Did They Ever Fix The Infantry Problem? (Full Version)

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



Message

Panzer Elite -> Did They Ever Fix The Infantry Problem? (4/25/2007 9:05:54 PM)


I was always a CC2 fan because the infantry in that game played a much more important role in it. CC3 on the other hand was tank heavy and thus, boring to me.

So my main concern before I buy is whether or not infantry plays a bigger role in this new version. What's the verdict on this?



dutch08 -> RE: Did They Ever Fix The Infantry Problem? (4/25/2007 11:14:15 PM)

Just playing through the new full campaign, I think the campaign writers did a good job with highlighting infantry, guns, and tanks in different scenario's.

Of course, if you are given enough points and given enough choices, tanks will rule the day. But in the campaign, a lot of times you don't have the neccessary points to get all the toys you want....and thus infantry plays a bigger role.

It hasn't been addressed because unlike Market-Garden, apparently there were a crap load of tanks on the eastern front. :)

BTW - I would be all over a re-release of CC2. But I digress.



Comrade_Blabsky -> Mods fix the infantry problem (4/26/2007 3:29:45 AM)

The great variety of AFV's available present the problem when playing against the computer of too many tanks.  Use an "infantry" mod or submod that limits vehicles.

More mods are being released presently, and also, this kind of stuff is relatively easy to adjust by anyone interested in custom ops and campaigns that take advantage of the modding possibilities for solo use.




Miserere -> RE: Mods fix the infantry problem (4/26/2007 7:50:45 PM)

My problem with the original CC3 wasn't so much the *number* of tanks (although it was annoyingly obvious that the developers had fallen in love with all the mechanized toys and had started making them the focus of the series, which is why CC2 has for me remained the high point of the series), but rather the ridiculous ability for tanks to spot and quickly wipe out whole squads of infantry. It was not uncommon for me to have infantry Hiding in trees at the beginning of a battle and within 10 seconds a Russian tank clear across the map had spotted them and was firing at them. Two HE rounds later the entire squad would be dead or cirtically wounded. That was not at all the case with CC2 infantry were much harder to spot and, even once spotted, were hard to wipe out while under cover.

So the real question for me is whether infantry survivability has improved in this version of the game?



Comrade_Blabsky -> Tanks vs crunchies (4/27/2007 4:51:31 AM)

Real Red addressed the tank-spots-everybody problem, and Cross of Iron has those adjustments.  It's not perfect.

Also, IMHO, commanders expect more concealment than is actually there on many maps, especially with large squads.  One or two soldiers sprawled out from the actual cover causes detection, and HE lobbed in the area is often very dangerous.  Trying to force a large squad into a patch of debris causes some of the sprites to squirm around seeking cover, and they are more vulnerable in that state.

Use the right-click to carefully recon the area, and keep your head down!



JudgeDredd -> RE: Tanks vs crunchies (4/27/2007 12:06:56 PM)

CC2 was also my highlight....I played it more than CC1 and CC3 put together...and then some.

Nothing gave me more satisfaction than running my little PIAT squad through the houses and upstairs...waiting on that Panther to come lumbering down the street and BAM! Straight down the commanders hatch!!

Love IT!



Uncle_Joe -> RE: Tanks vs crunchies (4/27/2007 6:23:27 PM)

Panzer Elite:

To directly address you question: IMO, no, they did not ever 'fix' the infantry problem. If playing against the AI you will still run into copious amount of armor (even in city fights...yes, it loses them left and right). And yes, infantry is still mauled by armor once spotted. The spotting seems to be much better than stock CC3, but once spotted, infantry do still evaporate entirely too quickly to vehicle fire IMO.

Case in point, in one of the winter maps I had a squad FULLY in the pre-made 'trenches'. They werent hanging outside halfway or anything of the sort. Their cover status was all good. An enemy squad came near and my troops opened fire, driving them off. A German armored car (222 I believe) open fired on my squad at over 100m. And in 10 seconds my entire squad was killed. Every shot from the 20mm killed 1-2 guys. It was literally 10 seconds and a squad of guys in trenches was wiped out at range, from a vehicle cannon. Yes, I know thats just one example, but it stuck in my mind early in the game. And I see it repeated often enough to know it wasnt a fluke.

Now, that said, once you accept that the combat isn't horrible 'realistic' in that regard, the game is still a lot of fun. I tend to just set up scenarios and pick both sides forces to keep the AFVs under control. I dont mind armor in the game, but at this scale it just seems silly to constant be fighting a hodge-podge of 4-5 vehicles and a few squads/teams of troops. And thats usually what you'll face in most of the the stock campaign scenarios.



Doggie -> RE: Tanks vs crunchies (4/28/2007 8:30:19 AM)

Close Combat is a game designed to be played against a human opponent.  Against a competent human player, the AI will lose every time.  If you must play it solo, edit the opposing force to give the AI at least a hope.  Take out all the halftracks, armored cars and such because they're sitting ducks.  Once you learn how to train a mortar team, open topped vehicles are often dispatched with a single shot.  I would recommend using mortars for smoke only, or not at all.

As for armored vehicles, at the scale CC is played the long range Axis guns are not an advantage.  At one hundred yards the lowly M-10s and Shermans actually have the edge over the supposedly invinceable kittens.  If you want to kill a tank every time, just let it see an infantry unit, let it swivel the turrent toward the decoy, and then move out from behind cover and smoke it while it's aiming or reloading.  A real tank wouldn't waste it's main gun ammo on a couple of scouts in a bell tower, especially when enemy armor is nearby.  The AI will do it every time.

An experienced human player will give you fits.  A platoon of infantry can humiliate your panzer platoon if managed properly.  A properly placed flamethrower team can be all but impossible to dig out rubble, providing it's  managed by a human commander.  And then there's "invisa-schrecks" a concept many of the old timers here are familiar with.  They are the spawn of satan, and all it takes to create them is an understanding of the game mechanics.  Your little CC sprites are like human soldiers in that they have the ability to learn.  It's your job to teach them.



Pford -> RE: Tanks vs crunchies (4/29/2007 8:11:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Doggie

If you want to kill a tank every time, just let it see an infantry unit, let it swivel the turrent toward the decoy, and then move out from behind cover and smoke it while it's aiming or reloading.


Yes, this trick, which works equally well against AI or Humans (one supposes, not having been able to get mp working) is a glaring exploit that needs addressing. Will units in subsequent versions be scriptable to favor hard or soft targets? At variable distances? Battlefront solved this dilemma so neatly with their Cover Arcs.



Infidel -> RE: Tanks vs crunchies (5/1/2007 5:19:49 PM)

I would like to know more about the "training your troops" thing, as I was not aware the AI is capable of "learning".  Did I miss this in the manual, or is any information available to get the hang of this aspect of the game?



Doggie -> RE: Tanks vs crunchies (5/1/2007 6:21:00 PM)

Your troops gain experience, morale, strength, intelligence and other attributes in each battle.  When you click on the soldier icon you see little bars representing their skill level.  You would think that highly experienced, intelligent, and motivated troops would perform better at all things than inexperienced ones, and you would be right.

Take your panzerschreck team, for example.  During their first battle they may not do so well, as they're new to tank hunting.  But keep them with in the command radius of an officer or NCO who can teach them, give them a taste of combat experience without getting them killed, and during the next battle in your campaign they will be more experienced, intelligent, strong, etc.  That means they aim better, they hide better, and they kill more tanks.  When all their individual attributes are maxed out, you have a veteran AT team who know their business.  They can hide in an open field and kill tanks at unbelievable ranges.

Same with any other specialized teams you may have.  A flamethrower team that has survived a few battles will learn how to use their flamethrower.  Instead of just sitting there and letting themselves be killed, as flamethrower teams are infamous for doing in Close Combat, an experienced team can walk through a hedgerow and crisp fry everything in their path to a crackely crunch, and the crispy critters won't even be able to see them in time to shoot back.



Comrade_Blabsky -> Major Major (5/2/2007 2:30:58 AM)

Troops can gain rank, as they gain experience over the long haul.  When playing a multi-operation campaign, heroic actions and kills will boost rank of leaders and asst. leaders.  I have, in past CC3 campaigns, had command teams go all the way to major, and gunners in tanks and a machine gunner also.  The actual command teams will see an increase in command radius.   The rest of the troops will gain rank in the screen, but lack command radii. 



Infidel -> RE: Major Major (5/3/2007 10:18:51 PM)

Ahh, okay that makes sense and clears some things up for me.  I had noticed during the campaign I just finished that even regular units seemed to perform better within a command radius.  And it wasn't just limited to morale.  The soldiers seemed to acquire the enemy and put fire on them quicker and with more intensity when a leader was nearby.  Do regular troops also learn and become more proficient with experience as with specialized units?

And thanks for the info!



Comrade_Blabsky -> Being a good officer (5/3/2007 11:49:12 PM)

IMHO, CC3 style campaign is very much centered on building your force in all aspects (it said so in the manual).  All troops can gain experience, strength, leadership, etc.  Pay attention to the long-surviving troops as a campaign progresses and there are rewards. As the operations progress, give assignments to parts of your force (especially get command teams to capture VL's) and watch as they gain attributes and start acting better in combat. (Check at the start of an operation to see if any units were promoted!)

In Cross of Iron, command radius makes a big difference.  If possible, have multiple command teams so that most of the force is in some radius.  And linking the main command radius to outlying command teams is even better.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.78125