Close Combat Series :: View topic - Old debate, which CC is best?

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> The Mess

#1: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Curtain68,

Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2020 12:23 am
—
I know it is personal preference and each series has its merits but I just want to chip in with my take.

No series has much value without the mod and map makers. I don't play the original versions very long before moving on to the mods. And most mods I have played are excellent for all versions. The love and attention to detail are superb. I am not going to make a tribute post but the guys responsible must be very proud.

I always go back to CC3 because you can fit about 520 maps in there and maps are premium to replay ability. Not to mention 'retreat from battle', 'zoom in' and all the other features that have been debated on. But the best maps are mainly from the later CC versions so,
Years ago someone posted instructions on how to hex edit the cc3 exec to use bigger maps. I used this amazing find to play all the new version maps in CC3 BUT hard drive failure took this away together with many projects.

Recently I installed the stand alone VOT mod (which has the hex edited values) onto Windows 10. Then I duplicated its folders/files and copied over all the files from CC3/COI mods over, renaming each base folder. Basically I had various CC Mod folders within the main VOT folder. Then I discovered I could launch each mod exe from each different folder to play that mod (with no d switch).

Since I have created new elements files, made new terrain files and converted some maps so all the latest maps can be used. I have then renamed about 1200 maps so they appear in the scenario maker in order. E.G for WF, beach maps then Normandy. then France, then Holland etc. I have also rotated nearly 100 maps just because they are gorgeous.

Now I am working on each mod to get the best data, graphics and sounds, because there is a lot of choice. But I have also been collecting all the available data on how to make the AI WORK because I believe it can and have seen it work.
I loved the PAC mod but the early cc3 maps were not my ideal. Later CC version mod maps are perfect for it so now I can use them.

To me CC is a throw back to my days as a kid using miniatures. Nothing has come to replace it. I do want to share all this stuff eventually if any one is interested, but all this stuff is space heavy so will need to work out how to host.
Anyway, working on a realistic commonwealth NW Europe theater at the moment (Englander was an experiment Wink

) Then I will move on to the others. All maps are ready to use but they include all made by the community so need to consider getting permissions to host also.

#2: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Pzt_Kanov, Location: México

Posted: Mon Jun 15, 2020 7:27 pm
—
Hey man,

I remember when you dropped the Englander mod on the CSO site, I thought it was the most groundbreaking mod at the time, reminded me of the commando mod but bigger in scope. It had so many new and crazy ideas that no one had even thought about like coding a StuG as an at gun so you could see the tank "riders" and the full auto version of the SMG used by the soldier carrying it in very close combat.

I am interested in this huge map overhaul of yours. Specially a pacific mod with updated maps, that would be so cool. Good luck finding a hosting site.

Oh and the best close combat is CC2 of course but CC3 is a close second ;^)

#3: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Ivan_Zaitzev,

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2020 12:30 am
—
For me it's CC2, it's the game I always come back to.
The only thing I really miss in CC2 is the ability to scavenge weapons and ammo.

#4: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Hicks,

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2020 2:00 am
—
CC3 with Der Ost Front. It had for me the best mixture of customisation and sense of progress. The scale of time was larger which gave more variety to what you would fight against. A strategy map layer would have been nice, but given how often the end section of a campaign descends into playing the same four or five maps over and over I'm glad it had the linear campaign instead.

#5: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Desertmouse, Location: south of London

Posted: Tue Jun 16, 2020 5:36 pm
—
For me CC4 with true green mod love the tank graphics or
CC5 with Karelia /Tali Ihantala mod best maps out there

#6: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2020 12:38 am
—
I play CC TLD the most because of the mods. But say CC LSA the best individual game.

The most advanced individual game at the tactical level is Modern Tactics. But I tend to play the AI much more than H2H and to me a campaign is required. Without either a CC2/CC3/COI or CC4/5/TLD/WAR/LSA campaign I find I don't play it.

One thing that always bothered me with CC is the way features were not carried forward and built on. Why couldn't the last game have had;
- a directory for single battles/maps to be stored in so we had the flexibility to add single maps of CC3/COI. It was suggested but never done.
- an option to set points in a single battle and enforce it for CC3/COI. It was suggested and points were displayed again.
- the zoom in option (map zoomed and larger soldier/vehicle graphics used) of CC3/COI
- the BC/strategic options; BG stacking, bridge blowing, etc. of LSA
- the deployment options for teams and objects before a battle of Modern Tactics
- single player, H2H or up to 5 v 5 Multiplayer of Modern Tactics
- more than 1 support strike for each type of Modern Tactics

#7: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: buuface, Location: Thailand

Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2020 7:28 am
—
You are right Tejszd

It's very odd that great features are constantly dropped from one release to the next.

You may not remember, but CC1 even has a battle replay function. It was one of the coolest things about the game

I have to agree that as far as the game engine goes, LSA is the best, because of the stacking/merging battlegroups and the ability to attack a map from multple locations simultaniously.

It's a pity that LSA is so much more difficult to mod than previous games, meaning we may never the see porting of all our favorite mods (apart from GJS) to LSA

#8: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Curtain68,

Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:26 pm
—
I remember when you dropped the Englander mod on the CSO site

Pzt_Kanov wrote (View Post):

Hey man,

I remember when you dropped the Englander mod on the CSO site, I thought it was the most groundbreaking mod at the time, reminded me of the commando mod but bigger in scope. It had so many new and crazy ideas that no one had even thought about like coding a StuG as an at gun so you could see the tank "riders" and the full auto version of the SMG used by the soldier carrying it in very close combat.

I am interested in this huge map overhaul of yours. Specially a pacific mod with updated maps, that would be so cool. Good luck finding a hosting site.

Oh and the best close combat is CC2 of course but CC3 is a close second ;^)

Yes, was a sort of tongue in cheek mod, not sure any of the trade offs really worked, though I did enjoy using the amphibious vehicles and it was a good learning curve. I enjoyed CC2 for the AI, though TT's CC4 Vetmod also got the AI to rights. Cathartes CS mod campaign also had at least 1 op where the axis AI side would attack hard, so hoping I can sort something with CC3, got a few ideas.

#9: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Curtain68,

Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:38 pm
—

Hicks wrote (View Post):

CC3 with Der Ost Front. It had for me the best mixture of customisation and sense of progress. The scale of time was larger which gave more variety to what you would fight against. A strategy map layer would have been nice, but given how often the end section of a campaign descends into playing the same four or five maps over and over I'm glad it had the linear campaign instead.

Yes, I think map variation is crucial to replay ability. It is handy you can retreat in CC3 games when you know no progress can be made until you receive more requisition points or upgrades. I want to try and reflect the strategic situation with a third party program showing progress of historical units, where cc controls the actual battles. Like the old MMCC3 but with more scope.

#10: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: Curtain68,

Posted: Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:47 pm
—

Tejszd wrote (View Post):

I play CC TLD the most because of the mods. But say CC LSA the best individual game.

The most advanced individual game at the tactical level is Modern Tactics. But I tend to play the AI much more than H2H and to me a campaign is required. Without either a CC2/CC3/COI or CC4/5/TLD/WAR/LSA campaign I find I don't play it.

One thing that always bothered me with CC is the way features were not carried forward and built on. Why couldn't the last game have had;
- a directory for single battles/maps to be stored in so we had the flexibility to add single maps of CC3/COI. It was suggested but never done.
- an option to set points in a single battle and enforce it for CC3/COI. It was suggested and points were displayed again.
- the zoom in option (map zoomed and larger soldier/vehicle graphics used) of CC3/COI
- the BC/strategic options; BG stacking, bridge blowing, etc. of LSA
- the deployment options for teams and objects before a battle of Modern Tactics
- single player, H2H or up to 5 v 5 Multiplayer of Modern Tactics
- more than 1 support strike for each type of Modern Tactics

Before my last hard drive loss I had made a CC5 chessboard type strategic map where all maps had the same VLs, entry and exit locations. This made swapping in new maps easy. Latter CC versions have some great features and it is a shame they are not carried over. I just enjoy the flexibility of CC3 and the wider variation of maps/unit ugrades. Plus it is a lot easier to mod and I find I can edit the data fast because I know my way around Excel.

#11: Re: Old debate, which CC is best? Author: mooxe,

Posted: Fri Jun 19, 2020 8:08 pm
—
I always look back to www.tournamenthouse.com when I see this debate. Before TH was lost, CC2 had 46,000 individual games logged. CC3 had half, and CC5 half of what CC3 logged. I reference TH as its our only way to see how many games were played online. Of course there were many tens of thousands more that were not logged or played versus the AI.

Now that Close Combat is 24 years old, the excitement and popularity is long gone. Over those two and a half decades the metrics on what makes a good game have changed. Each version has been one step forward and two steps back in terms of added features.

Close Combat 2 was the daddy of them all. This is where the realism started. It cemented the games title in the war gaming genre and paved the way for the series to continue.

Close Combat 3 led to the mod explosion and popularity online.

Close Combat 5 had the most longevity and could have been the most sold version until 2004. Estimated combined sales of all version was 1.2m. It also may have bridged the gap between Close Combat disappearing and its resurgence through re releases.

The best version in terms of features is probably one of the re-releases. According to this Wargamer article as of Feb 2018, 5 million copies have sold. Its unclear if that includes the original 1.2m.

Two things we can probably all agree on though... 1) CC2 launched what we have today 2) The series definitely missed 99% of its online potential.

Close Combat Series -> The Mess

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

Page 1 of 1