Close Combat Series :: View topic - So nearly 2 years later, no new CC, just a re-relise.

So nearly 2 years later, no new CC, just a re-relise.

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein

#1: So nearly 2 years later, no new CC, just a re-relise. Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 5:27 pm
—
Admin info: This post and posts following to the post stamped "Fri Jan 23, 2009 2:26 pm" has been suggested to be split from COI and moved into WaR forum by Tejszd, non objected, so I have moved them.
Due to limits in thread topic head line, I have tried to make a topic name that fits the debate, it starts with Bufs post, so If you have objections to my "abrevation" of it, plz PM me and I make a new to your likning. /Stalky
/Admin info

squadleader_id wrote:

CoI is just a re-release/re-package...so I wasn't expecting a new game or anything new. As long as it helps to start the CC train moving again (with CC6, CC7, CC8?)...I'm not complaining.

So nearly 2 years later since this post and theres no new CC... just another rerelease..

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

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:12 pm
—
You are deluded.... what do you mean "Just"

The CC:WaR release has more changes than CC4-Cc5 in that sense it is a new release.

It is a re-release only in the sense that it is set in the same theatre as CC4 even though more area is covered by more battle groups over a longer time span and depicted more accurately than Classic CC4.

The engine has been re-worked allowing more player options including Battlegroup team selection, off board support, movement mechanics incl. a new retreat option, re-working of the reinforce and disband rules (in patch), in built mod support for the first time ever,added support for the first time ever for easier modding of almost every feature.

The list of improvements is long and satisfying.. and the brilliant thing is there is more to come.

if you are a CC fan then the future is bright.

I guess if you wanted to be pedantic they will all be re-releases as they will likely be set in WWII.

#3: Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 5:27 pm
—

schrecken wrote:

You are deluded.... what do you mean "Just"

The CC:WaR release has more changes than CC4-Cc5 in that sense it is a new release.

It is a re-release only in the sense that it is set in the same theatre as CC4 even though more area is covered by more battle groups over a longer time span and depicted more accurately than Classic CC4.

The engine has been re-worked allowing more player options including Battlegroup team selection, off board support, movement mechanics incl. a new retreat option, re-working of the reinforce and disband rules (in patch), in built mod support for the first time ever,added support for the first time ever for easier modding of almost every feature.

The list of improvements is long and satisfying.. and the brilliant thing is there is more to come.

if you are a CC fan then the future is bright.

I guess if you wanted to be pedantic they will all be re-releases as they will likely be set in WWII.

Its a patch... outside more maps and a bigger strat map, which is the only new thing of any worth. A patch is improvements on bugs and the engine... er, THIS IS A PATCH!!! Also, modding tools were always out there, so give me a break.. look at the year the original was made and this one and you see years in between with only the meagar changes you have listed?

If at you say INA SENCE WAR is a new release, then why is it called a rerelease? Because it IS a rerelease.. its not a new version.. or it would be CC6...

Why is it only those who are getting paid to develop this game the ones defending it?

#4: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:18 am
—

CSO_Sbufkle wrote:

Why is it only those who are getting paid to develop this game the ones defending it?

Hey...I thought the S3T people work for free! Rolling Eyes

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

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 12:43 am
—
Why is it only those who are getting paid to post on this are the ones posting on it?

Does that make all posters on this forum paid posters?

#6: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:48 am
—
Trying to stay out of this mess but....

While there is definitely a shortage of tools and little in the way in new features in battle WAR still replaces CC5 for me as the best version of CC.

CSO_Sbufkle wrote:

Why is it only those who are getting paid to develop this game the ones defending it?

I'm not on the payroll. I volunteered to test in the hopes of having some influence on the end result (lost a few and won a few debates along the way) and to see the latest CC release early.

Couple things to think about;

How many tools where available for CC5 3 months after it came out? 0
How many mods were available for CC5 3 months after it came out? 0
WAR was released on Oct. 28/2008....

The bugs in CC5 that everyone wished could be fixed have been fixed. I know many of you think these fixes should have been free and they should have been free from Atomic but Matrix and S3T aren't Atomic....

On top of the bugs there is a long list of enhancements along with access to a lot of settings that never could be edited before. Many of these were requested by people in the wishlist threads. If people want the list it can be posted again....

In hindsight maybe some of the changes weren't necessary; don't know what the benefit is/was of the btd files being changed to a text file. Could more have been done? Yes, but that answer is always yes and easy for people to say who are not putting in money or time....

Probably the biggest issue at this point is to get a strat editing tool, as it will save tons of work....

Last edited by Tejszd on Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:11 am; edited 1 time in total

#7: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:09 am
—
Note: The WAR discussion should move to the WAR forum.... I don't want my post(s) to be mistaken as defending COI as it was not much more than a mod....

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

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:22 am
—
Heretic!!!!

Still it's replaced CC3 on my HD as a much improved version of The Russian Front franchise.

What's mods are left to convert...

France 1940, Englander and PacMod I thnk....

Both 1940 and PacMod are working on my PC but need tweaking and testing.

#9: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:41 am
—

Quote:

Note: The WAR discussion should move to the WAR forum....

Ye, I can split it of and moved into WaR forum, if Sbuf (who made first statement) dont mind and objects in next 24 houres.

#10: Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:26 pm
—

Tejszd wrote:

How many tools where available for CC5 3 months after it came out? 0
How many mods were available for CC5 3 months after it came out? 0
WAR was released on Oct. 28/2008.....

there were many tools that existed for Cc3 that were capatable.

PLUS these were rereleases, so there WERE tools alreayd thewre and for YEARS we knew what tools were needed.

If there were new files and types, THEN theres reason not to have new tools.

And Schreck, very few people defending COI, CCMT and WAR are not on payroll or have personal pride from being involved. Thats a fact.. at you have the balls to defend it.. although the argument about 'use excel' when tools existed before but were neglected by the cracker jack team at 3t is unaccpetable...

#11: Author: Dima,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 5:29 pm
—

Quote:

The bugs in CC5 that everyone wished could be fixed have been fixed. I know many of you think these fixes should have been free and they should have been free from Atomic but Matrix and S3T aren't Atomic....

On top of the bugs there is a long list of enhancements along with access to a lot of settings that never could be edited before. Many of these were requested by people in the wishlist threads. If people want the list it can be posted again....

why do u always mix hot with stinky?

everybody thanking u guys for making good things fixed client/server bugs and allowing editing some things that were either hidden in CC*.exe or not availabe (doubt it actually).
But u know what was making CC the best wargame? The H2H GC and the mods. What did u add to that?
1)u added 64 maps w/o adding more BGs or teams in FPs, sry to say but that was waste of time....
2)u made most of modders puking of txts in WaR.

so to say the truth, u didn't do anything for making the best wargame - CC5 - much better in it's main advantages.

no doubt most ppl will forget the WaR v soon.... of coz if u guys won't start listening to community and make the chnges.

#12: Author: Vman,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:00 pm
—
CC fans are desperately awaiting a *new* game with a *new* engine. I believe the devs mentioned that CC6 would be using a new engine. So this is why people are getting tired of re releases.

#13: Author: Pzt_Serk,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 6:25 pm
—
IIRC, when they bought the CC serie license, they engaged themselve in re releasing the cc series before being allowed to work in CCVI.

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

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:32 pm
—
Just accept it.

Most tools are available as 3rd party addons and stopped being supported years ago.... unfortunately.. I think you time would be better served lobbying the tool makers to upgrade their tools.... thank you Mafi great tools by a terribly dedicated CC fan, thank you Bernd your modinstaller works a treat.

The huge modding community of years ago has dwindled to pzjager and a lot of talk from squid.... any thing else has been CCMT and WaR.

Buck compton can't move ahead with his mods as his volunteer helpers can't find the time to fulfill their promises...

Let's hope it gets revitalized over the next year or so with mods for War and beyond.

Is any one working on a non-WaR mod where your efforts will result in limited capability continuous H2H crashes, less strategic choice, fewer design choices available etc etc.

#15: Author: Dima,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:11 pm
—

Quote:

The huge modding community of years ago has dwindled to pzjager and a lot of talk from squid.... any thing else has been CCMT and WaR

ha-ha-ha.
just check the amount of dlds of PJ mods since their release and the amount of dlds of some other mods...

and u r just tell the things u wish to be - CC5 modding community is v strong Smile

Quote:

Buck compton can't move ahead with his mods as his volunteer helpers can't find the time to fulfill their promises...

and that's a stone in my courtyyard Smile

. yes, shit happens.

ok, that's all u can tell in reply to our posts - good tactics Schreck Smile

#16: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 8:11 pm
—

schrecken wrote:

Is any one working on a non-WaR mod where your efforts will result in limited capability continuous H2H crashes, less strategic choice, fewer design choices available etc etc.

Mods are free 0$... WaR has a 40$ price tag on it .. and H2H craches is common in WaR to, right? So whats yer point, beside the 40$?

#17: Author: southern_land,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:25 pm
—
I see the haters are coming out in force again... it seems to me they're primairly ppl who have never been considered for the rerelease teams or have been sidelined from it for what ever reasons.

frankly if you spent as much time working on your mods as you do trolling these forums the cc 'community' would be a hell of a lot stronger but with the notable exception of PJ's Stalingrad mods there have been few mods that have gotten beyond the "wouldn't it be cool if..." stage

the one highlight recently has been WaR, a means whereby old members are reattracted to the game and where new blood in injected with their having to buy CC5 from bargain bins or other version from ebay. People are the strength of this community.. any community and new people are deserately required for this community. They won't be attracted by crap Zombie mods

As to Dims retarded suggestion that increasing the numbers of maps for the strat map without increasing the numbers of BGs it indicates how much he knows about simple mathes or simple tactics. I know he automatically rejects anything he's not intimately involved it (which I suspect is everything) but where he to think about it he would realise that this equates to a thinning of the available forces giving a greater need to allocate fores to the right areas for defence or attack. I guess this element of tactcal command his slipped by him.

So in conclusion why don't you get off your collective arses and do something... make it for cc5 , make it for cc1 if you must but stop your pathetic fucking whining and do something.

#18: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:27 pm
—

Quote:

How many mods were available for CC5 3 months after it came out? 0

Wasnt there a Panzershrack and a PanzerMarsh mod that came out pretty quickly?

I like WAR,I don't like having to still wait to play a GC but it's better than the eternal "Is it done yet" posts.
And it's way better than CCV.
I still disagree with vehicle speed but my test was only done at about 30-50M or so.
I don't like the Excel file yet but I heard were getting a new one once the patch is released.I really think it only needs to be worded just a little better.
I do like editing support
I do like being able to add 4 turns to my GC,I can go nice and slow now and not loose all my tanks.(I hope)
And I do like the fact that somebody has the code who will hopefully talk to use.Always seemed before that only a choosen few could do Hex editing.
So hopefully if there is any bumps in the road a few years later we'll still be able to get help.

I like this
I like that
I dont like this
And I dont like that

Pretty much everything I have said about any video game I've played before.
Yea I get pissed and post in haste,but I bought the game,and I'll buy the next one.
And im sure I'll have things I like/dislike and after a few Beers will tell you exactly what I think. Smile

#19: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:34 pm
—
And isnt there 2 mods out now for WAR?

Incorrect post on my part about the amount of Bg's.......sorry

Last edited by platoon_michael on Sat Jan 24, 2009 1:58 am; edited 2 times in total

#20: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 9:48 pm
—
And Subfkle,
Your an idiot for even starting this thread (no beers consumed at this time)
You were an idiot back when you said "I'M a Mapper,all Hail me"
You were an Idiot when you said countless times you would help make maps for BoB (and never did)
You were an Idiot when you left.
And your still an Idiot as bashing CC is what you only came back for.

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

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:20 pm
—
This thread just gets better.... LOL.

#22: Author: QM, Location: Australia

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:32 pm
—

#23: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:17 am
—
So...how are the all volunteer S3T gang doing with the next release? Wink

When's CC5 (CC D-Day?) coming? Maybe on this re-release you guys can export the map graphics into txt files...so we don't need PShop or PSP to make maps...we can all make maps using notepad and Excel Very Happy

...code them with notepad...yay!
I mean maps are where most mods are stuck on (except maybe Buck Compton's projects)...and why squid isn't moving along with his mods (then again he could also be busy with RL...and only have spare time to troll forums Wink

#24: Author: Kojusoki,

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 12:23 pm
—

platoon_michael wrote:

Quote:

How many mods were available for CC5 3 months after it came out? 0

Platoon - I do like you approach.
People will always complain. Thats how world works. I find CC WaR a really nice game, I am playing this way too much and I find it better then CCV.

Modding: I find it REALLY easy. Come on guys - dont tell me the spreadsheet is complicated! It is not so sophisticated to take one value from one thing and check it in another sheet. It coudnt be made in one sheet as then it would be a real mess. YES, WaR IS MODDER FRIENDLY. I am playing CC for ages but since WaR I started modding things (ok, my mods are only forcpools, weapons, vehicles - no graphics etc so im not a "full" modder) becouse IT IS EASY (you dont need anything else then Excel)! Ok maybe becouse im an engineer (not software) and I use excel all day, but come on - even a secretary knows excel (no offense, blond ladies:)
I started modifing the stats etc becouse of the .txt extension, becouse of the excel. QClone didnt work for me.

Complaining that CC WaR is not compatible to other tools - well, AFAIK WaR is comercial, tools are not. Probably, if WaR would be sold which such tools, the author would ask for money for this.

I do like all the editing possibilities
I do like new features of the game
I do like .txt extension - I modify forcepool in excel using "my own method", which uses Excel functionalities. It could be improved but is not that bad
I do hope someone will make sooner or alter am easy tool for changing forcepools (but with showing all the stats of the weapon, armour etc - it shouldnt be such a big deal so stop complaining and do this - however it would be a nice if the developer would do this. I am not an IT specialist but I know it is not a big deal. And I am not talking about a tool that just fills excel without going deep into details.

Shame on you developers, for leaving unused columns! It is not how a good job looks like! It is UNFINISHED!
Shame on you developers, for making CCWaR working much slower then CCV (maybe of those unused columns...hmmm?
Shame on you developers, this game crashes pretty often in H2H
Shame on you developers, for making multiplayer options like those from XX century - we got 2009 now. Even the bloody GameSpy is not supported!

You call it a patch, you complain it has a tag of $40? Guys, they are not modders. This is their job. This is how world works. It is unfair? No, it is fair. They made something - it wasnt flawless (I mean CCV). The policy was "we are selling it "as is" and buck off it you dont like it. We bought it and accepted. Period. This is how world works. You want a full suport for CCV? They would be happy, I ensure you, to sell CCVI for 20$ plus 10$ per year as "customer care". With all the support and patches. But then you will complain that they should support their products for a long time for free

Of course it would be better to have a flawless game with life long support. But I tell you something - it would be even better to have such a game for free!

Im sorry for this long thread but im sick reading all this mess of this forum, only complaining. AFAIK there are many ppl who are happy with this game and they just dont show up. And always those who are upset, shouts most. That is how world works. So calm down, developers be ashamed for your mistakes from one hand, be proud that many ppl like me spend way too many hours at Rhein with their wifes compaling a lot: and all others - enjoy the game or play CCV or poker

Cheers and see you in game!

#25: Author: Dima,

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 5:49 pm
—

Quote:

frankly if you spent as much time working on your mods as you do trolling these forums the cc 'community' would be a hell of a lot stronger but with the notable exception of PJ's Stalingrad mods there have been few mods that have gotten beyond the "wouldn't it be cool if..." stage

this statement just clearly shows how far away u r from the community.

Quote:

the one highlight recently has been WaR, a means whereby old members are reattracted to the game and where new blood in injected with their having to buy CC5 from bargain bins or other version from ebay. People are the strength of this community.. any community and new people are deserately required for this community.

good, but that's not WaR that made CC community live on it's own(w/o support) for so long.
try to guess what was/is the main power Wink

Quote:

As to Dims retarded suggestion that increasing the numbers of maps for the strat map without increasing the numbers of BGs it indicates how much he knows about simple mathes or simple tactics.

1) looks u even don't know much about the game u part of... WaR HAS more BGs than CC5...
2) the simple math and simple tactics tells most of us (the community) that we need more teams in FPs to play even on 44 maps (large map is the "modern" standard for CC maps) Smile

.
3) and yes, to have more BGs on stratmap, that's simple strategy, not tactics...but who cares, eh? Wink

so another statement showing how far u r (and prolly most of S3T) from the community and it's wishes.

Quote:

I know he automatically rejects anything he's not intimately involved it (which I suspect is everything)

another statement showing u don't follow the community Smile

Quote:

So in conclusion why don't you get off your collective arses and do something... make it for cc5 , make it for cc1 if you must but stop your pathetic fucking whining and do something.

we do, Shane, we do...
it's just not visible to u, guys, who r so far away from CC community...

have u ever noticed that noone ever (at least i didnt c any) complained about graphics in WaR?
be professional, try to listen to the community, and it's main "living power" in particular, wishes and community will lean toward u Smile

#26: Author: MossOrleni,

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 9:23 pm
—
Kojusoki, I entirely agree with you here.
This and some other threads really remind me of the two old guys watching the Muppet Show Laughing

With the important exception of a decent stratmap tool, I'd say the graphics part of the game is still as moddable as before.
For the data part: to me, defending the adb fomat is like sticking to Betamax Wink

Welcome to the 21st century: it looks frightening, but imagine the possibilities...
Seriously, to anybody with basic spreadsheet/DBMS knowledge, the transition to standardized tab-delineated text format should come as a gift from heaven. (Besides, I always wondered why S3T didn't do more with the Access application that Senior Drill made; that thing is a real beauty.)

This said, I do agree that using 'easy to mod' as a selling argument is a bit ambitious: 'big modding potential' would have been more accurate. The basic framework exists, the necessary tools aren't there (yet; as said before, the game is only 3 months old). Note that I don't qualify the current 'official' datasheet as a real tool; to me it's merely a data dump/visualization with some additional info.

And on the price issue: if some of the complainers would have spent the time they use to write their posts on any other value-adding activity, they could have started their own WaR retail shop a long time ago Rolling Eyes

After a movie and dinner with your wife/girlfriend, you likely spent more already... (you probably know already that once in a while, this activity is necessary to compensate for all the other evenings you play CC)

Cheers,
Moss

#27: Author: Dima,

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 10:03 pm
—

Quote:

For the data part: to me, defending the adb fomat is like sticking to Betamax Welcome to the 21st century: it looks frightening, but imagine the possibilities...

when u make the first mod that earns popularity, i will agree with u Smile

#28: Author: southern_land,

Posted: Sat Jan 24, 2009 11:29 pm
—

Dima wrote:

when u make the first mod that earns popularity, i will agree with u Smile

hello, Kettle, this is the pot. Do you hear me?

#29: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 3:42 am
—
Well here is my effort toward making WAR more popular and the standard for mods going forward...

The game is working now I just need to determine which new features to use and what to set them at.

- Air supply for both sides? How many and what days?
- Artillery for both sides? What maps?
- BG reinforcement for both sides and how many times?
- Should BG's retreat instead of disbanding?
- Should BG's disbanded come back or not?
- What was the weather for each day starting May 10 1940?

Meuse StratMap.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

721.91 KB

Viewed:

8443 Time(s)

Meuse Editor.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

871.82 KB

Viewed:

8443 Time(s)

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

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:22 am
—
Looking Good Tejszd

#31: Author: southern_land,

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:52 am
—
cool, thats what I'm talking about

#32: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:59 am
—
Nice work, Tejszd!

I haven't even touched the StratMap...still waiting (hopefully not in vain) for a new StratEdit replacement tool. But the demo version of my little mod thankfully works and is playable without a StratMap.

So besides just "lots of talk and trolling the forums" (Hi, Shreckie! Wink

)...I've been working on this project in between a huge RL project of renovating my house (PS: worked on this conversion alone since my partner in crime - Eaglereach - is very busy and hasn't even touched CC in months!).

Now...just waiting for the official CCWAR patch so I can release the thing Wink

BoS45_0109_0004.jpg

Description:

BG Screen, with missing/disabled Commander Photos...thanks to S3T! :D

Filesize:

166.13 KB

Viewed:

7917 Time(s)

BoS45_0109_0003.jpg

Description:

Command Screen

Filesize:

138.62 KB

Viewed:

7917 Time(s)

BoS45_0109_0002.jpg

Description:

Main Screen - converted to CCWAR, with patched exe.

Filesize:

116.24 KB

Viewed:

7917 Time(s)

#33: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:15 am
—
As one of the "pissant brigade leaders" (TM)-Flamer...I don't like the girlie soldiers(TM)...but I like the more aggressive AI for the single player game!
And in urban battle scenarios...brutal!
Since coding Infantry as Vehicles don't work in urban maps...CCWAR's version of the AI is better than nothing Wink

BoS45_0109_0005-small.jpg

Description:

Battle Screen!

Filesize:

247.23 KB

Viewed:

7917 Time(s)

#34: Author: southern_land,

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 5:50 am
—
... and again cool... now we're talking... any other takers?

#35: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 10:47 am
—
BTW, the move to txt files editable via spreadsheet apps is fine...but I don't agree with some of the changes...some of them just giving modders extra work (like changing TRUE and FALSE into "1" and "0", changing columns, changing data formats).
Also...the txt files are not user friendly...at least compared to adbs paired with Qclone.
At least when you load adbs in Qclone...you have the column headers...very handy for data editing. With the txt files...if you load them in a spreadsheet...you have no header column...you need to load them into the WAR Workbook (which needs updating and revisions!)...carefully pasting them below the headers before you can edit them.
Sure...modding using the Workbook is the way to go...but with Qclone we can make minor changes/edits of individual adbs without having to load the whole workbook data.

If the designers really wanted the txt data files to be more user friendly...then why leave out those handy column headers in the files??

Edit: This post should go well with this locked thread Very Happy

:
http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=5771

Last edited by squadleader_id on Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:36 am; edited 1 time in total

#36: Author: Dima,

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:23 am
—

Quote:

Well here is my effort toward making WAR more popular and the standard for mods going forward...

lol Tj, 54 BGs and 44 maps...
Nice work, Tejszd! Very Happy

Quote:

- Air supply for both sides? How many and what days?
- Artillery for both sides? What maps?
- BG reinforcement for both sides and how many times?
- Should BG's retreat instead of disbanding?
- Should BG's disbanded come back or not?
- What was the weather for each day starting May 10 1940?

does anyone here argues that new feutures r great?

usually it takes 1 post in mod forum for the modder to understand the problem and make fixes/chnges but it looks like u (S3T) don't understand what we continuosly point in many threads.

what we want is:
1) remove GS(c) i.e. return soldiers behavior to CC5 level.
2) a-la Qclone proggy to work with .txts or return .adbs back.
3) a-la BGEdit proggy to work with .txts or return .adbs back.
4) a-la StratEdit proggy.
....other things we can make on our own.

For the game designers/programmers that created the great CC:WaR it should be piece of cake Wink

.
But S3T memebers amaturish replies in this and many other threads make me wonder - sure u, guys, were part of the team that created the great WaR? Rolling Eyes

#37: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 11:44 am
—
That is niceTejszd.
Might I suggest using all 64 BG's that WAR can support and not have them reappear?
1) it makes the game more realistic,I never did like fighting the same BG over and over and over again.
2) It provides a clear cut template to modding WAR using 64 Bg's.

Not very fair of me to ask you to do that I agree.
But the rewards of having 64 BG's just seem to numerious.
Ofcourse I don't know much about the Meuse Campaign so maybe thats not an option?

In any event this is good news,Meuse was always my favorite mod for CCV.
It just seemed more fun to play for me than the others.
It's the only CCV mod I have played atleast 3 GC's with.And finished.

#38: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:12 pm
—
I think the reality is we should all stop looking for the next Close Combat from recycling older Close Combat games. It wont ever happen. These rereleases are only one step above modding and the end product is still 10 year old Close Combat.

#39: Author: Kojusoki,

Posted: Sun Jan 25, 2009 12:28 pm
—
Thats what we are looking for! Good Job!

- Air supply for both sides? YES
-How many and what days? I SUGGEST IT SHOULD BE BALLANCED. IF NOT, MAKE IT HISTORICAL
- Artillery for both sides? What maps? YES
- BG reinforcement for both sides and how many times? NO (NEVER) - WE MUST LEARN HOW TO TAKE CARE OF OUR MAN AND CALCULATE LOSSES. JUST MAKE THE FORCEPOOLS "PROPER"
- Should BG's retreat instead of disbanding? SHOULD HAVE AN ABILITY TO RETREAT
- Should BG's disbanded come back or not?DISBANDED SHOULD BE GONE, BECOUSE SOMETIMES ITS BETTER TO BLEED THE BG INSTEAD OF HAVING IT DISBANDED (AS IT WILL APPEAR SUDDENLY SOMEWHERE ELSE). IMO ITS BETTER TO HAVE MORE BGs instead of those with recycling ability...
- What was the weather for each day starting May 10 1940? NO IDEA

#40: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Tue Jan 27, 2009 11:21 am
—
I do agree with Dimas post that no new ingame featurs was a mistake.
If those are being save for any possible re0release I hope you'll be smart enough to bake them backwards compatable for WAR.
IE dig in mount/dissmount/more airstrikes etc during game play.

#41: Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:12 pm
—

mooxe wrote:

These rereleases are only one step above modding and the end product is still 10 year old Close Combat.

Well put... although one step above modding is perhaps beign one step too generous...

#42: Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:34 pm
—

southern_land wrote:

They won't be attracted by crap Zombie mods

Im not trying to attract anyone! lol! Thats too funny! I got paid to do work for CC and seeing the circus coming with the Simtek team got out when it was good... but the work with Simtek helped me get gigs elsewhere, where I actually saw how OTHER companies did things.. which is interesting. However that being noted, for CC, I dotn need any money to do things anymore, and I do what I want for work, mods ect because I have no obligation. Left out? Good lord no! AQm I welcoem byt eh CSO/Simtek/3T country club? God no.. but I dont care!

Some guy had a funny idea and I took it to CC3.. just for kicks! And that what Im getting!

Although at best whatever comes of that mod, I hardly think Ill finish it really as anything but a fun add on, its rather rough of you to call a mod crap prior to it being made.

You can read lieterally and between the lines in all these threads that WAR and COI are seen for what they are, mods... and Ill give you one thing, the hope there will be a CC6 is stirnging some people along to buy these rereleases, hell wasnt a rallying cry of COI that to support/fund future versions of CC you should buy COI? I guess that was so effective, it wasnt rehashed for WAR...

I think at this point 3T has to say outright... will there be a CC6? Not HOPE to be one.. but concrete? Or is it expected that some people will pay for CC5 Rerelease and thus the circle is complete? I dont even think anyone will believe there will be CC6y even if 3T says there will be.... the PR damage by the 3T team and glorified testers like Flamethrower have pretty well stomped on the CC community.

CC modders will work with whats out there to keep the game alive, and dont seem to be swallowing what 3T is thrying to force feed them... read the posts.

#43: Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2009 6:43 pm
—

platoon_michael wrote:

And Subfkle,
Your an idiot for even starting this thread

I didnt start this thread.. was split by admins...

platoon_michael wrote:

You were an idiot back when you said "I'M a Mapper,all Hail me"

I am a mapper.. dont recall sayign the rest of that though...

platoon_michael wrote:

You were an Idiot when you said countless times you would help make maps for BoB (and never did)

IIRC I did look into it, and with what you offered for overview maps to use as guides, didnt really have alot ot work with.. honestly, I thought you were doing well when I saw some good pregress when you started making your own maps. Ill admit wintrer maps are tough.. SL did a great job on WAR maps, they certainly arent my forte.. I am not obligated in helping anyone, I will if I can, but get it form many diifferent places, form different games and projects paid and for fun, not to mention real world. But we all can relate to that.

platoon_michael wrote:

You were an Idiot when you left.

You tell me.. I guess I am!

platoon_michael wrote:

And your still an Idiot as bashing CC is what you only came back for.

No I have been doing CC work for some others and like any old hobby, you always seem to come back to some... I think its crazy how 3T iin PR in forums like this, is treating the community.. and I voice this displeasure. As anyone can agree or disagree with..

#44: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:32 pm
—
You may not have said all hail me but you sure played the part.

The pictures I uploaded were fine,you just either lack the imagination or spoke too soon when you said you could make X amount of maps in a week.
No you arent obligated to do them but you shouldnt have offered (more than once)

You tried to jump on the "I'll Mod CCIV Bandwaogn" then backed out for what ever lame reason it was.

You also told me that CCIV would never be re-released.

Well here it is.
Not by my doing in any regards,heck I didnt even hang around long enough to get in the credits or a free copy.All I have is suggestions.
I posted them,I left.
With people like you,Anzac Tack and who ever the person responsible for the leak of WAR leaves me to believe there wont be as many on that list should a next time come around.
Yea I stated my complaints about WAR,and im sure I'll have some more.
But you on the other hand just downright have a grudge against anyone working on CC.

And it shows.

#45: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:28 am
—
My apologies to anyone who read that.
I was out of line last night.

I'm done with this conversation.

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein

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

Page 1 of 1