ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post): | ||||||||
Never said that it was THE REASON CC5 would have sold well in the US because of the whole: The US won WW2 in Normandy bit You make a good point how CC5 was revived by the mods It lost interest because it was a crappy game, but the mods revived it. Yes, the CC5 eastern theatre mods definately helped CC5's popularity You can thank CC3 for enlightenning the CC players to where most of European WW2 was realy fought
WOW! HMMM, AT_Stalky notices CC players playing in European time zone more than AT_Stalky sees people playing in US Time zone AT_Stalky lives in Sweden Conclusion = AT_Stalky notices more players in Euro time zone because, being in Europe, AT_Stalky spends most of his online CC time in European time zone because most US players wont come online until AT_Stalky is well asleep as they are 6-9 hours behind Swedish time. Its no surprise that AT_Stalky does not play US people online often as AT_Stalky would have to either stay up till dawn playing or get up extremely early to play during US evening playtime
Maybe less than 1% of the time. Most often, say 99% of the time, a unit (BG) would retreat/withdraw into a sector behind their previous position (erxactly as in CC3 & CC1). Therefore, CC3 depicts REAL LIFE 98% better than CC5 CC3 ROCKS CHEERS AGS |
AT_Stalky wrote (View Post): |
But from a personal preference view, one can’t care less what other people favour. My taste, your taste, are subjective.. Lucky we have both CC3 and CC5, (and CCMT for Stwa, and CC4 to Platoon_Michaels)! |
Quote: |
It is the main reason, I try to stay in my CCMT cage (forum) for the most part. Far beit for me to go into another forum, and post critical remarks about that game. It is best to stay in the forums of the games you like, as a general rule. |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
Another thing that keeps cropping up with people who prefer CC5 is that more often than not they started with Close Combat V and/or IV with out any real proper experience of delving into the older games. Whereas I started with CC2 and worked my way up (and then back down again ) they will have started with IV or V and then later "tried" CC2 or CC3 or one of the crappy re-releases. |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
because with everything in life there will be always the few or the many that prefer one thing to another given a choice and/or have differing opinions regardless of what the concensus considers to be "better". |
Quote: |
Where did you get that statistics from?
I have only an impression of what most CC5ers started with… and that impression do not fully agree with your observation/statistics. |
Quote: |
If a strong majorety would equal consensus, then there would be consensus that CC5 would be the best of the games debated here. But, with qualitative meassures, one can hardly say that. It dont matter how many more ppl prefering CC5 over CC3, that still dont equal that CC5 is the better game in general. Though one may say CC5 is more popular than CC3, or more ppl prefer CC5 over CC3..
Preferances.... thats all. |
AT_Stalky wrote (View Post): |
A second observation, the CC5 “game room” has the most players in European time zone, not American. Conclusion…? |
AT_Stalky wrote (View Post): |
But, if someone state that there was more CC5 players in the European time zone than in the American time zone, then what does that mean..? |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
This discussion is starting to look like kids spat over apples and oranges - which are better, does anyone know? Can anyone tell? |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
AT_Stalky summed it up already: Preferences nothing else. |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
But AGS if you wanna continue.... |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
be my quest and tell me: what's the difference between CC3 and CC4/CC5 from the tactical point of view?.To me, none whatsoever. And now, what's the difference from the strategic point of view? |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
Doesn't strat map of CC4/CC5 offer more choices for the players? I think it does. |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
And it's something that CC3 is missing |
zoober wrote (View Post): |
But doesn't it mean it's better/worse game? |
Dima wrote (View Post): |
Yeah, used to play alot of CC3 since the release.
CC3 rocks as: 1) it is linear and has tiny maps that offer frontal assault tactics most of time! 2) it had so huge success after CC2 that Atomic moved to CC4-5 with stratmap and non linear GC! 3) it has incredible invisible ATGs - so cool! 4) you play same maps again and again as there is no way to move to other maps until you finish those! 5) infantry suppression work really great - soldiers get unsuppressed when enemy team charges them! 6) it has awesome point system - so successful that Atomic moved to FPs in CC4-5! 7) it doesn't represent real units like battalion size BGs in CC4-5! etc? CC3 rox |
Tejszd wrote (View Post): |
Being trying to stay out of this.... |
Tejszd wrote (View Post): |
but |
Tejszd wrote (View Post): |
The biggest complaint I have with CC3 compared to CC5 is the lack of control the player has on the strategic level. You will always win or lose the war based on the side you play and the only control you have is to move right or left between maps on an Operation..... |
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post): |
OH! WOW! HMMM, AT_Stalky notices CC players playing in European time zone more than AT_Stalky sees people playing in US Time zone AT_Stalky lives in Sweden Conclusion = AT_Stalky notices more players in Euro time zone because, being in Europe, AT_Stalky spends most of his online CC time in European time zone because most US players wont come online until AT_Stalky is well asleep as they are 6-9 hours behind Swedish time. Its no surprise that AT_Stalky does not play US people online often as AT_Stalky would have to either stay up till dawn playing or get up extremely early to play during US evening playtime |
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post): |
@ Stalky My response was entirely logical. ,. |
ArmeeGruppeSud wrote (View Post): |
AT_Stalky loves to sparr with me |
Quote: |
CC5 rocks
1) it is ahistorical so wannabes can try to rewrite history with different outcomes |
Quote: |
2) it had such a huge success that Atomic died! |
Quote: |
3) you play same maps over and over again and again as there is no way to play more than 44 maps in a campaign. |
Quote: |
It is more likely that you will play on less than 40 maps and may play one single maps 20 plus time zzzzzzz |
Quote: |
4) it has awesome soldier history system - so successful that at end of campaign only mortar teams have any real history |
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 |
Quote: |
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: |
CC5 rox |
Quote: |
2) it had such a huge success that Atomic died!
yes! as it had released CC3 2 years before that was a huge success after CC2! |
Quote: |
there are 44 maps in 1 operation making it highly detailed - of cause that's much worse than 3-4 maps per operation in CC3! |
Quote: |
wannabes try to capture Kremlin in CC3!
CC5 players try their skill to win historical operation as all the historical operations had at least 3 possible outcomes Wink. |
Quote: |
yeah, it is realistic, don't be jelous Wink. |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
yes! as it had released CC3 2 years before that was a huge success after CC2!
|
acebars wrote (View Post): |
CC3 was a huge success after CC2 and it was made by MICROSOFT |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
Matrix games has only produced shite. |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
CC5 is anything but a realistic strategy game, and it ruins the tactical element. Anyone who has played Hearts of Iron 2 will know exactly what a real WW2 strategy game should look like that or CC2. |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
Still waiting to hear a coherent argument for why CC5 is better than CC3 |
acebars wrote (View Post): |
and would also like posters to describe their experiences with both games (AT_Stalky for example) have you just tried CC3 or played it for a month at least? |
Quote: |
Well, Matrix has not produced any Close Combat game… Matrix is the DISTRIBUTOR.
SCO-Simtec developed COI, Blackhand developed LSA, and now PITF, and Strategy 3 Tacics developed WAR & TLD. CCMT was developed by S3T? if I don’t remember wrong. |
Quote: |
In any case it is certain CC4 and CC5 had something to do with killing Atomic. |
Quote: |
More proof that staunch CC5 defenders have not been in touch with the previous versions and have no real idea about CC3. |
Quote: |
CC3 was a huge success after CC2 and it was made by MICROSOFT |
Quote: |
Matrix games has only produced shite |
Quote: |
Yep and all the battles take place over and over again on maybe 10 maps. ZZZZ |
Quote: |
Anyone who has played Hearts of Iron 2 will know exactly what a real WW2 strategy game should look like that or CC2 |
Quote: |
Yep and even if you do capture the Kremlin you are pushed off, which I would say is realistic. |
Quote: |
Many operational commanders had success but if the overall strategic situation is bad a pull back is necessary anyhow. |
Quote: |
This is completely ommitted in the bullcrap CC5 system. How can one battalion expect to change the course of history |
Quote: |
CC5 is anything but a realistic strategy game, and it ruins the tactical element. |
Quote: |
Still waiting to hear a coherent argument for why CC5 is better than CC3, and would also like posters to describe their experiences with both games (AT_Stalky for example) have you just tried CC3 or played it for a month at least? |
Quote: |
This is completely ommitted in the bullcrap CC5 system. How can one battalion expect to change the course of history
1 battalion - sure you've tried CC5? |
Dima wrote (View Post): |
haha, acebar, i used to play all the versions since 1996.
used to win Pz_Clan Tournament in CC3 back in 2002 (or 3?). Show me your stats |
Dima wrote (View Post): |
mate, as i mentioned above, i used to play CC3 alot, and only vs human so yes, i can judge. Can you? |
Quote: |
Dima can you read english or just laugh all the time? |
Quote: |
One battalian cannot change the course of history in CC3, it retreats and moves forward with the overall movement of the frontline. |
Quote: |
The bullshit system in CC5 doesn't even allow battalions to retreat they just vanish into thin air |
Quote: |
I only have been able to play multi since gameranger, never done stats in my life, happy to meet online I want actual battle proof of your CC3 claims |
Quote: |
I'm looking for my copy of CCV, maybe you can show me what I missed? I played it extensively before putting it away for good, and I was disappointed. |
Dima wrote: |
mate, i don't need to proove anything to you - there are enough players in community who know me.
Can you say the same? llol i will not as i don't play with noobs, sorry mate. |
Quote: |
of cause awesome system of CC3 does allow your teams to retreat, but some teams that were close to enemy do vanich in thin air, don;t they? |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT