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

Forum FAQ

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein

#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

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

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:

8343 Time(s)

Meuse Editor.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

871.82 KB

Viewed:

8343 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:

7823 Time(s)

BoS45_0109_0003.jpg

Description:

Command Screen

Filesize:

138.62 KB

Viewed:

7823 Time(s)

BoS45_0109_0002.jpg

Description:

Main Screen - converted to CCWAR, with patched exe.

Filesize:

116.24 KB

Viewed:

7823 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:

7823 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.

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Wacht am Rhein

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

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next :| |: Page 2 of 3