Why I am not interested... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Modern Tactics



Message


JudgeDredd -> Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 12:35:26 PM)

I was kind of burned with Close Combat Cross of Iron.

No-ones fault but mine...I didn't like the original CCIII (my least favourite) - it actually put me off buying anymore of the series and COI did nothing to re-ignite my initial passion for the series.

Why? Well, for me, infantry wise, the game was unplayable. Entire squads wiped out with SS style shots and mortar teams, nevermind the armour.

I tried and tried and tried to keep my troops as safe as possible up till the point of contact, but there was really no need, because as soon as contact was made, the troops died.

I could've been crap at the game, so 'm not necessarily blaming this on the devs....but I found it unplayable for infantry.

And whilst I was excited about this (being a modern warfare game), I just couldn't justify the purchase based on the COI release. That and no campaign makes the game unpurchasable for me.

I am not trying to put anyone off, or stop other people enjoying it. I just wanted the devs to know what has put me off buying it...just in case they make more...they may consider my points.




Marc von Martial -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 12:58:06 PM)

You need more exercise I take it [;)]




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 1:07:11 PM)

I don't know what that means, sorry




Erik Rutins -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 1:29:19 PM)

I would assume Marc meant practice, in a nice way. [;)] With that said, I'm also not that great as a player at CC, but I've seen replays of folks that can absolutely do very, very well with infantry so I know that there are plenty of things I still have to learn too. I will note though that CC:MT's battlefield is even more lethal than COI's (as it should be) so I would definitely agree that if COI is too lethal for you, CC:MT would be even beyond that.




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 1:44:31 PM)

Oh, ic.

I thought he just knew I was a fat bastard somehow!!




Erik Rutins -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 2:47:26 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
I thought he just knew I was a fat bastard somehow!!


Well, most of us are, so he might have guessed that too. [;)]




Marc von Martial -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/20/2007 3:05:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I don't know what that means, sorry


To make infantry survive in CC:

Use:
- cover
- supressing fire (attack and fire teams)
- even more surpressing fire
- smoke
- outflank tactics

If you run into an enemy (even worse an ambushing enemy) without any of the above your are toast in CC [;)]




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 10:50:37 PM)

You know, I had a big post written about how I'm no n00b blah blah blah, so I thought I would fire it up and try again....

So this is how my first scenario went in CoI...

3 infantry units, 2 machinegun units, 1 HMG unit, 1 Stug III and a mortar unit and Group Leader

Stug III on the brow of the hill to cover same with HMG mortar unit behind hill and set to lay smoke in front of hut on west of river (there is a AT gun in there).

It all kicks off.

HMG opens up on infantry crawling on north west of river
Stug II set to fire on building where suspected gun is
1 MG unit in building to far west to provide supressing fire where AT gun is.

So I have Stug III and 1 MG unit providing supressing fire on AT and smoke being laid

I sneak 2 infantry units up to building and when I'm within 30 yards and then I set to move fast to close on the building
They are wiped out as soon as they stand up, despite the HMG supressing fire...despite the Stug III supressing fire and despite the 2 MG units I now have opening up on the enemy

In short, as soon as my unito show their heads, they are totalled. I use smoke and it's useless. Unless the smoke is DIRECTLY between the unit and the enemy, they will be opened up on. It is truly useless.

Smoke form your troops is just as back because as soon as they stand up to launch smoke, they are totalled.

I'd like to hear from anyone esle who thinks it's doable...because I've played this mission 3 times now and at the most I have taken 1 control point.

I know this sounds like it should be in the CoI forum, but I wanted to see whether this was different or not.




Andrew Williams -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:04:11 PM)

I seem to march back and forth across eastern europe without too much problem.

Did you have a command team exerting influence on your attacking teams?




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:07:01 PM)

Yes...Group Leader and I kept them as close as I dare with the infantry units.




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:07:20 PM)

oh...and this was on the easiest setting!




Behemoth -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:08:46 PM)

Sorry Dredd, I don't have CoI, but in the old CC, there was friendly fire. Did you cease fire of your own units before the charge? I used to mow down my units a lot until I realized what I was doing. perhaps this isn't helpful, I was just on and thought I'd drop my 2 cents.




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:11:43 PM)

No seriously...this is not my units causing the damage to my units. As soon as my men show their faces, they are dead.

I might see if I can make a video of it just to show, but I have no idea how big it would be.




davmarksman -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:12:51 PM)

JudgeDredd does have a point with infantry getting massacared. its hard to advance with infantry and tanks against a well inplaced emeny defensive postion combing AT & infantry, and thats just against the AI. But CC infantry combat is better compared to games like sudden strike




davmarksman -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:14:55 PM)

p.s. a campaign for CC:MT would be nice

________________________________________________________________________________________
"The infantry is there so that when some die the generals know where to direct the artillery fire"




Duck Doc -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/21/2007 11:59:26 PM)

I am just lurking & I have no idea how I got here but here goes.

Seems to me this is a true statement on any modern battlefield, WW2 & beyond. Hi-diddle-diddle-straight-up-the-middle is a good way to get yourself killed.

The U.S. Army in WW2 taught their infantry only this: fire & maneuver = fire to suppress & pin enemy then maneuver to flank or envelop them.

I played some of the original CC series & at the tactical level the game represents one must use all the cover & defilade & smoke (& mirrors...) available to conceal your forces then maneuver on the enemy without being exposed.

I never had any problem with my infantry because I took good care of them [:D] .

Thanks for re-kindling my in interest in cc: coi! I just may jump in.

quote:

ORIGINAL: davmarksman

JudgeDredd does have a point with infantry getting massacared. its hard to advance with infantry and tanks against a well inplaced emeny defensive postion combing AT & infantry, and thats just against the AI. But CC infantry combat is better compared to games like sudden strike





JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 12:06:25 AM)

Well Dale, I can assure you...
quote:

Hi-diddle-diddle-straight-up-the-middle

is not a tactic I employ.

There is plenty of smoke kicking about...plenty of sneaking, plenty of fire and manouvre and plenty of flanking...but same old story...as soon as my men show their faces, they are taken out. I'm sure war is that brutal, but it makes the game no fun.

The problem I am mentioning here was the very reason I stopped playing CoI within 2 weeks of buying it and exactly the reason why I have offered it free of charge to a good home in the General Discussion forum.

I only installed it again to justify my comments by playing rather than trying to remember what happened.

As it stands, someone has asked for it and I will gladly be shipping it to them. Unfortunately, I haven't heard anything different about this game.

Anyway, I'll leave you lot in peace now to enjoy your game [:D]




Motomouse -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 12:07:54 AM)

infantry frontal assault - dont do it unless you outnumber (locally?) the enemy like 3 : 1 (minimum)
even if you outnumber the enemy more than 3 : 1 a flanking maneuvre would be more effective perhaps
is it really necessary to assault a certain position to achieve your overall goals?

In CoI perhaps you dont have to achieve a decisive win in the mission on the first try? Often it takes severel rounds on the same map and you just advance one victory location or you get a draw and you are waiting for your next chance.

Just some thoughts, I am definitly no expert on this topic
Regards
Motomouse







Duck Doc -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 12:20:45 AM)

Sorry. I re-read your original post & you say you are maneuvering under cover.

I meant my reply mainly in response to davmarksman.

Sad you don't like the game. If the other person doesn't want it I will take it off your hands & even pay you for it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

Well Dale, I can assure you...
quote:

Hi-diddle-diddle-straight-up-the-middle

is not a tactic I employ...


Anyway, I'll leave you lot in peace now to enjoy your game [:D]






Banquet -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 12:31:49 AM)

I know where Judge is coming from. I have CoI and enjoyed it very much. However it does seem that infantry is just a sideline to armour. I haven't played for a while (been playing AT) but I remember a tank shell or mortar round taking out just about a whole squad, pretty much as soon as it was spotted. I ended up spending as many points on vehicles as I could as that seemed to be what the AI was doing.

I was interested to check out Modern Tactics but hearing there's no campaign (a highlight of CoI) and reading about the increased lethality of weapon systems has made me decide to hold off on a purchase.

That being said Modern Tactics seems to be aimed at MP games rather than campaigns and I hope it has great success. It's early days in terms of feedback and I still may buy the game in the future :)




davmarksman -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 12:39:14 AM)

a good tactic that works is be very cautious. Use the move comand and when you make contact bring several units to fire on that postion. if you cant do that pull back. Apart from that...

smoke, bombard and get all your squads shooting. The unit which made contact usually get high casualities but you might just suppress them and save a few men.




Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 2:17:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

To make infantry survive in CC:

Use:
- cover
- supressing fire (attack and fire teams)
- even more surpressing fire
- smoke
- outflank tactics

If you run into an enemy (even worse an ambushing enemy) without any of the above your are toast in CC [;)]

The way to make infantry survive in CC is to limit the number of AFV, most importantly ones with large caliber weapons.

IMO, CC2 was the best of the series because of its campaign and its limitation on how many slots were open for vehicles.

CC3 failed on both counts.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)




jomni -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 2:56:45 AM)

Well I'm "glad" to tell you that in CCMT, there is no such thing as a super AFV.  Even my M1 tank gets destroyed pretty quickly by an unknown (unspotted) enemy.  Most probably AT infantry.  AT lethality of infantry in CCMT is very effective.




Reiryc -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 8:04:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

You know, I had a big post written about how I'm no n00b blah blah blah, so I thought I would fire it up and try again....

So this is how my first scenario went in CoI...

3 infantry units, 2 machinegun units, 1 HMG unit, 1 Stug III and a mortar unit and Group Leader

Stug III on the brow of the hill to cover same with HMG mortar unit behind hill and set to lay smoke in front of hut on west of river (there is a AT gun in there).

It all kicks off.

HMG opens up on infantry crawling on north west of river
Stug II set to fire on building where suspected gun is
1 MG unit in building to far west to provide supressing fire where AT gun is.

So I have Stug III and 1 MG unit providing supressing fire on AT and smoke being laid

I sneak 2 infantry units up to building and when I'm within 30 yards and then I set to move fast to close on the building
They are wiped out as soon as they stand up, despite the HMG supressing fire...despite the Stug III supressing fire and despite the 2 MG units I now have opening up on the enemy

In short, as soon as my unito show their heads, they are totalled. I use smoke and it's useless. Unless the smoke is DIRECTLY between the unit and the enemy, they will be opened up on. It is truly useless.

Smoke form your troops is just as back because as soon as they stand up to launch smoke, they are totalled.

I'd like to hear from anyone esle who thinks it's doable...because I've played this mission 3 times now and at the most I have taken 1 control point.

I know this sounds like it should be in the CoI forum, but I wanted to see whether this was different or not.



How long did you lay down suppressing fire?

Generally you'll have to do it for a while. Plus, it's good to attack from multiple directions on the same target. Additionally, when you use move fast, the guys try to assault the target and won't shoot on the way in.

My suggestion is to use suppressing fire for about 2 - 5 game minutes before you move anyone. The next think you want to do is move 1 unit at a time part way to the building. When it reaches its destination part way to the building, then set that unit on indirect fire to the building.

Move your next unit the same distance towards the building. Once there, set it to suppressing fire.

Move your last unit and set it to suppressing fire.

All of these moves should take place outside of a firing lane from either other buildings or trenches etc if possible.

Now go back to the first unit being moved, bring it to within 15-20 meters of the building, then make it fire on the building. At about the same time, do this with your second unit as well. The second unit however, once it moves to the same distance as the first unit, should then be set to move fast up to the building after your first unit throws grenades in. Once that second unit reaches the very outer perimeter of the building, then change it to either a move order or a fire order.

Bring in the 3rd unit.

Usually using this tactic in some combination, taking into consideration distance to be run and the fire lanes of your opponent will allow you to make a successful assault.

Last thing, make sure you set either your 'bars' over the mens head to command or to cover. I usually set the bars to command and the outlines to cover. This way I know if my boys are in command range and also if they are in good cover. To check to see how far your command range is for your command unit(s), press the space bar and a ring will show up around the command unit(s). I would recommend bringing a command unit in with your assaulting unit.

Keep your assaulting men in command at all times or things will go bad quick more often than not.

cc3 is not much of an infantry game, but it can be done although it's more difficult than say cc1, 2, or 4.

My favorite of the series by far is/was cc1 since it had the best infantry survivability of the series and suppressing fire worked really well.




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 4:05:16 PM)

forget it




Uncle_Joe -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 4:27:59 PM)

Just so you know, Judge, you are not alone in your assessment.

Everyone's advice on 'suppression fire' and 'cover' etc aside, the combat modeling in CC is still very much more 'Hollywood' than reality IMO. My final straw was a defense scenario where all of my squads were in trenches. A German armored car (222) spots one squad and at 150m kills 1-2 men per burst at men in the trenches. Each shot guaranteed killing at least 1 of my men....

Add to that the fact that the game always degenerated into tank orgies and I soon lost interest. If you limit it to just soldiers or maybe a few AFVs, it can still be fun but the lethality still seems awfully high IMO.

Just thinking about how much more lethal modern weapon system would be makes me have almost zero interest in this title as well.




JudgeDredd -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 4:46:31 PM)

I think that's my point...lethality.

I kid you not. As soon as a squad shows their face, regardless of covering fire, suppressing fire or ditches, flanking manouvres, attacks from multiple sides.....regardless of all that...my squads die in  seconds (if not, then routed/surrendered) and this is on the easy setting.

Not good. And seeing as this is meant to be more lethal, I can only see it as another game to practice my frustration skills.

I had started this post in the vein hope of being persuaded otherwise, but I'm afraid there has been nothing here to do that. All I've had, really, is advice to use certain tactics that are, tbh, basic knowledge and are most definitely being implemented by me.

Man, if a Stug III, HMG, MG and mortar team firing on a building concealing an AT team for 3-5 minutes isn't enough to supress that AT team, then I give up...truly I do. Not to mention having two squads closing in from either side!!




CSO_Sbufkle -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 8:12:39 PM)

Heres a AAR for COI I made, youll have to excuse the code int he text, the settings on the site have to be fixed up to get rid of it.

http://www.closecombat.org/CSO/index.php?name=Sections&req=viewarticle&artid=24&page=1

I feel I was outgunned in this situation but came out on top. In day 2 I easily finished taking the map, I had effectively trapped the Germans from both sides around the bridge.


Like any game like this, the map is key. LOS is crititcal and sometimes the odds are agaisnt you. The AI in particular is easy to beat, but then again on some maps and some situations... itds damn hard no matter what! Its these tough times I actually enjoy playign the game.




Andrew Williams -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 9:37:38 PM)

and here is a n AAR H2H of the same area.

H2h AAR







CSO_Sbufkle -> RE: Why I am not interested... (11/22/2007 9:51:51 PM)

An AAR in a forum thread? How quaint!!




Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.671875