Matrix Games Forums

I think the success of bringing back 8-10 year old games and generating viable sales shows there is unwaivering interest in the close combat series. I played them all and this one.

How about a Nex Gen close combat game, with new graphics, larger maps, more detailed sprites and a new engine. But with the same aspect, same tradition, same scale as the close combat series. Its not a question of aint broke dont fix it. Its just technology has come along way in 10 years and I would like to see close combat look a little more improved and play better with a fresh AI approach.

-larger maps
-higher bit per pixel graphics
-more motion: water, wind, dust.
-sprite aspects could include a slight isometric parallax enabling more detail without affecting physics
-same for some objects

Continue dreaming.[8|] Yes CC games are old but do you know other game like CC with better graphics? the answer is not.

I dream of concatenating all tatical maps together into a huge one, to eliminate the rectangle boundary limit across different tatical maps.

Wishlist in the unlikely case of a future rewrite of the engine:

1. Linux support (and add MacOS and some other platforms while at it)
2. CC2 ABTF-style campaign mode
3. 3D-rendering (but still simple top-down 2D graphics)

ORIGINAL: oliver.h

I dream of concatenating all tatical maps together into a huge one, to eliminate the rectangle boundary limit across different tatical maps.

I think that there is not hardware computer for this.[:'(]

Wishlist in the unlikely case of a future rewrite of the engine:

Good question, who will rewrite it?[8|]

People please, I do not know when you discovered the CC games but I have been playing them on net for 9 years and for four years or more we had not more new good CC games, for many time all the CC community thought on the end from this games and now we have the WAR and WAR engine is present and future on CC games and I would like to wait it for many time. By it Strategy 3 has my full support if they want continue making CC games with this engine because this option is better than other options.

And to be realistic, with 3D graphic, you will not see many mods because people would need better and more expensive tools. And mods would be more difficult.

CCMTII, plz?

ORIGINAL: Nomada_Firefox

ORIGINAL: oliver.h

I dream of concatenating all tatical maps together into a huge one, to eliminate the rectangle boundary limit across different tatical maps.

I think that there is not hardware computer for this.[:'(]

Wishlist in the unlikely case of a future rewrite of the engine:

Good question, who will rewrite it?[8|]

People please, I do not know when you discovered the CC games but I have been playing them on net for 9 years and for four years or more we had not more new good CC games, for many time all the CC community thought on the end from this games and now we have the WAR and WAR engine is present and future on CC games and I would like to wait it for many time. By it Strategy 3 has my full support if they want continue making CC games with this engine because this option is better than other options.

And to be realistic, with 3D graphic, you will not see many mods because people would need better and more expensive tools. And mods would be more difficult.

If the WAR engine is the future of CC games forever then it will end. There is plenty of talent out there waiting to be hired for development of a new project and there is a market for it.
I'm just trying to be innovative knowing once CC2 is re-released there will be nothing left. Anything else is just a mod. I don't want a full 3D game either because that is not CC, and its already being done by battlefront. I have nothing against 3D but its another genre.

There is plenty of talent out there waiting to be hired for development of a new project and there is a market for it.

If it is easy and there are a plenty of talent on the world, please tell me why is there only one company making one game as CC? why did nobody make it?

ORIGINAL: Nomada_Firefox

There is plenty of talent out there waiting to be hired for development of a new project and there is a market for it.

If it is easy and there are a plenty of talent on the world, please tell me why is there only one company making one game as CC? why did nobody make it?

He never said it was easy, just that there are plenty of good game designers out there. But, the problem is that there are not any producers willing to fork out the resources to develop another 2D WWII game. They probably don't see any profit in it, especially if they can't console it. Matrix Games can make some money off of the CC series because it's not a total rewrite. Add some new maps, tweek the stategy layer and battle groups, some minor AI tweeks, and adjust some game data values. Relatively simple compared to designing a game from scratch.

I agree but by the moment I would like to think on the present and on the immediate future. If I´m not wrong, Strategy 3 first should to make one new CC5 and one new CC2, next they will can to think on a new proyect. I think that they have a clear mind and they do not need our comments about how and what will be the next CC games. By the moment they have made a good job, we have the dream from all modders, one game 100% easy mod.

I tell it because I´m tired from all the speculation about the new CC, more when probably they have designed it many time ago.

ORIGINAL: Nomada_Firefox

I agree but by the moment I would like to think on the present and on the immediate future. If I´m not wrong, Strategy 3 first should to make one new CC5 and one new CC2, next they will can to think on a new proyect. I think that they have a clear mind and they do not need our comments about how and what will be the next CC games. By the moment they have made a good job, we have the dream from all modders, one game 100% easy mod.

I tell it because I´m tired from all the speculation about the new CC, more when probably they have designed it many time ago.

You're always talking about mods. How about the people, such as me, who are not interested in mods? I don't care if the game is a dream for modders.. I wan't the game to be good as it is.

You seem to have an opinion for every thread in this forum. Usually your responds are negative ones.

I don't agree with you about developers not wanting our comments or opinions - on the contrary. We are the ones who pay for these games, we are the ones who decide if the game is good enough to be purchased and we are the ones whose comments should matter the most.

I would like to see a new 3d engine behind CC. I would like to see buildings being destroyed like in Soldiers or COH. I would like to have a tool for seeing LOS easily and so on.. There's a lot of things that I would like to see. Still, I understand that it's not realistic to ask for such changes. There is just not enough market for these kinds of games.. It's just easier and more tempting to make a Starcraft 8, GTA XII or Red Alert 7.

Anyway- WaR is good. I'm waiting for patches to fix the BG disbanding problems.

You're always talking about mods. How about the people, such as me, who are not interested in mods? I don't care if the game is a dream for modders.. I wan't the game to be good as it is.

Sorry but I´m sure that Strategy 3 will not make one game that we can not mod, people like mods, if you do not like them, good for you but many people play CC games because they can play them with mods, it is a old true from always on community.

You seem to have an opinion for every thread in this forum. Usually your responds are negative ones.

It is a free forum and I can answer, if you do not like my answers, it is not my problem. If you see, I joined the forum 8 years ago and I only made 141 post, I do not answer on all the threads.

I and many old CC gamers do not want to see one 3D game for CC games. As I told you on other threads I saw very near GICombat and I saw Squad Assault. On this moment I like CC games as they are, a good 2D game. Yes it has some troubles but I´m sure that they will resolve them.

Probably Andrew Williams and his team will not respond about it but I can give my opinion about their thoughst, it is a free democracy.

PD: Youself are making one negative post.[:'(]

I agree with you. 2D is better for CC.

ORIGINAL:  Maxy

I would like to see buildings being destroyed like in Soldiers or COH.

The only thing that stops CC buildings from being completely destroyable is that they don't take damage from "blast rating". Right now a 1000lb bomb damages only the element which is affected by kill rating. If elements could take damage from blast rating, heavy HE shells and bombs would quickly turn buildings into rubble.

when it comes right down to it I'd prefer to see the AI gameplay improved over graphics.  Even with everything considered there will still be greater numbers of players or potential players playing off-line than h2h.  A revamped AI is crucial to any new model CC

ORIGINAL: bartholimew

-larger maps

But, have you tried bigger maps? Close Combat Modern Tactic's maps are up to 5 times the size of some traditional maps.

You need to have 2 or more players per side otherwise the maps are just too large to play.
-

What about playing a 5 day operation on that one big map?

A huge (relatively) operational area without artificial constraints such as map edges etc.


You pla it with phase lines...
1. take the river crossing
2. take Hill 116
3. clear the village

etc etc

All the time watching your flanks and rear.


There is a mod cor CoI/CCIII that let's you play the big maps.

Interesting idea. How would it look in practice?
Would it feature reinforcements, multiple AIs, etc?

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

What about playing a 5 day operation on that one big map?

A huge (relatively) operational area without artificial constraints such as map edges etc.

There is a mod cor CoI/CCIII that let's you play the big maps.

Problem is that the maximum number of teams (15) is currently not scalable to those larger areas. IMO, many battles would end up in wild goose chases, where it is nearly impossible to control ground because of the scarcity of units.
Even if increasing the number of teams would be more difficult to control, it could at least be made optional to set the maximum number of teams to higher values than the current 15.

But larger maps is definitely the way to go for future CC...

Cheers,
Moss

Actually the reason I would like a 3D engine is that I want to be able to make mods. With the current 2D engine you have to be an expert 2D graphics artist to make a map anyone would like to play. With a 3D engine you only need to place 3D objects and modify the landscape (see for instance the scenario editor included in Bungie's Myth 2 RTS, or that included with the Combat Mission games) and it will look just as good or bad as the maps provided with the game (as long as you have all the models you need for buildings etc).

But also note I listed that as number 3 on my wishlist. I'm fine with 2D, but a little sad that it stops me from making mods (or if I did no one would play them because they would look too bad).

I have been playing CC to and from since about the time the CC2 demo was released. I read a lot about the first game, long before it was even named Close Combat ("Beyond Squad Leader", anyone?) but for some reason managed to stay away until the second game arrived.

I don't care about bigger maps. I think the game works best with quite small maps that have no or very few tanks. If the tank AI is improved I guess the tanks will be less annoying, but I still think the mechanics of the game work best for infantry combat, and I would be perfectly happy to buy a future game containing only or mostly infantry. Dividing operations into several small battle maps is a good abstraction. Bring back the campaign system of CC2 and I would be very happy.