Pzt_Kevin_dtn wrote (View Post):
|
Why is there continued interest in CC3 when CC5 is available with multiple mods operating under the CC5 format. Is it strictly the interest in the eastern front? Do people feel the AI is better? Is it easier to mod?
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
1) a bit better AI (probably more to do with the smaller maps)
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
2) a wide range of equipment is available as the game covers many years which allows for some neat options in that a battle/operation maker can control what is available (rarity)
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
3) individual squads/units can be upgraded
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
4) individual squads/units can be rested without losing their history
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
5) points allow freedom to "buy" whatever you want but will stop someone from having all tanks or veteran units or...
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
6) you can flee a battle
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
7) prearranged bombardment for a battle (setup by the battle/operation maker)
|
ANZAC_Tack wrote (View Post):
|
points made u choose most effecient, or attacking in numbers or smaller quality units. another tactical edge
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
It was the soldier personal stats that realy got me hooked with CC1!
During a DOF CC3 H2H Campaign, one SS soldat, Schuss, began his career as a buck private during Fall Blau (early in 1942)
Eventually Schuss , after a distinguished career, including 8 promotions, met his demise on Prokhorovka Ridge as Hauptman Schuss, when his Kommand Panther was fatally struck by a bazooka rocket.
In CC5, that could never happen
Legendary CC Heroes, i will never forget their names, Schuss, Frieder, and so many other legendary sprites in my CC Campaigns
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
CC3 is so much easier to mod than CC5
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
In CC3, it is so much easier to create game balance than CC5 (because of points system)
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
CC3 has far fewer bugs and glitches than CC5
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
CC3 lends itself far better to online play than CC5
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
Please also note that, just like in the real historical statistics, the amount of artillery losses is much higher than that of AFV losses (actually double).
This is what WW2 stats should look like!
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
CC3 players want to experience simulated ww2 combat command in the battles that actually happenned, in the historical order they happenned, its fun.
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
CC3 involves more closecombat time (none wasted looking at stratmap)
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
MMCC3
|
Quote:
|
Because it simulates one command, being one officer, commanding one company. ..... Commanding men that you know and have personally grown fond of as you nurture them, watching them gain experience, get promoted, men with names that you remember, names whom you grieve over/miss when they are gone
|
Ivan309 wrote (View Post):
|
CC5 is focused in infantery, which in my opinion is alot more interesting and challenging than running down your opponent with tanks.
|
AT_Stalky wrote (View Post):
|
However, the CC5 system offers more diverse interaction with its macro and multiple micro level views of the war. That obviously (and statistically proven) has its appeal to so many CC-players…
The combination of the strategy layer and the tactical layers objectives is the strength in the CC5 system. In a CC5 GC game, the VL are or low importance, they are just nominal in its nature. The importance in a CC5 GC is the real value, as in taking the right exits/entry’s and combine that tactical layer objectives with the overall strategy layer objectives… This is a strong side of the CC5 strategy layer, that offers REAL value objectives in the tactical fight.
|
zoober wrote (View Post):
|
Doesn't strat map of CC4/CC5 offer more choices for the players? I think it does.
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
Supply lines, determined by the strat map, affects ammo & fuel in battle for units
|
Tejszd wrote (View Post):
|
Tanks can crush fences & hedges on maps in battle
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
Only 44 maps
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
You can play a whole CC5 campaign without even playing on all of them
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
Playing on the same maps over and over and over again ......, you might fight a dozen battles each on 2 or 3 maps
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
Then there are the tiny vehicle and soldier graphics, and no zoom aaghhh!
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
Then there is the total waste of combat time stuffing around with the stupid strat map when you could actually be engaging in "CLOSE COMBAT".
|
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post):
|
In CC5 there is virtually no soldier history, because a unit may be shot up a bit, so you put it back in force pool (where it is immediately automatically put back to full strength with no loss/liability/penalty) and when you reacquisition it, all the names are new and the original soldiers' combat histories are lost.
About the only teams that ever seem to build much statistics are mortar teams (boring).
|
acebars wrote (View Post):
|
But personally find the strategy execution of these last installments is simply woeful, movement phase and battle phase included. For example: There are these odd and strange reinforcement pool rules as well as units spontaneously disbanding after losing battles only to spawn a day later on a supply point 5 sectors behind lines.
|
Quote:
|
5) it doesn't represent a real command at all, because it is a fantasy world where you are a Fieldmarshall commanding several regiments and you are also several battalion commanders and dozens of company commanders as well. You are not at all in touch with your men because you are sufferring with multiple identity disorder, so realistic
|
Quote:
|
Not like CC5 where you suffer with a multiple identity disorder, as you bounce around making decisions at several command levels (ahistorical & unrealistic) as a General moving regiments, a Colonel moving battalions, a Major moving companies, and finally, the company commander moving squads.
|
Dima wrote (View Post):
|
in CC5 all the AVFs that got destroyed, damaged, immobilized or taken in battle when your BG is cut and out of fuel, are listed in destroyed tanks column for the total losses. So basically if your BG is cut and you take 5 AVFs in battle and they don’t have fuel from start all 5 of them will be listed as damaged in battle debriefing screen and destroyed in operation debriefing screen while all of them remains in your roster
|
Dima wrote (View Post):
|
Game wise: I have a lot of BGs cut off, so each time I go in battle with 4-5 immobilized AVFs that increase total number of Armor losses in GC Debrief screen – is it realistic
|