay, my opinion.

#4: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2020 3:08 am
—
Thanks vobbnobb! Guess I better get working again on Meuse for LSA....

#5: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2020 7:50 am
—

vobbnobb wrote (View Post):

The 1940s meuse mod by tejzd being my favorite mod for cc.

I agree. No one has done more to keep mods alive, ported and updated!

#6: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: Schmal_Turm,

Posted: Sat Sep 12, 2020 7:43 pm
—
Being that I don't own the Bloody First, and have never played it, I agree that the original way the previous games are laid out is just fine with me. With the addition of the myriad of mods, and even the occasional errors encountered in some of the mods/games, although it is somewhat disconcerting, and irritating—the alternative of no CC games, and by extension—no mods for those games, is something I can't contemplate.

A special thanks to all of the hard-working modders in the CC community, in which our warring lives would be back to just playing with miniatures and board games, and therefore, would take up so much more of our time. Heck! What other games allow you to finish a battle in as little as 15 minutes?

#7: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: dj,

Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2020 4:23 am
—
Yes frustrating how after 20 years the gameplay is regressing badly. Haven't bought it yet waiting for price point under $20. CC2 or CC3 with some good mods still the best all these years later IMO.
I wish Slitherine / Matrix would just take the original CC2 or CC3 update the maps and graphics, keep the AI as is and call it a day. I know they lost the source code but they should be able to replicate it.

#8: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: Jatke,

Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 3:38 pm
—
A short list of how TBF gameplay has "regressed badly":

playable pause
mid-game Save
battlefield review
requisition equipment (inc. radio) & sub-units
soldier awards, promotions, history tab
LOS viewshed
removable UI
AI deploys & fights better
active development
branch option, non-linear campaign
Commander reputation
branching scenario options
better Debrief (still flawed tho)
user defined scenario VLs
modability
Can script deployment, side aggression, unit control
water, vehicle dust clouds
dynamic lighting
Italians
multiple fire support missions + timing
Improved minimap situational awareness
a more playable Overview with battle effects
tooltips
panicked/broken/routed soldiers may stay on map
escaping POWs
coop play
Enemy 'edge' icons increase situational awareness
recuperating soldiers that return to the unit
Teams Monitor list badges and manpower count
soldier monitor list sorted by health status
incoming arcs
smoother vehicle pathing
tracer impacts
vehicle sounds
sequential orders
can mod up to 40 units max per side
better death animations
casualty 'balloons'
High initiative and caution settings
set home map side
Custom key binding
4k resolution support
vehicles nerfed and will retreat
Infantry will assault tanks

#9: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 4:50 pm
—
I can't tell if Jatke is being sarcastic..

"Italians"

#10: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: Jatke,

Posted: Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:53 pm
—
Neglected to delete them from the list, which was part of a broader enumeration of TBFs features. Alas, without the Eyeties, the improvements in TBF over classic CC may seem scanty and undeserving of serious discussion.

#11: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: dj,

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2020 4:39 am
—
So what I meant about "regression" is not the graphics. Rather the overall quality of game play whether MP or vs AI. I've read the GA press releases before claiming AI improvements and vehicle pathing corrections and found it contrary to those claims. Totally 100% unplayable vs AI as single player since CC5 and all the re-releases. The Mods helped offset. CC3 really didn't even need the mods it the build quality was so good for base game. Generally it's the same set of issues, not enough budget, part-time developers everything is rushed.

#12: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: Jatke,

Posted: Tue Dec 01, 2020 1:15 am
—
The AI and veh pathing are much improved in TBF. All movement pathing is shown by a line tracing the route. The AI can be scripted to have one of 7 'stances' (0 = All Out Attack, 1 = Attack, 2 = Probe, 3 = Defend, 4 = Delay Hold, 5 = Delay Withdraw, 6 = Retreat) or be given a range of stances eg. Attack - Probe or Defend - Delay. In defense the AI maintains position rather than moving randomly.

The classic CC mods didnt improve solo play. Hell, for years modders thought BG characteristics could be changed in the Battlegroups file when those characteristics werent even be used by the game. Smaller maps do produce more action simply thru proximity, not better AI.

Far from being rushed, TBF took so long in development that to some it became vaporware. And its 'part-time developer', Steve McClare, is the sole reason CC didnt die after CCM/RtB.

#13: Re: Sooo how is it? Author: dj,

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:43 am
—
Ok that's good news. I do appreciate all the hard work of Steve and others don't get me wrong. Just frustrating they operate on shoe-string budget ever since Atomic and the sales reflect that. CC2 and CC3 had huge numbers of sales and since then the numbers have dropped off substantially. If they would invest more resources likely would produce better results and sales.

As far as comparison vs classic CC mods, I think it really depends on the specific mod. Some yes were just a bloodbath of stupid AI vs how much ammo you have or limited resources. Others like Dreaded88 or PzJager really nailed it and even complained that others just tried the small maps as short-cut to force better AI results.

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat The Bloody First

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

Page 1 of 1