Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page 1, 2 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein

#1: Got it! (almost) Author: Mr_Tank,

Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:18 pm
—
Facing another saturday night at home with the loving companionship of my laptop.
I just got my hands on a beta version of W.A.R. ( gotta love the abbreviation).
Theres still a lot of glitches and faults in it.
Theres a bunch of new maps and BGs, the total is now 64. Edit: 54 BGs, 64 maps.The strategic map is very large now
So far it works ok with my Vista OS.
Edit: No naval support, but instead there's artillary attack, morter barrage, air assult and a parachute thingy, which should be air supply, but i cant get it to work.
Edit: Each battlegroup has about 140 units for the allied/americans, and 80 units for the axis/germans, of which 15 can be selected, just like CCV. But each unit is also worth a certain number of points, somewhat similar to COI.

Last edited by Mr_Tank on Sun Jul 13, 2008 11:44 am; edited 2 times in total

#2: ha Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 9:56 pm
—
oh i so jumped the gun on that one...hook line and sinker, but still its a breach of NDA for soembody.

#3: Author: Mr_Tank,

Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 11:29 pm
—
I do agree that it is borderline at best....
If the game is worth playing, then I will purchase it when/if released. You have my word.
I thought that it would be of interest to the community that someone actually had some info on the progress of this game.

#4: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 2:26 am
—
well it is coming...soon a Q and A style from some die hard 'IV corp" non s3t/matrix persons.

if u have a Q about WaR im sure it can be added.

#5: Author: QM, Location: Australia

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 7:58 am
—
New maps? What do you mean new maps? CCIV has always been my fav of the series.

I have a 'Q' about W.A.R. What does does it stand for? (what is it good for...LOL)

Edit: Forget it just answered my own question.........duuh. Watch am Rhein.

#6: Author: Digs, Location: Ontario, Canada

Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2008 3:27 pm
—
If they don't get the a.i. right, then I'm not bothering to waste my money!.

#7: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 5:46 am
—
well ai is always a problem with CC, but if it has kept my interest for 6 months, it cant be to bad, cause its at least that long since i played ANY VERSION OF CC H2H, sad, but true...mostly im to busy testing stuff,not all s3t,some for pj,dima initially,but lately all u know who...

once its released,ill try to give it an objective opinion,not just 'yeah its good' but how,over the last few months, i have noticed how the AI has changed,what it does,how it moves etc...remember a lot of ai's stupid movements are pathing issues...put ai in big open map,and its game on.

#8: Author: Mr_Tank,

Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 11:09 pm
—
Well , sofar I'm having problems beating the ai when it is defending, however I am not impressed when it is attacking me. It always goes after VL, and if the first is to well defended the ai tries the next one and so on.
I've found a couple of maps that are exact copies from ccv.

#9: Author: Therion,

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 1:24 am
—
I wonder if it's possible to make a good attacking CC AI at all.
Can it grasp the concept of fire and manoeuvre? Or shooting a building with a tank cannon "just in case"? Or positioning snipers/machine guns in right places?

All I see in CC series games is units crawling/running towards objectives like zombies or moving in circles.

#10: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 2:42 am
—
yes its beta,yes some maps are ccv, not for long. some maps are recoded cciv maps also.

#11: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 4:20 am
—
They are called "placeholders"

same with data etc.

#12: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:31 am
—

Mr_Tank wrote:

Well , sofar I'm having problems beating the ai when it is defending, however I am not impressed when it is attacking me. It always goes after VL, and if the first is to well defended the ai tries the next one and so on.
I've found a couple of maps that are exact copies from ccv.

Isn't that exactly what people have wanted? An AI opponent that is continually going after VLs rather than just hanging out.

#13: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 1:44 am
—

Mr_Tank wrote:

I do agree that it is borderline at best....
If the game is worth playing, then I will purchase it when/if released. You have my word.

Good to hear...of course, whatever asshole tester leaked this, just probably guaranteed at least one thing for the rest of us....that at the very best, the release will likely end up being delayed, because in the absence of the culprit stepping up and confessing...(and thereby risking legal action for NDA violation), all the testers will likely be dumped, and a whole new set of testers would have to be recruited.

#14: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:17 am
—
....this is bad....really bad....i am even sober for the occation....this is bad...

#15: Author: QM, Location: Australia

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:49 am
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

Mr_Tank wrote:

I do agree that it is borderline at best....
If the game is worth playing, then I will purchase it when/if released. You have my word.

Exactly right and you could possibly even say goodbye to the extant generation of CC members involved in the test team, why would you hang around after what this asshole has bought down on them? I know I wouldn't.

I hope the SOB owns up just so I could get my pound of flesh outa them. I would pay my way to wherever just to get that.

#16: Author: Mr_Tank,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 4:36 pm
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

Mr_Tank wrote:

I do agree that it is borderline at best....
If the game is worth playing, then I will purchase it when/if released. You have my word.

To be honest I did'nt think of that.
I have no idea where/who the version comes from. But I doubt they will change their testing team because of it. The company is every bit as eager to get the game released, as you or I am.
I have heard of other games and movies where testers/vievers/editors each got an individual version, with a tiny differnce in each, so if the product were to appear on the web, the leaker could be caught.

#17: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:40 pm
—
well mr tank, thanks for nothing, you've F*^ked me up.

#18: Author: Mr_Tank,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:46 pm
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

well mr tank, thanks for nothing, you've F*^ked me up.

Well, if you want a scapegoat I'm an easy target.
I haven't shared my version with anybody, but still there are others who have the beta version, and they probably had it weeks before I did.

#19: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:31 pm
—
Tack, I'm as pissed as you are, but the real blame is on the S3T team member that passed on the installer. Not weeks ago actually...from the screenshots, the powers that be know exactly which version was leaked, and they know when the torrent was uploaded.

#20: Author: Therion,

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:25 am
—
Yeah, but on the other hand, downloading a leaked beta and then posting about it publicly instead of quietly notifying the company is very, very, very wrong too.

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein

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

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