Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

Tejszd
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2007 4:32 pm

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by Tejszd »

ORIGINAL: Knavery
Ok I pulled the trigger on CCTLD. However, when I play in my native resolution (1680x1050), there is a large black stripe on the right on some of the maps. Is that supposed to happen? Thanks!

TLD/WAR will change in battle resolution if needed because a map has less pixels than your selected resolution. When it has do that sometimes there will be a black area as your nearest resolution to the map is still a bit higher....

Edit: CC5 and earlier games just use to crash if a map had less pixels than the selected resolution. Just one of the many bug fixes made for the remakes....
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by wodin »

I agree wholeheartedly with GoodGuy....you really don't just issue a few orders and sit back...no chance in hell...BftB is the most involved game I've played...your constantly planning assessing and reassessing...
User avatar
Knavery
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:44 pm

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by Knavery »

At what point did this thread change from discussing Close Combat games to Battles from The Bulge? I got what I needed, so I guess this thread can die the derailed way. :) 
Windows 7 Home Premium (x64)
3.4 gigahertz AMD Phenom 965 Quad Core
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1024Meg
4GB RAM
User avatar
Southernland
Posts: 2283
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 6:51 pm

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by Southernland »

ORIGINAL: wodin

you really don't just issue a few orders and sit back...no chance in hell...

Feild marshall Haig did opps!
¡¡ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq oʇ ƃuıoƃ ɯɐ ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by wodin »

ORIGINAL: Knavery

At what point did this thread change from discussing Close Combat games to Battles from The Bulge? I got what I needed, so I guess this thread can die the derailed way. :) 


Further up Major brought it up I think...he likes mentioning the Bulge game when ever he can...

CC is my all time favourite and nothing will take it's place....also for an RTS it's the only one where I do have faith in my pixel truppen and don't feel I have to micromanage everything...
MajFrankBurns
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:55 pm

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by MajFrankBurns »

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy
ORIGINAL: MajFrankBurns

You just proved my point you even said it in your post. You CAN issue orders and just sit back and watch the ai play itself and it looks just like a presentation and/or simulation. That's my point. You can do it in Mad Minutes Bull Run & 2nd Manassas as well. You don't have to do anything after giving initial orders but just scroll around and watch the ai play itself.

Actually, your reply proves that 1) you haven't read my post thoroughly, and 2) that you don't understand what the game is about.

1) I said you CAN issue orders and then sit back, which may indeed lead to the impression that the game is rather like a presentation than a fully fledged game, AT FIRST GLANCE.
This is not the case, though.
I should have added another sentence there (I typed so much, I simply forgot it): You actually have to intervene, readjust plans, cater for unexpected events, etc., IF you want to WIN (and make a difference), despite having an excellent player AI, because the enemy AI is superb, too.

2) Understand the game (and its depth) first, before emitting assumptions in forums:
Just like a real general, you're pretty much supposed to be a crisis manager, where you don't bark just one order, where then everyone has to stick to this golden rule, but where you have to make sure (by assigning/detaching the proper contingents) that the subordinated officers have the troops/resources they need (for the task ahead), and where you have to develop an operational plan in your head. Still, say you've started a scenario and you have given all vital orders, if you then just sit back without intervening, you will get average results, if at all. Major victories take quite some effort, a good strategy, and proper execution, and, last but not least, some babysitting for weaker/less experienced units, most likely.

So, your last sentence shows everyone (who's familiar with the series), that you either have not played the game at all, or that you did not play it for more than say 2-3 hrs. Basically: you don't know what you're talking about.If one tries to win with one set of initial orders only, like you suggest, then the enemy AI will kick the player's a$$, as the enemy AI is reassessing the situation continuously, making it absolutely unpredictable. Sure, both sides have their objectives, but everything else (this involves plan execution, shifting plans, reacting to most recent events, force allocation, etc.) will be different each time you play a scenario.
With a set of initial orders the player AI may strike at abandoned locations/villages, with the enemy having moved behind the player's positions to cut him off, or with the enemy AI either trying a three-prongued attack or even a pincer movement. The AI is that smart.

Sorry, but you have no clue.

I'd say basically you have no clue what I'm talking about.

My point and only point is this game will literally play itself with LITTLE interaction from the player. That is my point and only point. Then you want to go into all this garbage about "If you want to WIN" I didn't say anything about winning or losing. I said "PLAY ITSELF" and it will 'MO! So, before you go making generalized stupid statements you need to comprehend the subject matter and the POINT of someones post not what you're own AGENDA is. 'MO
Further up Major brought it up I think...he likes mentioning the Bulge game when ever he can...

Lmao and like you don't Wodin? [:-][:-][:-] <~~~ these are for real this time bud.
User avatar
Knavery
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:44 pm

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by Knavery »

ORIGINAL: MajFrankBurns
ORIGINAL: GoodGuy
ORIGINAL: MajFrankBurns

You just proved my point you even said it in your post. You CAN issue orders and just sit back and watch the ai play itself and it looks just like a presentation and/or simulation. That's my point. You can do it in Mad Minutes Bull Run & 2nd Manassas as well. You don't have to do anything after giving initial orders but just scroll around and watch the ai play itself.

Actually, your reply proves that 1) you haven't read my post thoroughly, and 2) that you don't understand what the game is about.

1) I said you CAN issue orders and then sit back, which may indeed lead to the impression that the game is rather like a presentation than a fully fledged game, AT FIRST GLANCE.
This is not the case, though.
I should have added another sentence there (I typed so much, I simply forgot it): You actually have to intervene, readjust plans, cater for unexpected events, etc., IF you want to WIN (and make a difference), despite having an excellent player AI, because the enemy AI is superb, too.

2) Understand the game (and its depth) first, before emitting assumptions in forums:
Just like a real general, you're pretty much supposed to be a crisis manager, where you don't bark just one order, where then everyone has to stick to this golden rule, but where you have to make sure (by assigning/detaching the proper contingents) that the subordinated officers have the troops/resources they need (for the task ahead), and where you have to develop an operational plan in your head. Still, say you've started a scenario and you have given all vital orders, if you then just sit back without intervening, you will get average results, if at all. Major victories take quite some effort, a good strategy, and proper execution, and, last but not least, some babysitting for weaker/less experienced units, most likely.

So, your last sentence shows everyone (who's familiar with the series), that you either have not played the game at all, or that you did not play it for more than say 2-3 hrs. Basically: you don't know what you're talking about.If one tries to win with one set of initial orders only, like you suggest, then the enemy AI will kick the player's a$$, as the enemy AI is reassessing the situation continuously, making it absolutely unpredictable. Sure, both sides have their objectives, but everything else (this involves plan execution, shifting plans, reacting to most recent events, force allocation, etc.) will be different each time you play a scenario.
With a set of initial orders the player AI may strike at abandoned locations/villages, with the enemy having moved behind the player's positions to cut him off, or with the enemy AI either trying a three-prongued attack or even a pincer movement. The AI is that smart.

Sorry, but you have no clue.

I'd say basically you have no clue what I'm talking about.

My point and only point is this game will literally play itself with LITTLE interaction from the player. That is my point and only point. Then you want to go into all this garbage about "If you want to WIN" I didn't say anything about winning or losing. I said "PLAY ITSELF" and it will 'MO! So, before you go making generalized stupid statements you need to comprehend the subject matter and the POINT of someones post not what you're own AGENDA is. 'MO
Further up Major brought it up I think...he likes mentioning the Bulge game when ever he can...

Lmao and like you don't Wodin? [:-][:-][:-] <~~~ these are for real this time bud.

MajFrankBurns,
I mean no disrespect when I say this, but you have no idea what you're talking about. As you know, I just bought the game and have the previos titles as well. The game does not play itself nor would you get anywhere if you let it do so. It's no different than any other RTS in that regard. If you let the units just sit there without issuing orders, then they just sit there. Just like Close Combat, which this thread is supposed to be about, or Company of Heroes, or any other RTS game.

The difference between this and other RTS titles is that the AI is known to be extremely intelligent. You don't have platoons getting stuck with pathfinding issues etc.

I'm not sure how you've arrived at the conclusion that BfTB plays itself. As far as I know, you're the only one that hasn't played any of the titles, but seem to know the most about them. How is that so Frank?
Windows 7 Home Premium (x64)
3.4 gigahertz AMD Phenom 965 Quad Core
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 1024Meg
4GB RAM
User avatar
Lützow
Posts: 1521
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2008 6:09 pm
Location: Germany

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by Lützow »

ORIGINAL: Knavery

I'm not sure how you've arrived at the conclusion that BfTB plays itself. As far as I know, you're the only one that hasn't played any of the titles, but seem to know the most about them. How is that so Frank?

Because he wants to continue his little crusade and making a fool of himself by picking fights on Matrix boards. The majority of his posts are rants and negative comments.
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by wodin »

I love you Major...give us a kiss[;)]
User avatar
Arctic Blast
Posts: 1157
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 5:58 am
Contact:

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by Arctic Blast »

He's a troll. Just ignore him.
Meditation on inevitable death should be performed daily.
User avatar
bairdlander2
Posts: 2394
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:25 am
Location: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta

RE: Close Combat Remakes - Opinions Wanted

Post by bairdlander2 »

From his writing style and posts I think he is someone else who i dont see on forums anymore.[:D][:D]I am "green buttoning" him now.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”