Historical Accuracy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat - Cross of Iron



Message

bobwalt -> Historical Accuracy (1/2/2007 1:21:30 AM)

I read the release notes posted release notes for COI and I am troubled by the minimum main gun range. It seems to me that it is a one size fits all and that is incorrect. Most German tanks had a much greater degree of gun depression than did the Russian; that is one reason why they could operate from hull-down and the Russians could not. Shouldn't the Germans have a lower minimum range than the Russians. IMHO a computer game is a great place to implement all those little minutia type rules that would be too hard to keep track of in a manual game. Now for the other side of accuracy - please do not take away the ability to do fascinating "What Ifs". Because something did not or could not have occurred does not mean it is not an interesting proposition to find out what would happen if it did occur; so please do not remove too many options. Do, however, make it clear that that those items were not historically possible.

Bob



Hitori kyo -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/2/2007 11:46:36 PM)

i agree with bobwalt

- Hitori Kyo



Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/3/2007 2:11:57 AM)

IIRC, German assault guns suffered from a handicap in this regard because the gun-compartment ceiling was so low. So, if the developers wanted to do anything in this vein, it'd have to be on a per-vehicle basis.

Personally, I always enjoyed infantry play in CC, preferring to have armour present only in VERY small quantities as part of the tactical problem presented in the scenario. For that matter, if I want to play some big-honkin' tank battle, I'd likely to turn to CM or Panzer Command.

I always considered CC to be a much better infantry game than CM, but vice-versa for AFV. And I believe that the harder Atomic tried to turn the CC into an armour game, the less attractive that the title became. Hence my indifference to the issue raised by bobwalt. [:)]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)



old man of the sea -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/4/2007 6:50:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

I always considered CC to be a much better infantry game than CM, but vice-versa for AFV. And I believe that the harder Atomic tried to turn the CC into an armour game, the less attractive that the title became. Hence my indifference to the issue raised by bobwalt. [:)]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)


I'm with you on that.

E



Norden_slith -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/4/2007 11:33:58 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

IIRC, German assault guns suffered from a handicap in this regard because the gun-compartment ceiling was so low. So, if the developers wanted to do anything in this vein, it'd have to be on a per-vehicle basis.

Personally, I always enjoyed infantry play in CC, preferring to have armour present only in VERY small quantities as part of the tactical problem presented in the scenario. For that matter, if I want to play some big-honkin' tank battle, I'd likely to turn to CM or Panzer Command.

I always considered CC to be a much better infantry game than CM, but vice-versa for AFV. And I believe that the harder Atomic tried to turn the CC into an armour game, the less attractive that the title became. Hence my indifference to the issue raised by bobwalt. [:)]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)


I agree. All Tanks meet at pointblank range in this game, so a Tigers superior range (pounding away at 2 km range) didnt mean anything here. No Infantry plus some support is what this game is good at.




Sarge -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/4/2007 2:08:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Norden

I agree. All Tanks meet at pointblank range in this game, so a Tigers superior range (pounding away at 2 km range) didnt mean anything here. No Infantry plus some support is what this game is good at.




E’s work on infantry model in CC is still un-matched to this day, nothing I have played has ever come close to the entertainment value, or for that matter the ability to apply realistic tactics.

CC is hands down the best at modeling infantry tactics.



old man of the sea -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/5/2007 5:45:59 AM)

Thanks Sarge....

E



Randall Grubb -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/5/2007 9:07:10 AM)

E's work was fantastic considering the massive amount of data needed for the CC series. Even though there were minor errors and a few historical inaccucies, the original games are still far better than any others. The games initiated a drive for historical accuracy in the few then existig grognards and has been responsible for creating hundreds of new grogs, generating interest in researching the minutia's of every weapon and vehicle, reams of data tables, scores of mods and quite a number of websites.

And E did most of his research from books. The internet then was nowhere near as informative as it is today. His work for the games has probably led to more learning of WWII history by the fans, modders and denizens of the CC websites than any other game. When guys start picking the fly specks out of the pepper and debating on and on and on again about whether this weapon could have been in that battle because the production of it only started on this date and the supply was so and so, shows how much study of detail and history of World War Two that the games have engendered.

Props, E!



old man of the sea -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/5/2007 3:53:47 PM)

wow, I'm all watery eyed now.......

I have to add that a lot of the credit has to go to John Anderson. He made it all work.

Carry on soldiers.

E



KG_Absolute -> RE: Historical Accuracy (1/7/2007 1:10:15 AM)

More choices, better selection, greater flexibility via unit selection will provide a better/newer CC.  Those who play online will build scenarios.  As long as that feature is avaialble in CC: CoI then the greater the gameplay will be online. 



Tête de Porc -> RE: Historical Accuracy (2/11/2007 1:26:18 AM)

quote:

Most German tanks had a much greater degree of gun depression than did the Russian; that is one reason why they could operate from hull-down and the Russians could not. Shouldn't the Germans have a lower minimum range than the Russians.


I say leave it. Tanks have enough advantages in this game already. Anything that can help the poor bloody infantry is a plus.

Even if some tanks may suffer slight discrimination because of the elevation issue it's still nothing compared to what the infantry gets. So it's better to discriminate against the tanks.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.96875