Take Command - 2nd Manassas (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

JudgeDredd -> Take Command - 2nd Manassas (4/30/2006 10:56:11 PM)

Anyone gave this a go? The demo played out quite nicely. A few things wrong, but overall, I'd say it was a fairtly good tactical game. Camera control is pish poor though (or maybe it's my old hands!) ... just didn't seem "zoomable" enough. You could zoon in OK, but the zoom out was borderline useless.



junk2drive -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (4/30/2006 11:22:21 PM)

It is a great game for those who like this kind of game.

For me, ths scale of the battlefield is large and I agree that you cannot view enough of it to keep up with the action.

However it is real time. If you have to hold a spot for one hour and do very well, you will be sitting and staring at nothing for the remainder of time. You cannot speed up time if there is action somewhere on the battlemap.



Sarge -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (4/30/2006 11:30:52 PM)

My only real issue with TC2M is the restrictive camera.

I understand the official reasoning behind the camera, but IMHO it makes no sense and has a adverse effect on game play.



wodin -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 1:41:53 AM)

Have the first game.

Good fun.

Have little interest in the Civil War though.



JudgeDredd -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 1:58:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge

My only real issue with TC2M is the restrictive camera.

I understand the official reasoning behind the camera, but IMHO it makes no sense and has a adverse effect on game play.


I agree - that was my main issue.

As for the sitting and waiting comment...I don't know. I only played the demo and there was enough action there to keep me going.

What I did like, though, was the Courier and getting messages saying General X is having trouble holding your left flank and that he cannot guarantee holding etc...made me feel part of a bigger battle. Nice touch. And, of course, the fact that I didn't have to act (and indeed was unable to) on General Xs behalf.

I may get this one. I'm not a fan of the American Civil war...that is I've never had a game on the theme. But I could become one. I like the idea more than the Napoleonics, I would say.



wodin -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 11:49:32 AM)

JudgeDredd,

If your anything like me you will buy it and play it what three times. Goodgae but no real interest in the War means it wont hold you attention.

However its the search to find that wargame that fullfills every level that you want. Im like that.

Ive even played games that I thought finally here we are but in the end something isnt quite right.

CL had the promise. Im goign to start to learn how to programme and then I will programme the damn thing myself.



JudgeDredd -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 2:02:35 PM)

Absolutely. But it's ok having several games that give a little of each.

I find the same in any game genre to be honest, but more so in strategy games.

Problem is, now, I have so many games installed, I can never make the choice of what I want to play. I did have a couple of each genre installed...that way I could decide what I wanted to play depending on the mood I was in...but now I spend so long looking at all the games, I get lost in the plethora of shortcust and end up playing a game I didn't want to really and so it goes on!

I think I'll do that again....decide what games are my fav of each genre and take the rest off until I'm ready for them.

Cheers wodin....great help m8!



ravinhood -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 4:02:37 PM)

I have the first one and I just found it too much of a sit and watch game than really a tactical civil wargame like I'd like to have with an AI that's seemingly as good as the one in the origional and probably this sequel as well. It's really not all that hard to play or understand how to defeat the AI once you understand how the game "scores". And without any multiplayer feature this one sort of dies away pretty quickly unlike Sid Meiers Gettysburg which I can still find challenging matches on gamespy. It's kinda of sad and funny at the same time the most fun I find with this game is just taking an artillery detachment and just watch the AI play itself. But, then again it's a Paradox production and that's the most fun I got out of HOI as well since it was so rediculously unrealistic, I would take some minor like Switzerland and just watch the AI play itself after I just found it too easy or too rediculous to play it with any tenacity.


@Judge

Lol I found myself in that same position several years ago. I have 100's of games of all types and for the most part I can look at one and go "yelch" I already played that. lol I think that's why most released games today don't appeal to me because I already have something like it.

Amazingly when I get in that mood that nothing is appealing, the Out of the Park Baseball series keeps appealing to me. Has lots of statistics and buying and trading for star players to put my Texas Rangers in first place and the world series is a challenge and continous fun for awhile. Then when that gets old a game like Transport Tycoon or Industry Giant II call out and I end up playing more games of these 3 types than I do wargames anymore. I'm hoping Sid Meiers new Railroad Tycoon is better than the last two, though they were ok fun they just weren't very challenging like the origional.

I see a lot of engines for wargames I like, but, they don't have the era of the war I'd like to see them in. Like MM's Civil War engine would be more fun if it were an ancients era with so many different variations of weapons and tactics to use. The civil war had to be the most boring of them all, stand across from each other and fire till one or the other retreats. That's about as bland as a grapefruit without any sugar. Rome Total War was such a disappointment I doubt I will even look at MTW2. Not unless I hear/read they reduced the battle/death speed way down back like it was in the origional MTW.

Matrix games is taking forever releasing anything worth buying as far as I'm concerned. They killed Combat Leader and are starting over (gah). EIA might as well be a hasbeen, cause by the time it's released it will be a hasbeen. The Tin Soldiers series is the only thing I've really cared for. But, even that gets old after just a few games. It needs a RANDOM element badly. It needs a Combat Mission QUICK BATTLES feature badly.

Game design is just in a rut and too repetitive. What we need are some fresh new minds that know how to make a game that is challenging and fun and not a clickfest. And of course once again what we need is a movement away from WWII, Civil War, Naploleon and hypothetical futuristic or cold warfare. Need to move back to sticks and stones and break my bones sort of games. ;)



Cap Mandrake -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 5:07:11 PM)

Ravin;

I agree with you..Sid Meir's Gettysburg was fun...especially in multiplayer.



Monadman -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 6:24:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

And without any multiplayer feature this one sort of dies away pretty quickly . . .


I tend to agree.

I supported them and bought the first and second game but will not purchase the third without multiplayer. I’d much rather see a third game with less units and a multiplayer function then a gazillion sprites concentrating on an OOB for yet another famous ACW engagement (been there, done that, got the referenced sources).

Time to move the market before the market moves.

Richard




wodin -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/1/2006 10:14:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood



Matrix games is taking forever releasing anything worth buying as far as I'm concerned. They killed Combat Leader and are starting over (gah). EIA might as well be a hasbeen, cause by the time it's released it will be a hasbeen. The Tin Soldiers series is the only thing I've really cared for. But, even that gets old after just a few games. It needs a RANDOM element badly. It needs a Combat Mission QUICK BATTLES feature badly.




I have to agree.

Panther games are the flagship developer for Matrix in my opinion.

Combat Leader is the No1 game Ive been interested in. That is all in the air now and most likely scrapped.

World in FLames is looking good on paper but how will it play?

Luckly MAtrix has the Talonsoft label to make some money on. However they are old games. I want something new.



junk2drive -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/3/2006 5:36:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

It is a great game for those who like this kind of game.

For me, ths scale of the battlefield is large and I agree that you cannot view enough of it to keep up with the action.

However it is real time. If you have to hold a spot for one hour and do very well, you will be sitting and staring at nothing for the remainder of time. You cannot speed up time if there is action somewhere on the battlemap.


The first patch is out. They added a feature to end a battle early if you are winning.



Dunhill_BKK -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/4/2006 1:34:55 PM)

This game is one of the best wargames I've ever played. However, it is a game for grognards, who might like a bit more difficulty than some. I refer to the game as a tactical field simulator.

I don't agree that the camera is limited. You have to use the jump map to quickly move the camera around. Moving the camera hundreds of meters over the battlefield is cool, but there are lots of graphics to resolve so it can be slow with all the trees, smoke guns, and such to draw. And speaking of graphics I upgraded my machine to 2GB just to enjoy all the great graphics. This is a real immersion game, and a really well done one at that.

I would highly recommend it as the designers frequently post on the forums about howm to mod the game and are really working with the community to create the bet game possible. You can't say that about many computer games these days.

Moreover they are working on multiplayer and the strategic level next. This game will be the ultimate in one on one grognard battles when that is done. Mark my words.

One last thing this is the only AI that give my CPU grief in big battles when it is turned up. It is a good bit of programming and regularly hands me my hat after routing my troops.



SwampYankee68 -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/4/2006 7:18:30 PM)

I have found that the camera does not limit me at all, especially once you begin to use your map to move your "eye" about the battlefield. At max zoom out you can take in everything a division or even more is engaged in. And then you use the map to move from division to division. I like the fact that I cannot have "God's eye view" at all times, it is more challenging.

I'm loving the game right now - but I will admit that I am very interested in the ACW.

If you liked Mier's game you can't help but love this game. Perhaps someday if MadMinute is commercially succesful with their titles they will code in multiplayer, but one cannot fault their support - they have already released one patch. This is not a full time endevour for the designers, but you would not know it from their dedication.

But back to the game play - once you get used to the command delay (couriers take orders to units!) and plan for that, the game starts to give you a very good picture of what commanders faced - seeing a "situation" develop and then trying to get a unit there IN TIME to have an effect. Great stuff, absolutely great...IMHO



ravinhood -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/10/2006 1:14:25 PM)

From reading the dev comments at the official site it doesn't look like multiplayer is going to be in the 3rd rendition either. They keep saying they don't have the time/resources to put that into the game. Here I don't understand this philosophy, they spent 3 years of their off time making the origional (still spending their off time making this one and the next), why not put in another year and build a multiplayer feature that could put them into the status they want of just making wargames (civil war based I guess). It's like they made 1/2 an engine and didn't finish it and sort of expect the gaming consumers to just waller all over it and buy it just because. Now me I like pbem multiplayer and I doubt this type of game will ever fit that bill, but, I'd bet salt to peanuts a multiplayer feature would gain them more sales, prehaps even double them if not more than just a single solo play that pretty much only grogs are going to appreciate right now.



Jevhaddah -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/10/2006 3:42:09 PM)

I have to say that I know very little about the ACW but I purchased this game so that I could dip my toes into this conflict across the Pond. I must admit that I am having a great time with it, I have even had a major victory or two, which had me totally gobsmacked [:D]

I have since purchased Sid Wossnames Gettysburg to run on one of my older PC's, looking forward to playing it later in the year, It's too sunny hhere in Scotland to stay indoors, I believe our summer is going to be a Tuesday this year [:D].

I have not really played Multiplayer yet on any of my Vast Matrix Games collection, the main reason being that I dont want to make an ass of myself, I know I am missing out and one day I will bite the bullet and go for it, but not yet, coz I iz too shy [8|]

With this game being a partime endevour, maybe multiplayer is out of the question because of all the extra support that would be needed to address security issues, bugs and user brainfarts.

I am however enjoying myself [:)]

Cheers

Jevvy



JudgeDredd -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/10/2006 7:29:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jevhaddah

...I believe our summer is going to be a Tuesday this year [:D]...


LMAO at that. I'm Scottish and know exactly what you mean!



captskillet -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/10/2006 8:28:07 PM)

Summer...............you guys in Scotland dont what summer is...........try Louisiana humidity and 95 on for size[;)] [:D] !



ravinhood -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/10/2006 10:53:53 PM)

Ahhh yes Louisiana the land of Swamps and Polk Salad, Crawdead heads and creole gumbo. ;)



Jevhaddah -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/10/2006 11:22:16 PM)

Alas, our weather is extremly changable, we are lucky to get a sunny day to last a whole day [:)] I think it was last June when we had a warm morning, followed by rain afternoon and snow in the evening [X(]

Cheers

Jevvy



Cap Mandrake -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/15/2006 7:22:54 PM)

Just tried the demo. Darned fun game if you ask me. I cranked up the landscape horizon to 2500 yds, set on max uniform detail, max trees, max casualty displays etc etc.

The march column graphics are great..you can see the individual soldiers head's and rifles bob up and down. One time I plotted a regiment to go to the other side of a barn...one file when to the left of the barn and two to the right. [:)]The melee/charge graphics are great too. Regiments in skirmish standing in a wheat field look fantastic. The regiments in line formation are too straight..they look like someone took a laser to them.

Sounds are very good.

The fog of war thing is great. If you have all 4 regts of your brigade committed and a couple of enemy regts show up on your flank....utoh.

Would be hard to learn for someone with no knowledge of US Civil War tactics.

It needs a multiplayer capabilty baaaad! Would be a killer game with that capability.



Crimguy -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/18/2006 1:51:26 AM)

I know little about Civil War tactics. I am not an ACW fanboy. I like WitP, HTTR, TOAW and Combat Mission.

I love this game. AI is for the most part challenging, and does a great job trying to outflank you. The builtin scenarios are very good, and play on the AI's strengths.

It desparately needs multiplayer. The devs need to make that 1st priority for the next title (Shiloh) but have other things on their minds.

I have since rented Ken Burns' civil war series, and am gonna have to start re-reading my history books on the subject. It is truly a game that will get you in the spirit of things.

Highly recommended, and gets my vote for wargame of the year (so far).



*Lava* -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/18/2006 3:01:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
Camera control is pish poor though (or maybe it's my old hands!) ... just didn't seem "zoomable" enough. You could zoon in OK, but the zoom out was borderline useless.


Hi!

I was on the beta team for MMG's first game.. "The Civil War: Bull Run."

Here's a couple comments on the camera.

First off, the game was designed such that it would be difficult to move around the map with the camera. The reason for this is that the developers wanted the player to learn how to "command" his forces by using the somewhat excellent friendly AI. The emphasis was put on "Commanding" as a commander would do so... not as 99% of the way games are designed.. as god would do so.

While it is quite easy to micromanage every unit at the brigade and division level, when you hit the Corps and Army level, you really have to "give orders" to your subordinates and let the AI more or less control parts of the battle. At this level, the player must determine his strategy, put it in motion and then watch over the battle as it develops. At critical moments and areas, the good commander (player) will jump in, take command of certain units for a limited amount of time and then back out and supervise the overall conduct of the battle.

As designed... it works superbly.

As far as the zoom goes, Judge you have a valid point. Panning in and out really takes a lot of time to learn how to do. When I first started playing the game, I used a combination of keyboard keys and the mouse for camera control. Later, I learned how to do it all with the mouse. Once you get used to using only the mouse, things become a lot easier, but nevertheless, it still is a bit awkward. The reason I believe is because the scroll rate is quite slow, whether you are looking at the whole battlefield or only a small portion of it. I'm just guessing here, but once again I believe this was designed to be that way, however, if it was scaleable (close moves fast.. far moves slow), it would be much kewler, easier to zoom in and watch the battle going on and still force the player to rely on his AI subordinates in the bigger battles.

Ray (alias Lava)



Hertston -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/18/2006 11:28:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

It desparately needs multiplayer. The devs need to make that 1st priority for the next title (Shiloh) but have other things on their minds.


Agreed. Often these days you get the impression that MP is included just because its sort of expected that it should be, whether it actually adds much or not. With the case of both Take Command games, though, its absence is particularly frustrating as they would make such good multiplayer games.



Crimguy -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/19/2006 12:44:29 AM)

To be fair as possible, they are a very small house, and I'm appreciative of all the work they've done. I imagine adding multiplayer code is a bear of a job for a 2 man outfit. And to do it right, in my eyes they need to do something similar to the multiplayer in Steel Beasts, i.e. allow players to choose who they control from the brigade level all the way up to the army command. No small task.



*Lava* -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/19/2006 4:38:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

To be fair as possible, they are a very small house, and I'm appreciative of all the work they've done. I imagine adding multiplayer code is a bear of a job for a 2 man outfit. And to do it right, in my eyes they need to do something similar to the multiplayer in Steel Beasts, i.e. allow players to choose who they control from the brigade level all the way up to the army command. No small task.


Yep..

But my feeling is that they will cave and you will get some kind of multiplayer soon.. but it will be crap until they have the resources to do it well.

It's getting to be pretty standard fair in the games biz. A few folks whine until they get what they want, and then the game usually suffers for it.

Ray (alias Lava)



e_barkmann -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/19/2006 2:00:53 PM)

well worth getting, best game I have played in the last year or so.

Due to the competence of the AI, I feel I am playing another player.

I am generally one who says that if a company wants my money, I require reliable multiplayer - in this case, I am more than happy paying MMG for each iteration as I have enjoyed both immensely at the single player level, and hope that my money will eventually allow the guys to go full time and get MP sorted.

cheers Chris



ravinhood -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/20/2006 10:09:15 PM)

quote:

Highly recommended, and gets my vote for wargame of the year (so far).


Sorry, but, COTA will win that honor. ;)



Crimguy -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/21/2006 2:53:12 AM)

Remains to be seen . . . COTA (finally) will take the AA engine somewhere other than Market Garden, so that will be interesting. It will get my $$, that's for certain. HOpe more people take it online this time.



junk2drive -> RE: Take Command - 2nd Manassas (5/21/2006 3:01:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Crimguy

I have since rented Ken Burns' civil war series, and am gonna have to start re-reading my history books on the subject. It is truly a game that will get you in the spirit of things.

Highly recommended, and gets my vote for wargame of the year (so far).


I have the companion book to the PBS series and highly recommend it.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.5625