Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem

#101: Re: Nice Rant Author: vonB,

Posted: Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:16 pm
—
Well Hoogley, if we both win the Lottery, I'll match whatever you put in Wink

#102: Re: Nice Rant Author: Hoogley, Location: Brisbane

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:17 am
—
Laughing

I'll start entering the lottery, then.

I think that Spinlock is correct. The only way to get an iteration of CC that is up to modern expectations is to start from scratch but model the new game on the old ones in order to keep it "true". Start with a clean slate, and that way you get rid of the trash, plus you have more freedom for development.

Apple learnt that with OSX. Microsoft (sort of) learnt that with Windows 7.

Again, the problem (the thing that causes most problems in the world) is basically one of money. If anyone does ever gets development funding, I'll sign up for design management, UI design, and/or general graphical/artistic duties. Wink

#103: Re: Nice Rant Author: JaguarWolf,

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:34 am
—
It always amuses how utterly stupid the CC community is. The last couple of releases by Matrix(TLD, LSA etc) are such scams. So they make a few cosmetic changes here and there, and then hail it as the next best thing.

The truth they haven't done jack at all. It's the SAME game with the title changed. But so many people here get their panties in a bunch and feel they need to buy it.

So Matrix fills their pockets with your idiotic dollars and what real substantive gameplay changes do we get? NONE.

The truth is CC5 is and always will be the best game. Until an entirely new CC game is made, from the ground up, that incorporates all the damn changes we've been clamoring for, there will no other substitute. CC5 IS THE BEST.

#104: Re: Nice Rant Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:13 am
—
No it's not

#105: Re: Nice Rant Author: 7A_Woulf, Location: Sweden

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:16 am
—
Without making any personal attacks; -There is always reactionists that claims 'their' version of to be 'the best'... Razz

Compared to CC3 I think CC5 game sucks big-times, and despite some flaws that may be corrected I think LSA will break it too. -Why?

*At my first attempt with CC5, when it was released, I played a few turns on GC's before I got tired of the bloody engineers appearing at Cherbourg and uninstalled it... (Oh! -Did even CC5 need a patch?)
*The AI have never given me the same (or any...) challenge as I found in CC3, and now in the patched LSA
*CC5 have the 'magic-self-cleaning-maps'; -The engineers does an incredible job of repairing battle-damaged houses and removing/re-positioning wrecks... This feature might be in CC3 and/or LSA as well, but I've never reacted on it as much as in CC5.

But I still plays CC3, CC4 (Kreta), modded CC5 and now LSA, and I'm enjoying all of them! I gladly pays my 50 "idiotic dollars" and gets hours of fun and action; -That price is a piss in the ocean compared to the drawer I've got filled with games that I'll never install again... (as 'vanilla' CC4 and 'vanilla' TLD; -Maybe not in that drawer physically, but two games that I'd never play again.)

Guess I'm a noob and an idiot in some peoples eyes, but I'm still a better man than many other judgemental reactionists that imagines that they are so much better since they been playing CC since the "good-ol'-days" of CC1 and CC2. (ohps! -So have I! But I guess I'm not as good as some other since I haven't been active online and a member of other forums Question

)

*End of outburst* Rolling Eyes

#106: Re: Nice Rant Author: papa_whisky,

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:36 am
—
I am glad people have a favourite, but I am always left scratching my head as to why a small subset of people so aggressively slag off the re-releases and the developer. It is as if they feel threatened by the re-releases. There was hope that the re-releases may fund an overhaul of the engine. I doubt that has become a reality, on the other hand without the re-releases the community would probably overtime fade away and die. It is interesting to note that the most dynamic contributors to the CC community that are willing to experiment and try new ideas are basically supporters of the re-releases. It is very sad that Mooxe who has dedicated a lot of his time and effort to maintaining this site is so very negative.

Yes the re-releases have flaws, yes the patches are slow in coming out, and the reason why is that the developer needs to keep getting products out to pay for the incremental improvements. Not a particularly good business model, but without capital investment that is about the only thing they can do. Are the re-releases over priced or good value for money? Probably both depending on who you are. If you have played the game for a long time and get a few improvements then yes they are probably over-priced for what you get (compared to a really good mod with loads of new maps at no cost), if you have never owned a copy then probably no and represent good value for money.

If those that love the game could try to be more positive then it would make the whole CC experience (which the forums are an important part of) so much more attractive. Pointing out flaws is good. Sometimes its not just what you say, but the way it is said that in the end makes criticism constructive. If I was part of the development team that invest a lot of time and effort I would find the language used a big disincentive to continue for the little or no returns.

For me personally I will be buying LSA and look forward to enjoying it.

#107: Re: Nice Rant Author: mooxe,

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:12 am
—

papa_whisky wrote (View Post):

It is very sad that Mooxe who has dedicated a lot of his time and effort to maintaining this site is so very negative.

Its hard to change my mind. When I see half cocked deatures like night battles and disorganized teams I cant help but get frustrated. Yay night battles, nobody knows exactly how sighting enemy soldiers work to begin with, so lets add night effects to make it even more confusing. And for added confusion lets add light when bombs explode, and flares. Ok tell me who has found flares effective? Whats next.. padres and medics? Many of these features are barely even documented. I look at the LSA forum at Matrix and to me, for 50$ I too can join the beta testing team!

Theres no money... its all volunteer work.... nobody will invest... every game has bugs... patches come out quick... yeah yeah yeah.

The tactical portion of this game... wait let me rephrase... the close combat of Close Combat is still identical! Why after 13 years are we still debating on how effective mortars have to be? Its a game not a simulation. Mortars are for supression, not for dropping right on soldiers helmuts or down the barrel of an ATG. We knew that eons ago. Pathfinding... oh no energy left for that one. Didn't GJS have the best arguement for why the machine guns were in three and four man teams and not in the infantry section? Because they wouldnt go to the windows! That was nine years ago. You could fix that ofcourse two ways. Make smaller teams or program it so the main weapon took up aim outside the building. You can go on and on.

Matrix/CSO Simtek/S3t has released five, count em FIVE versions of Close Combat. Atleast two or three private versions for military contracts. So lets say eight versions... now check how many bug reports are on the LSA forum.

#108: Re: Nice Rant Author: JaguarWolf,

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:25 am
—
I agree. The people at Matrix are nothing but scam artists. And their customers are the gullible CC community members that buy up their latest close combat clones expecting a revised and improved experience when the only thing they receive is a rehashed product.

There's nothing negative about Mooxe or anyone else that points out how dishonest and shameful Matrix is.

But why oh why do people continue to support the cheats at Matrix??? It's been years and years and they continue to deliver pathetic products. They have a pattern of behavior that shows only greed and duplicitous actions. They haven't done a damn thing good with CC and they never will.

As for me, I'm not supporting or feeding the pigs at Matrix anymore. They're fat enough as it is. SDK, Battle of the Scheldt or GJS are 10 times better than their crummy CC clones. I'll take CC5 and its mods any day over their "new" crapware.

#109: Re: Nice Rant Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:40 am
—
JaguarWolf, wasn't it you that said...

oh bugger my CC5 just had a 00:00 crash

oh damn... why doesn't supply work properly

Oh crap... only 44 piddling maps.

darn it... i can't mutitask

hey didn't anyone ever fight at night?

why can't I see my opponents muzzle flash?

Why can't i see those crushed hedges?

why do all my nationalities speak the same language?

Why don't tankers have their own uniforms?

Why can't I go over and under a bridge?

Why can't I destroy bridges?

Why do my paratroops always land in exactly the same place?

Why can't i stack my battle Groups?

Why can't a BG move through another BG?

i just uninstalled a mod ... now my files are corrupted and I can't uninstall... what are those registry settings?

winger!

#110: Re: Nice Rant Author: Hoogley, Location: Brisbane

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:45 am
—
No offense to S3T, but my hope is that one day a well funded developer will recognise the uniqueness of this franchise, pump cash into it, and either re-develop it as Close Combat or rip it off if and call it something else if they don't want to pay the royalties. Razz

Maybe call it Advanced Squad Leader? :D

I really am amazed that it hasn't happened. I would have thought that Close Combat had proved it's longevity by the fact that we are all still here playing it and talking about it right now. I think it's possible that other have tried to reinvent CC instead of sticking to the format, so I probably didn't notice that they were even copying the game.

Maybe it's a convoluted issue: Destineer/Matrix/S3T can't fund a decently updated release; are asking too much for the IP rights for anyone else to purchase them; and no-one is sure if a clone will sell without the Close Combat name attached, so they're not confident enough to try it.

Who knows, but I just wish somebody would bring CC into the 21st century.

For the meantime, I'm enjoying S3T's re-imaginings.

#111: Re: Nice Rant Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:49 am
—
Nice points, Schreck ;)

schrecken wrote (View Post):

Why don't tankers have their own uniforms?

Nice new feature...too bad the research effort was quite poor on the uniforms.
Rank graphics for Panzer and Assault Gun crews are wrong in WAR and TLD...and still wrong in LSA.
But nobody really notice these tiny minor cosmetic thingies anyway ;)

BTW, S3T got the US AB uniforms for LSA historically correct this time (unlike WAR Rolling Eyes

)...soldier sprites uniforms needs tweaking though...why S3T loves those horrid stock green uniforms from Atomic is a mystery.

#112: Re: Nice Rant Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:57 am
—
The uniforms for AB in WaR was a considered decision based on research... some wore those uniforms to the end of the war and/or had their new uniform altered to resemble the old.

#113: Re: Nice Rant Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:28 am
—

schrecken wrote (View Post):

The uniforms for AB in WaR was a considered decision based on research... some wore those uniforms to the end of the war and/or had their new uniform altered to resemble the old.

Haha...you're not giving up on this are you Smile

Some Paratroops did not turn in their M42 uniforms after Normandy...but they don't wear them in combat anymore.
Probably the last organizational wear of M42 jumpsuits in combat in WW2 was by the 504th PIR, 82nd Airborne during Market Garden (I'm already thinking of a small mod so that the 504th can wear M42 jumpsuits in LSA).
True the paratroops did alter their M43, adding pockets to resemble M42 jumpsuits...but the uniforms are still olive green, not brown/cream. The BG unit icons and soldier sprite uniforms in WAR clearly shows US AB wearing brown M42 uniforms from the Normandy era.

Was the decision to simply just paint the old German infantry ranks black to represent Panzer crew ranks also based on thorough research? Wink

#114: Re: Nice Rant Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:06 am
—
It was all that was available at release as the artist had gone walkabout.... but you can see from the reults of the LSA release (20 months later) that this fine effort is continuing.

#115: Re: Nice Rant Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:14 am
—
pic

#116: Re: Nice Rant Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:19 am
—

Quote:

Probably the last organizational wear of M42 jumpsuits in combat in WW2 was by the 504th PIR, 82nd Airborne during Market Garden (I'm already thinking of a small mod so that the 504th can wear M42 jumpsuits in LSA).

that was well understood... it was done as a nod to the feelings and preference of many AB troops.

#117: Re: Nice Rant Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:26 am
—

papa_whisky wrote (View Post):

I am glad people have a favourite, but I am always left scratching my head as to why a small subset of people so aggressively slag off the re-releases and the developer. It is as if they feel threatened by the re-releases. There was hope that the re-releases may fund an overhaul of the engine. I doubt that has become a reality, on the other hand without the re-releases the community would probably overtime fade away and die. It is interesting to note that the most dynamic contributors to the CC community that are willing to experiment and try new ideas are basically supporters of the re-releases. It is very sad that Mooxe who has dedicated a lot of his time and effort to maintaining this site is so very negative.

Yes the re-releases have flaws, yes the patches are slow in coming out, and the reason why is that the developer needs to keep getting products out to pay for the incremental improvements. Not a particularly good business model, but without capital investment that is about the only thing they can do. Are the re-releases over priced or good value for money? Probably both depending on who you are. If you have played the game for a long time and get a few improvements then yes they are probably over-priced for what you get (compared to a really good mod with loads of new maps at no cost), if you have never owned a copy then probably no and represent good value for money.

If those that love the game could try to be more positive then it would make the whole CC experience (which the forums are an important part of) so much more attractive. Pointing out flaws is good. Sometimes its not just what you say, but the way it is said that in the end makes criticism constructive. If I was part of the development team that invest a lot of time and effort I would find the language used a big disincentive to continue for the little or no returns.

For me personally I will be buying LSA and look forward to enjoying it.

Excellent commentary!

I play CCMT, I suppose it is a re-release, kinda. But I am not going back to CC5. That's crazy. If I go for WAR, TLD, or LSA, its to RIP some maps.

I have so many ideas for CCMT mods I will never implement them all. The game could keep me busy for years.

There are a few bugs left, I wish Simtek/S3T hadn't lost the source code though. It would be nice to get a final patch.

#118: Re: Nice Rant Author: Hoogley, Location: Brisbane

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:57 am
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote (View Post):

... so that small team of volunteers continues to give their time and talents for free in an effort to complete the contract between the old Simtek and Destineer, in the hopes that they will get out from underneath the license agreement with enough resources to build something completely new from the ground up. Why? For all of you guys...the same people that ridicule and attack them for things they have no control over. The fact is, the game can't move forward until the contract is complete, plain and simple.

Hmmmm.... this is interesting, and relates to my previous musings. I wonder if this statement is an unvarnished truth...

I would like to think so. Does anyone know if LSA is the completion of this contract?

#119: Re: Nice Rant Author: BerndN, Location: Outer space

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:19 am
—
Spinlock,
CCSS seems nice. Great idea and nice to see so much progress.

But path finding. Some here said that path finding in CC3/CC2 was better. Thinking about and reading about the path finding methods in the links I gave I see a fundamental difference between last linear CC3 and CC4-CC LSA. Suddenly path finding has to deal with more indirect goals for an AI. Since CC4 there's the short term goals as well as values given from the exit VL's. Maybe the AI has problems adjusting to the different 'goals'. This only describes major path finding of AI units regardless of soldier AI or vehicle AI.

The specific vehicle pathing issues seems to be directed to the wide of the objects and maybe 'cover'? I have seen tanks which drives on one side of the road which shows cover great instead of simply driving on the road. From my point of view vehicles should not orientate by the cover qotiente of the ground. Sorry for writing such stuff in the rant thread but I believe it's interesting for any future development whether it's a CC re-release or a brand new engine :)

And I repeat, great work on CCSS, Spinlock! Smile

#120: Re: Nice Rant Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:21 am
—
just bought the game.
got the beta update after registering.
did not play unpatched.
played the grand campaign regular settings.

could not allocate artillery, said it was supply drop, but had a big icon of 155mm gun 3rd down, parachoot below it!

first map, it took some 30 movements to get a tank from one end of map to other, kept going into trees, rivers, fields, backwards in fences, worth pathing i have ever seen! its like original stock ccv when it came out, WTF!

the map was stretched, i went to matrix to fix, but my nvidia latest patch 257.20 with GTX260 card, windows 7 64 bit pro,1920*1200 60 hz 24"LCD HDMI cable, dosent have the steps to fix it like in the help sections!. so i have stretched maps....argggggggg!!

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Last Stand Arnhem

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

Goto page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next :| |: Page 6 of 9