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
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 2:53 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
Quote:
CC5 rocks
1) it is ahistorical so wannabes can try to rewrite history with different outcomes
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 .
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:
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.
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:
It is more likely that you will play on less than 40 maps and may play one single maps 20 plus time zzzzzzz
lsame as CC3 that offers 3-4 maps for operation!
Quote:
4) it has awesome soldier history system - so successful that at end of campaign only mortar teams have any real history
i see you talk about CC3, why do you say that in CC5 thread? ;)
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
of cause CC3 does represent real combat! But wait do we have same 15 units in CC5 but with different composition per BG?
Btw, CC5 BGs are battalion level.
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
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 3:21 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
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!
More proof that staunch CC5 defenders have not been in touch with the previous versions and have no real idea about CC3.
CC3 was a huge success after CC2 and it was made by MICROSOFT
Matrix games has only produced shite.
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!
Yep and all the battles take place over and over again on maybe 10 maps. ZZZZ
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.
Yep and even if you do capture the Kremlin you are pushed off, which I would say is realistic. Many operational commanders had success but if the overall strategic situation is bad a pull back is necessary anyhow.
This is completely ommitted in the bullcrap CC5 system. How can one battalion expect to change the course of history?
Quote:
yeah, it is realistic, don't be jelous Wink.
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.
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?
yes! as it had released CC3 2 years before that was a huge success after CC2!
I don’t believe that. There are sales figures some ware and as I remember CC2 was the top seller of the series by far. Anyone know where those figures are?
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.
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.
I believe that people can judge that by them self. And I believe ppl regard CC as a tactical game, with a strategic element. (Not the other way around)
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?
Started with CC1 the first day it was sold. Stayed with Atomics CC since, and liked all versions.. CC1 was a favourite. CC2 wasn’t that cool to me, CC3 was a huge favourite, had some issues with the point system and the way one buy units that were totally unrealistic. Liked CC4 with its BGs, but saw weakness with the locked force pool, went back to CC3, and played both for some time. Locked BGs was fixed in CC5. Tried COI, but was like CC3 to me. Tried CCMT, but lacking continuous battles, though saw potential in the APC and some more things… Tried WaR but it was not finished. Tried LSA, but still w8ing for the final patch… Have not bothered with LSA.. Have some hopes for PITF, but I cant give a rational answer why I still hope it will be good.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:54 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
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.
I had thought Microsoft collabed in the making of the game and basically took the CC2 game and microsofted it into CC3, that the atomic team were not the same peeps after CC3, and that Matrix created the re-releases, SSI distributed and collabed with CC4 and CC5. I'm pretty sure this is right correct me if I'm wrong.
Many good video game producers go down for one reason and another its not always to do with how good the games they make, Bullfrog for example or Looking glass studios (who made the classic system shock 2)
In any case it is certain CC4 and CC5 had something to do with killing Atomic.
The annoying thing for me is that with the simple addition or improvement and removal of ridiculous rules in CC5 would make it a better game than CC3 for me personally. But the battle group nonsense in CC5 just kills it for me.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:25 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
I have no idea how the team composition changed in Atomic. It seem to be a natural thing in any business that ppl come and go. Atomic-MS collabed, resources. Later Atomic-SSI.
CSO-sim was owned by some CC fans, not Matrix. The S3T team is not the exact same as the Blackhand team, composition has changed.
Quote:
In any case it is certain CC4 and CC5 had something to do with killing Atomic.
We know that It keep the series going for ~2,5-3 more years.
We don’t know how competition in the genre affected the sales. CC is grapixly shit.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
Quote:
More proof that staunch CC5 defenders have not been in touch with the previous versions and have no real idea about CC3.
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 ;)
Quote:
CC3 was a huge success after CC2 and it was made by MICROSOFT
haha, Microsoft was destributer like SSI after.
Quote:
Matrix games has only produced shite
Matrix came in charge like 8 years after last Atomic game...
Quote:
Yep and all the battles take place over and over again on maybe 10 maps. ZZZZ
definetly you talk about CC3 as you play 3-4 maps per operation forth and back.
anything to say about CC5?
Quote:
Anyone who has played Hearts of Iron 2 will know exactly what a real WW2 strategy game should look like that or CC2
you are funny, CC5 is the evolution of CC2 - CC3 was just an dead-end appendix .
Quote:
Yep and even if you do capture the Kremlin you are pushed off, which I would say is realistic.
thank you confirming how CC3 is linear and that player doesn't affect the campaign unlike CC5 GC where player's skill can be the difference between loss and victory. Like it was in reality.
the germans weren't at Kremlin walls in reality btw - totally unrealistic .
Quote:
Many operational commanders had success but if the overall strategic situation is bad a pull back is necessary anyhow.
totally agree - like example CC3 doesn't give you chance to win as the germans unlike CC5 btw ;)
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?
Quote:
CC5 is anything but a realistic strategy game, and it ruins the tactical element.
wow i second that but what can we do against so many? ;)
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?
mate, as i mentioned above, i used to play CC3 alot, and only vs human so yes, i can judge. Can you?
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:36 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
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 can you read english or just laugh all the time? One battalian cannot change the course of history in CC3, it retreats and moves forward with the overall movement of the frontline.
The bullshit system in CC5 doesn't even allow battalions to retreat they just vanish into thin air.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:07 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
Quote:
Dima can you read english or just laugh all the time?
Acebars, yes you are right, i really laugh at your arguments.
Anyway, when you start reading Russian i will accept this argument.
Quote:
One battalian cannot change the course of history in CC3, it retreats and moves forward with the overall movement of the frontline.
why did you enter my argument with AGS if you are not ready for that?
but well, iam good today, so i will repeat: CC5 has capability to recreate single operation in high details and in such scale where even 1 battalion can change history if it is in right place right time.
of cause CC3 is better having 3-4 maps per operation (instead of 44 for CC5) and one fights forth and back.
And ye, there are at least 27 battalions in CC5 .
Quote:
The bullshit system in CC5 doesn't even allow battalions to retreat they just vanish into thin air
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?
now picture whole batallion was close to the enemy .
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
mate, i don't need to proove anything to you - there are enough players in community who know me.
Can you say the same?
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.
lol i will not as i don't play with noobs, sorry mate.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:38 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
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.
For starters, I'm not your "mate". You've pretty much showed your true colours then, a load of bullshit you can't back up, maybe your internet friends can give you a medal?
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?
Yep thats because they have to surrender not vanish only to reappear 50km behind lines. Your arguments are incoherent and fanciful.
If you can't back it up on a battlefield then stop talking shit and run along and play with your internet friends.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:46 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
Acebars, you just entered this commity less than 2 weeks ago. You come with some strong language and some bold agressive arguments. Consider that people will respond accordingly. Some ppl almost feel strong attached to this place and the ppl here, and has feelt that for a long time.
Perhaps you should consider that many of us here go back 12-15 years. That means we have played H2H for one and a half decade.. And formed rather strong social bands.
Yeha, we though CC3 was cool back in 1998. But if one feel a bit trapped just playing the same 3 platoons time after time, then CC5 came as a fresh breath, with its 25? German BGs, and 54 allied BGs. But non will force you to play CC5... Keep at yer CC3 non here threaten yer relation with that game, no matter what ppl think of it.
And FYI, we did not as you, got stuck on 10 maps vs the AI on the CC5 GC…
Those time back then… So crowded. Many of us have arranged public GCs, as well as being apart of making tournaments, and participated in the same others has arranged. Not to mention the ladder era, where most of us formed the relation in the first place. If I don’t remember wrong, Dima was No1 in the CC5 ladder, cant remember what place he got to in the CC3…
Many of us are also moding the games, and or are participating in the making of em, and many even are a part of the making of the Matrix CC games….
But of coarse, if you just started playing H2H with GR, and became a member of the community some 10 days ago, we must take that into account.
Welcome aboard this awesome community
Last edited by AT_Stalky on Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:59 pm; edited 1 time in total
Acebars, you just entered this commity less than 2 weeks ago. You come with some strong language and some bold agressive arguments. Consider that people will respond accordingly. Some ppl almost feel this is there waterhole, and has been for a long time.
Perhaps you should consider that many of us here go back 12-15 years. That means we have played H2H for one and a half decade.. And formed rather strong social bands.
Yeha, we though CC3 was cool back in 1998. But if one feel a bit trapped just playing the same 3 platoons time after time, then CC5 came as a fresh breath, with its 25? German BGs, and 54 allied BGs.
And FYI, we did not as you, got stuck on 10 maps vs the AI…
Those time back then… So crowded. Many of us have arranged public GCs, as well as being apart of making tournaments, and participated in the same others has arranged. Not to mention the ladder era, where most of us formed the relation in the first place. If I don’t remember wrong, Dima was No1 in the CC5 ladder, cant remember what place he got to in the CC3…
Many of us are also moding the games, and or are participating in the making of em, and many even are a part of the making of the Matrix CC games….
But of coarse, if you just started playing H2H with GR, and became a member of the community some 10 days ago, we must take that into account.
Welcome aboard this awesome community
I don't think I've been untoward to anybody or aggressive, although I am allowed to retaliate. I don't give much respect to any time seasoned community in any field of life, there is nothing like new blood to flush out "old cronyism" so forgive me if I don't back down and no I don't give a damn how many tournaments you've won or how many internet people you know or how long you've been part of a community, never have never will.
If you have a look at my Scenario point calculator I posted, I'm sure you'd have denoted only someone who is seriously into this game would ever do something like that, time allowing.
That said you do have a point in that my CC5 experience has been mainly against the AI, we did play a little multi but soon went back to CC3. Like I did hint before I'd be willing to pull out CC5 again and perhaps be "illumined" and as I love close combat really would like it to be good, like I said before I desperately tried to like CC5. Perhaps it was I who was judging without "complete information" as I put it before, I would like to know.
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?
I don't give much respect to any time seasoned community in any field of life, there is nothing like new blood to flush out "old cronyism" so forgive me if I don't back down and no I don't give a damn how many tournaments you've won or how many internet people you know or how long you've been part of a community, never have never will.
Mate your the one who keep pushing us to show you our cards, remember? Read above again. You’re the one that wanted to know from what experience we came from… Your looking more like a troll for each post. If your not, consider how to reply now.
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:15 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
Quote:
Mate your the one who keep pushing us to show you our cards, remember? Read above again. You’re the one that wanted to know from what experience we came from… Your looking more like a troll for each post. If your not, consider how to reply now.
Those statements aren't related to each other. I wanted to know what peoples experiences of all the games were purely out of interest, for example someone can say yep I played CC3 single/multi extensively and disliked it I prefer CC5, I stated where I stand on the games to make a judgement thats all.
My statements to Dima are nothing to do with that, if someone wants to give big chat let them prove it, maybe this "noob" will bloody their nose. I was the one who offered a friendly or a chance to have my mind changed about CC5 only to be rebuffed with arrogance, hardly trolling on my part.
...and the last statement is in reply to some due reverence I am meant to have because I've been on this forum for 2 weeks?
Posted: Sun Jun 24, 2012 9:47 pm Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
I have not met you with arrogance. I have not slashed CC3, I have respect for every preference of this game. Even though you don’t show the same respect for other ppls preferences.
I have answered many of your questions and statements and elaborated as much as the time allows..
I have also made a “declaration of my and others CC history” as demanded by you.. And now it seem that it was more than you asked for, and then one get this through in the faces:
I don't give much respect to any time seasoned community in any field of life, there is nothing like new blood to flush out "old cronyism" so forgive me if I don't back down and no I don't give a damn how many tournaments you've won or how many internet people you know or how long you've been part of a community, never have never will.
I have not met you with arrogance. I have not slashed CC3, I have respect for every preference of this game. I have answered many of your questions and statements and elaborated as much as the time allows..
I have also made a “declaration of my and others CC history” as demanded by you.. And now it seem that it was more than you asked for, and then one get this through in the faces:
I wasn't referring to you concerning arrogance and the statement you quote refers to the notion that I or any new members of any community/forum should have deference, I respect all equally noob or seasoned vet regardless of time spent.
I don't feel angry or anything typing behind the keyboard maybe thats not really reflected over the net, I am/was genuinely interested in people's experiences of the game to pass judgement rather than demanding it as it may have seemed to you. i.e Perhaps there is something I missed in CC5 that actually makes it a good game to play.
I know how futile this whole argument is and perhaps I am just venting my frustration at how disappointed I was with CC5 because I love all of CC and really wanted to enjoy it, I am a history buff as well so the historical element is one of the reasons I play, but like I said before maybe I can be shown the light, I tried some of the CC5 mods (stalingrad for example) to no avail, I'll be installing it again next week.
Perhaps I've already said too much in what is a futile discussion and should give my leave.. Peace Stalky.
Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:09 am Post subject: Re: CC5 vs CC3
@ acebars
Some advice, don't play with these 2 trolls, Dima (a LEVEL 9 TROLL) & AT_STALKY (a LEVEL 6 TROLLl)
These 2 are very experienced trollers with enhanced superpowers in baiting, mockery, disrespectfullness, sarcasm, scorn, condescension, strawman arguments, derision, ridicule, contempt and just plain lame argumentation.
Watch out for AT_STALKY, he will try and pin you down on side issues
i.e. the Americn content of CC5 players
This is a diversionary tactic so he can stay off the real topic, because he knows CC3 is better ;)
Dima is also an expert at topic derailment
English is not their 1st language and they will use that to their advantage by misinterpreting your position so they can misrepresent your argument and use Strawman arguments against you
They have considerable ability to waste hundreds of hours of your time which could be better spent watching reality TV show repeats.
These CC5 Trolls are sentenced to endlessly roaming/trolling forums because CC5 has bored them into a state of eternal trolldom.
They have only one course of salvation.
They must break their CC5 discs and repent by converting to CC3
CC5 players try their skill to win historical operation as all the historical operations had at least 3 possible outcomes
CC3 players try their skill at CLOSE COMBAT command, to lead their men, keep them alive (as much as possible) and win their sector within historical operations
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!
Actually, CC3 has up to 5 maps to represent the company level CLOSE COMBAT sector where CC5 has just one single solitary map, so much better ;)
[quote]It is more likely that you will play on less than 40 maps and may play one single maps 20 plus time zzzzzzz
In CC5 campaign you have only 44 maps available and will likely play on less than 40 during that Campaign (maybe less than 30)
In a 16 OP CC3 Campaign, you can have up to 80 maps to play on and will often play on more than 44 maps during a CC3 Campaign.
Such variety is soooooo nice
Also, you are not likely to play on the same map for some 20+ battles zzzzzz
Even worse for CC5
In a single CC5 mod, there is only one playable campaign
In a single CC3 mod, there can be multiple playable campaigns with the possibility of playing on literally hundreds of maps (but only if DIMA will make all the OPs for me )
you talk about CC3, why do you say that in CC5 thread?
Please excuse me, i did not start this thread.
Please refer to the 1st post where Pzt_Kevin_dtn made such an outrageous comment that i felt obliged to refute it.
Then a bunch of others have jumped in (AT_Stalky finds it near impossible to stay out of a fray, especially when it gives him the opportunity to attempt to be insulting with such cutting words as: sad and childish, oh the pain )
Not a dead end at all!
Especially when it has continued evovling through mods with a dedicated following of players who love it adoringly, as one loves a faithfull wife,
CC5 players love their game like they love an unfaithfull woman, passionately, but never stop bitterly complaining about her indiscretions
Actually CC5 is the dead end of CC game series, because it is at the end of the series where the series died.
Whereas, CC3 is at the centre and pinnacle of CC developement, please view flow Chart below
CC3 is linear and that player doesn't affect the campaign
Totally wrong!
In CC3, the player's skill totally affects the campaign result, they can either lose or win on points like any otheR game, (i.e. football, basketball, etc), who ever has highest score wins, Duh!
unlike CC5 GC where player's skill can be the difference between loss and victory ............ CC3 doesn't give you chance to win as the germans unlike CC5
What total B.S!
No, you cannot win WW2 as Germans in CC3
Here is some shocking news for those who use this point to criticise CC3
Even in CC5 you CANNOT WIN WW2 AS THE GERMANS, !
SO GET OVER IT!
Tell me Dima, in CC5, have you ever played as Germans and driven the allies back into the sea and actually won the entire Normandy Campaign as Germans?
Tell me Dima, in CC5, have you ever played as Germans and completely driven the Russians back across the Volga and out of Stalngrad and actually realy won the battle of Stalingrad as Germans?
Tell me Dima, in CC4/5, have you ever played as Germans and driven the Allies out of the bulge and captured Antwerp?
Have you actually succeeded in attaining the German strategic goals of Wacht am Rhein?
No, of course not
Has anyone?
No, of course not
So no, just as in CC3, the outcome is the same.
The allies eventually win at Normandy, Stalingrad, the Bulge, and Berlin.
Ther best the Germans achieve in any CC5 campaign is exactly no more than in CC3, simply the inevitable is just delayed
When some wanker builds a series of CC5 mods where the Germans capture Moscow, Stalingrad, Leningrad Ekaterineburg, London and New York, i'll build one CC3 mod that matches them all
If you like, i can use some of the CC3 Great War mod's cratered maps so that the Germans, after successfully winning WW2 in CC3, will successfully invade and capture the moon in CC3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
.
)
than by any of AT_STALKY's most vicious attempts to crush my selfesteem 
you are getting so desperate to win a point lol
