but making the AI to deploy in its front lines rather than in the back should be an easy task
You think this because you see the old engine as a normal game but it is not a normal game. With millions of games in the world, people usually think how everything can be made at all plattforms with only write a new code.
Anyways, if I was Steve, I would see your words as something bad or a insult because you are thinking how after more of 10 years, these things could be fixed.
But I am more realistic, if these things were not improved, this is because it can not be made better. Ever in the old engine.
Steve himself told us that the AI is getting an overhaul. I just said that the deployment of the AI is bad and that is what mostly causes the AI to delay the attack. And for people who wonder why the AI cannot attack successfully, the bad deployment is the major cause. Whether this could be fixed or not, is up to the developers.
I have seen many people complaining about this AI issue on Steam, so definitely fixing this AI issue will help get more sales. I am just telling what I have concluded based on my many hours of game play, and in order to help make the next game better.
Steve himself told us that the AI is getting an overhaul.
He was speaking from Close Combat Bloody First, the new game, not GTC. The unique relation between BF and GTC is the system of gameplay, nothing more, everything is new.
I didn't say that the AI improvements were for GTG, we were talking about the new game... So clearly, you did not understand what I was trying to tell. All i want is a new AI improvement for the next game. But I did also ask for a patch for GTC if possible
AI problems when attacking that needs to addressed in future close combat games.
I have played many battles in 'Gateway to Caen' , and I have concluded the following about the AI:
Also, we would appreciate it if you release a patch fixing this AI issue in 'Gateway to Caen', so that we can have fun while playing as defenders
Clearly you were not speaking about BF and you were comparing BF with the older games as if they were the same. Asking a patch for a older game in non-GTC thread.
I understand you very well. But I have told you things told before by the developers about how they can not make a better work with the previous games. It is not possible. They can not get more from them. They are a 20 years old game. 20 years at computers is as if it was a prehistoric engine.[:D]
About the new game, clearly it will add a new AI, starting from scratch. I am sure how it will be a lot better. Just by the difference of technology. Perfect? probably no but a lot more perfect than the older games. I say how it will not be perfect because there is not perfection in games, ever and each player will have different opinions.
Wow, I like what I see! I was worried but I see you do have a talented team.
I hope that you take your time on the soldier animations. Perhaps making some versatility in the appearance of individual soldiers. If not height differences then differences in uniforms. Dirt, grime, blood. Give each soldier a personal touch that stays with them. Because part of the fun of the game is the attachment you get to your soldiers. It is what makes Close Combat a good game.
But most importantly of all: the movements. For example climbing over hills and walls. In 2d they just crawled really slowly when ascending sharp angles. I'd like to see minute attention to detail for soldier movements.
It is [current year] and there is no excuse not have attention to detail for the soldiers we are commanding. If we keep track of their kills and their acts of cowardice, then please then pay closer attention to the details in their movements. Such as when they are reloading, unarmed, fighting with knife. If they drop their gun or have a pistol, please don't make them running with a rifle(this has been a problem since I think CC2). If they shoot a pistol, please make sure they shoot with a pistol(also since CC2 if not 1). If they are using an anti-tank gun, please don't make them holding a rifle or mortar. pretty please with sugar on top.[&o]
It will be held from May 9th to May 11th at Castello di Pavone, a beautiful medieval castle located in Northern Italy.
was last year, 2016
Every year wargamers from all over the United Kingdom gather in London for a huge event: Salute!
There will be many games, stands, painting competitions, and many companies presenting their products. Sounds like the quintessential wargaming event. We couldn't miss it, could we?
We have the pleasure to announce we'll be at Salute 2017!
When you pass in front of the Slitherine stand, come say hello and chat with us! And don't miss on our special offer for the day: we'll have boxed editions of games for sale at the same price of their respective digital editions!
was this year, another meeting hasn't been announced as yet anywhere, unless i've missed it[&:]
Windows 11 Pro 64-bit (10.0, Build 26100) (26100.ge_release.240331-1435) 24H2
Close Combat is a great game because of the metrics that the developers have input into the game which make the experience real with respect to combat stress injury, histrocial accuracy, ballistics, and armor effect. It matters none about the graphics in as far as I still am playing A Brige Too Far and Cross of Iron in 2017.
What I enjoy so much about this game, as opposed to a FPS shooter like Battlefield 1 or visually-intense RTS like Total War, is how Close Combat shows the events as they unfold in a factual maner, and communicates them in a spartan fashion. Only the most important aspects worth reacting to are noted and my mind creates "memories" to fill in the gaps and makes sense of the events.
I am fascinated by the historical accuracy that this game employs. That being said - I am not in favor of adding an armor rating to the vehicles, tanks, and armored fighting vehicles. The game employs metrics as mentioned by the administrator that would be too complicated to convey. And because a noncom would not need to understand the laws of physics and geometry to know how to position a machinegun, nor would a driver of a Panther need be a mechanical engineer, it is then what matters most possessing a fundamental, pragmatic, and practical knowledge.
Rather than an armor rating in the game, an e-book covering the History of WWII relating specically to Close Combat would be more within the scope of this series worth. Since such historical accuracy has been covered in the game with respect to the capabilities of each fighting element, timeline, and the location of battles, an e-book would stand out as not as merely a companion to the series, but also an true WWII Historical Publication.
It could be in the book that the specific details of everything can be learned.
Regarding the 360 degree view vs the current LOS "radar sweeping" as you named it - I am not in favor of a 360 degree viewshed during unit deployment as this seems unrealistic. To know when and where the LOS begins and ends at 50m, 100m, and so forth with respect to depressions in the terrain, environmental obstacles, and structures, is not realistic in this capacity. In the reality, one would indeed have to focus on a specific feature with fieldglasses and make a guess as to where the field of fire is limited. With that, the LOS "radar sweeping" represents this exercise in a more realistic manner.
I understand that it would be nice to just drop a 75mm AT Gun on the map and instantly know every potential target it could possibly reach within that field of fire, but this is just fake and takes away from the game.
ALL THIS BEING SAID -
I have no clue how any of these opinions apply to the new game in 3D so all my opinions are drawn from the past and not very relevant.
The new screen shots - I am not impressed. I am a fan of A Bridge Too Far, Russian Front, and Gateway to Caen.
BUT
When I first played CC1 it was by chance at a friends house on his PC with a 1 level Demo he downloaded. Had I just seen the screen shots of that game, I would have not been impressed. That year I was heavy into Golden Eye on the Nintendo 64 and Warcraft II for PC. So I am hoping that when I play this game, I fall in love with a new game. Because for me, this is a new game altogether. The only comforting factor is that it is in the Close Combat family and promises the realism which this series brings (Besides Panthers in the Fog).
ORIGINAL: sepp3gd
Regarding the 360 degree view vs the current LOS "radar sweeping" as you named it - I am not in favor of a 360 degree viewshed during unit deployment as this seems unrealistic. To know when and where the LOS begins and ends at 50m, 100m, and so forth with respect to depressions in the terrain, environmental obstacles, and structures, is not realistic in this capacity. In the reality, one would indeed have to focus on a specific feature with fieldglasses and make a guess as to where the field of fire is limited. With that, the LOS "radar sweeping" represents this exercise in a more realistic manner.
I understand that it would be nice to just drop a 75mm AT Gun on the map and instantly know every potential target it could possibly reach within that field of fire, but this is just fake and takes away from the game.
In my experience as an M163 gunner, a crew/team knows where the blind zones are from any position it occupies in much less time than it takes to do a classic CC LOS 'radar sweep', no field glasses required. A 360 viewshed tool makes LOS determination far more realistic when the observer is at ground level as opposed to having a top down/oblique perspective.
Elevation contour is a prime example. At ground level a person's grasp of the effect that even minor elevation variance has on LOS is almost intuitive. From a top down perspective elevation changes immediately below are difficult to even detect unless they're fairly severe, and nigh impossible to determine their effect on LOS. In this respect a viewshed tool serves a function similar to the assumed light source of a shaded relief map in illuminating elevation effects. The concept is better understood when you consider intervening obstacles as simply terrain features composed primarily of varying elevations (a 2m bush, a 4m structure, a 12m tree etc).
In comparison, the CC LOS and right-click+drag terrain tools are awkward, time consuming and seriously detract from player immersion, doing little to mitigate the problems inherent in top down view.
What is too often lacking w/r/t CC LOS is a tactical AI that would auto-prompt defending units/individuals to make minor position changes to gain LOS when a suitable target is known to them but just out of view.
