Zemke
Posts: 642
Joined: 1/14/2003
From: Oklahoma
Status: offline
|
To All:
Not sure how this will go over, but here goes. I stopped playing CM: AK and BB for several reasons, and I will list why...and maybe it will help avoidance of some of the pitfalls for PCO, but then again, as you will see, my perspective is very different from most war gamers, so take what I am saying with that in mind.
To understand some of these reasons, you have to understand my background, I am a US Army Infantry Officer of over 25 years, a war gamer for over 35 years, I read a lot of history. In a lot of ways the typical guy to play these type games, with the exception I take what I see in a tactical game and compare it to the real world based on my experience doing it. Frankly most war gamers would NOT want their tactical games to be too realistic from a command and control perspective, they just would not have the control they are used to. I used to say on the Blitz forum that if you wanted to play CM in the most realistic manner possible, you should to play with time limits on, outside in the dark, sitting in a mud hole with a map on your lap, and have only a radio to talk to a friend with a computer running the game and he tries to tell you what is going on, and asking for decisions over a radio. My point is real commanders don't get to play squad leader, and have imperfect information to make decisions. Real Commanders lean hard on subordinate leaders to carry through the intent or task and purpose for a given mission. Another disclaimer, all of this has been talked about on most forums that cater to tactical war games and CM in particular.......But back to my list......
1. The fighting, bickering, censorship, general negative environment of both the Blitz CM forum and the Battlefront forum. The BF forum went down hill after CM:SF came out, and I was apart of that at first due to a tremendous amount of frustration by so many of us who were not pleased by what came out. The Blitz forum just became too much of a circus for me any more, I mean when you have open revolt against the moderator, something is wrong.
2. Unlike many, I don't want to have to be a Squad Leader, or worse I found myself playing Vehicle Driver in CM:SF. I preferred LESS control, players should not be able to micro-manage each individual unit, and move them to the next little piece of ideal terrain. If you want to play that way, then you need a game that mirrors Squad Level Combat only, or a Tank Simulator.
3. The entire CM:SF "event" left a really bad taste in my mouth. I was very disappointed that BF would not listen to the people that got them where they were, and instead did what they wanted, which IMO has proven to be a most unwise method of operation or doing business.
4. As far as CM:SF, I hated the "real time" play.....WEGO was the perfect "compromise" while real time seemed to be an attempt to cater to my kids generation. (I understand this may have been changed, but I have not even taken a look at the game in a long time.)
5. All the above said, I decided to start playing more operational level games like HPS Panzer Campaigns and War in the Pacific.
So with all the above said, I can say I really have not played CM regularly in over two years, the last year I was deployed to Afghanistan and frankly did not have the time to do so, and I have moved on to other operational level games. What I liked about CM I will list, and when I play PCO, I think I will know after a few games if I like it or not...sort of an intuitive thing, based on "how it feels", also the interface and easy of that interface will have a lot to do with that.
CM Likes:
1. I LOVE the WEGO system! WEGO is the best system to date, to replicate continuous combat, yet allowing time to make decisions.
2. The time delay based on Squad and Platoon HQ competency levels.
3. Moral of units, and how that could change.....few units fight to the death, most will break and run at some point. CM modeled this very well I thought.
4. Infantry model felt "right", or as good as there was at the time.....better than Steel Panthers to me, as that was my main tactical war game prior to CM.
5. The armor penetration model seemed really good, and took into account a lot of variables unseen by the players into account. I think I read once it even took into account the minor angle differences due to how the vehicle was sitting on the ground relative to the incoming projectile, and even the slope of the ground itself. The graphic and color representation of armor thickness and gun penetration was nice, and allowed quick decisions. (This was my main grip about the Close Combat series of games, the armor model seemed "jacked up", too close, not to proper scale based on the terrain.)
6. The "Hull Down" feature relative to another direct fire target was nice.
7. Sometimes your Squads changed their orders, due to the stupid orders you gave them or the situation. This was VERY realistic IMO. (Just wish it took place more often.)
8. Vehicle breakdown or bogging.....I think vehicle breakdown could have been replicated more. (Most Tigers tanks were not killed in combat, they ran out of gas or suffered mechanical failure and the crew was forced to destroy them if they could not be recovered or were in danger of falling into enemy hands.)
9. Workable artillery model, but I think CM:SF was hugely superior however.
10. Last the first 3D graphics of the game, and it just looked so cool to watch the battle. I don't think I ever grew tired of watching the combat, tracers, burning tanks, smoke...all a first that really sealed the deal for me to learn and play CM the first time I saw it, and on top of all that, it "felt right".
What CM needed:
1. A "follow me" command
2. Ability to plan and manage artillery better for deliberate attacks, fires by round count, example fire a Battery 6 on target XYZ, which means that in a battery six rounds per gun will be fired on that target, pre-planned targets, smoke/WP and HE mixed, time on target and so on. In other words, more and better ways to manage the biggest killer on the battlefield. (Talk to an Artillery guy for more details, I am just a grunt.) Perhaps attacks in CM were not true deliberate attacks, but more of the "hasty" variety and that is why. But I always tried to make my attacks very deliberate, with lots of artillery and combat power committed at the decisive point.
3. Players should not be able to move Squads perfectly, to every perfect piece of terrain, more "fuzzy" orders and more uncertainly is more realistic, see next point for more.
4. More uncertainty in the area of Command and Control, or C2 if you will. For Example, orders may not be followed, orders may be misunderstood, orders may be disregarded, and the chance of this could be higher based on leadership, moral and experience of subordinate leaders and distance from the higher HQ. Trust me, when the leader is not near, units have a higher chance of doing "their own thing". A way of doing this may be by settings, there could be a "High C2" setting or something....just an idea, as I know most people will want to micro-manage their units and want "perfect" obedience of orders.
Notice I NEVER said 1:1 representation of infantry........graphics are nice, but I would rather have good play in the abstract, then perfect realism and 1:1 representation.....another major pitfall of CMSF, and I think frankly if they had it to do over again, they would avoid. It opened a Pandora's box of problems and cries of "my guy did not take cover" or "there was cover and blah, blah, blah......
Thats is about it.
(Added as an Edit) Frankly I only added this long post without reading all the other posts, and had forgotten about the previous CM:SF negative comments made by some. I do not and did not mean this to become an anti-CMSF rant, I was only trying to express my thoughts on where I am at when it comes to tactical war games, and my thoughts on those type of games. I hear CM:SF has gone through a lot of fixs and is much better now. Last I have bought and tried Achtung Panzer Kharkov. The jury is still out on it for me, but most of my problems with that game were system related, as I still have a fairly old computer. The main issue I had with APK, was Parodox and it's stupid download service, and it was always pooping open to tell me to buy something.
< Message edited by Zemke_4 -- 9/7/2010 3:52:31 AM >
_____________________________
"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
|
Printable Version
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO? - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread