My Initial Impressions

[KG Erwin]

For a test run, I went for the opening shots of Barbarossa, set at Grognard level. I realized right away this was a mistake, as it appears that the defending Russkies actually outnumbered me.

Maybe it's been too long since I played CC, but I seem to recall getting some easy early victories. Not with CoI.

So, I guess I'm gonna have to go back to Platoon Tactics 101. Commanders are VERY important. I had a squad surrender after suffering a couple of casualties (and I suppose some considerable combat stress). So much for the myth of Germans being ubermenschen. That was put to rest immediately.

I suppose SPWaW spoiled me, as the AI in that game is hopelessly incompetent when attacking. CoI is something else entirely. The Russian AI decided upon an aggressive defense, and picked apart my "mini"-kampfgruppe.

A personal note: I pride myself on being a "historical" gamer, rather than a "gamey" player, taking advantage of the loopholes in the rules. I soon realized that the AI doesn't play "by the book", so I'm really gonna have to do some more studying, plus rely on my instincts.

Game sound/graphics: I LOVE the weapons sounds. Combat is LOUD, as it should be. The graphics are adequate, and the explosions are really cool-looking. A definite improvement in the immersion level.

Technical notes: the install proceeded flawlessly, and the game (so far) shows no prospensity to cause any lag or CTD issues on my PC.

Conclusion: this game has shown me that I'm not as good as I thought I was at the tactical level. [:(] I would NOT recommend this one to beginners. Excellent job, guys. [&o]

[Shaun Wallace]

Hia KG,
 
This is 100% where we tried to go with the game and you have described it perfectly.
 

 Maybe it's been too long since I played CC, but I seem to recall getting some easy early victories. Not with CoI.

So, I guess I'm gonna have to go back to Platoon Tactics 101. Commanders are VERY important. I had a squad surrender after suffering a couple of casualties (and I suppose some considerable combat stress). So much for the myth of Germans being ubermenschen. That was put to rest immediately.

I suppose SPWaW spoiled me, as the AI in that game is hopelessly incompetent when attacking. CoI is something else entirely. The Russian AI decided upon an aggressive defense, and picked apart my "mini"-kampfgruppe.

A personal note: I pride myself on being a "historical" gamer, rather than a "gamey" player, taking advantage of the loopholes in the rules. I soon realized that the AI doesn't play "by the book", so I'm really gonna have to do some more studying, plus rely on my instincts. 
 

 
CC is and always has lent itself to historical and accurate tactical gaming. There is a reason that the USMC among many others use CC as THE tactical trainer. Simtek as a developer comes from this background and we do as a group tend to err on the side of realism, which may not always be the best gaming experience. We have recently been working on an Anti Terrorism trainer for the USMC FAST teams. This is very much modern asymetrical warfare and infantry based.
 
We have tried to put what we have learned and are learning from real military life into the sims we are creating or rebuilding. Many of the team at Simtek have taken part in real military excersices using CC in training enviroments as well as real live fire classes as well as attended classes and courses by the military where we have learned much on how to build and design tactical sims. CoI is the first of what will be several, both re-releases and new versions.
 
What Atomic did was build the first generation of CC and what we are aiming to do is to build the second generation of CC. We have learned much from other sims, both military and commercial and have much that I think CC players will approve of when its implemented.
 
We are busy working on the next releases already and hope that we have done a good enough job on CC CoI to keep you all going in the meantime
 
Cheers and glad you are enjoying it KG
 
Sulla

[PimpYourAFV]

I've played Close Combat and liked it with the awesome mods people made. I see many companies involved and am wondering who is the maker? First Microsoft, then SSI and now Matrix is the developer? Why so many companies involved?

[spadman]

Kg, you make me a little nervous now that I am downloading the game.  I am a beginner in CC and now I am scared I will not be able to understand what I am doing.  Is there a good way to learn the game as a newbie?  (that question is for anyone by the way)
Mike

[Randall Grubb]

ORIGINAL: PimpYourAFV

I've played Close Combat and liked it with the awesome mods people made. I see many companies involved and am wondering who is the maker? First Microsoft, then SSI and now Matrix is the developer? Why so many companies involved?

We need to get some definitions ironed out for you. A Developer is the maker of the game. A Publisher is the company that sells the game.

The series of Close Combat games were developed - made - by Atomic Games. Microsoft was the publisher for the first three: CC, CC2 and CC3. CC4 was published by SSI and CC5 by Mattel Interactive (or SSI bought by UBI, bought by Mattel or some such domino chain of events).

Atomic Games was bought by Destineer Studios who now owns all the Close Combat series copyrights and licencses. Destineer licensed CSO Simtek to develop the re-releases of the series and contracted with Matrix to publish the re-release of CC3 as Cross of Iron.

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: spadman

Kg, you make me a little nervous now that I am downloading the game.  I am a beginner in CC and now I am scared I will not be able to understand what I am doing.  Is there a good way to learn the game as a newbie?  (that question is for anyone by the way)
Mike

Not to fear, spadman. A tutorial was included in the original game, and I'd think it's included in the new game.

[spadman]

I sure hope there is a tutorial.  That will help a lot.  Im at 63% downloaded. [:)]

[Randall Grubb]

Yep. It is called Boot Camp and is one of the options on the Main Screen. It will walk and talk you through all of the menus and commands and give you a basic idea of what you need to know to play the game.

After that, it is learning tactics by trial and error in the main game. Remember, good tacticians are not born, they have to learn their skills.

[spadman]

that sounds good.  I dont mind learning a game it is just nice to have a head start that a tutorial normally gives you.  Installing.  Cant wait.

[KG Erwin]

After a few tries, I'm getting better, and have even pulled off a couple of decisive victories in the stock Grand Campaign. In contrast to a few posters, I'm very pleased with what was offered in this reissue, especially the nod towards the classic Real Red mod for CC3, and the ample added material.

The negativity expressed by some surprises me, but I suppose it was to be expected. I knew from the start that this wasn't a from-the-top-down redesign. Did any of the negativists actually read the pre-release notes?

As a disclaimer, I guess some of you know that I was an unpaid contributor to certain aspects of SPWaW, so I do have some loyalty to the company.

At the same time, if there's something that bothers me about a game or an aspect of the company's policies, I'm not afraid to speak up. I HAVE bought one Matrix game that I think flat-out sucked, but that's immaterial. (Don't ask which one -- my displeasure was made apparent in that game's subforum.)

I had to say the above to disabuse anyone of the notion that I'm a total fanboy.

So, I bought this game for two reasons: (1) I knew that it would be better than the original, and (2) to show support for reissuing other titles in the series.

My ultimate wish is for Close Combat: the Pacific War, for obvious reasons. [:D]

[KG_Absolute]

Erwin, is that a real picture of you?  And yes, Pacific is a great mod for Close Combat.  If you like pure infantry style with AV's in support mode...Pacific is the best.  Again, I would pay at least 10 bucks for each mod, maybe more.  Maps I would pay for too.  Sooooo, Matrix...excellent job on a re-make!

[KG Erwin]

KG_Absolute, you don't know who that guy is? It is definitely NOT me. That is the ultimate "Marine's Marine": Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller.

See this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chesty_Puller

[KG_Absolute]

Was not sure, so I asked.  My Dad's brother was a Marine (and most of his kids).  My Mom's sister's husband's brother died on Saipan, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Saipan.   My father was an officer in the Army and so was I.  Several of my grade school friends were Navy officers.  One of my old grade school and high school friends paid the ultimate price.  In 8th grade, he was my running mate when I ran for Class President.  He survived by two wonderful children.  He did not have to die.  He was an avid war gamer and let me have the SPI War in Europe monster game when were just kids in high school.  I have read a bit on WWII but, I must admit, I did not know Chester Puller.  But, I do know who Zhu Liang was and I am sure Puller did too.  Puller, got a nice ring to it and he represents our soldiers in a great way.  God bless his soul, all of our soldiers (past and present), known hero's and the oh so many unknown.  America is a great country because of them and I know the world is a much better place because of them. 
 
A pleasure to meet you KG Erwin!

[Doggie]

ORIGINAL: KG_Absolute

Erwin, is that a real picture of you? 

[8|]

Nope, not going to do it. Tempting as it is, I aint going to touch this. You owe me one Erwin. Don't say I aint never done anything nice for you.

[Shaun Wallace]

Nope, not going to do it. Tempting as it is, I aint going to touch this. You owe me one Erwin. Don't say I aint never done anything nice for you.

Now that is what I call RESTRAINT I did not know u had it in you pooch <G>

Sulla

[Comrade_Blabsky]

So KG_Erwin, can we count that as a vote for a CoI adaptation of Ron Gretz's CCIII Pacific mod?

[KG Erwin]

ORIGINAL: Comrade_Blabsky

So KG_Erwin, can we count that as a vote for a CoI adaptation of Ron Gretz's CCIII Pacific mod?

Yes, absolutely.