Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (Full Version)

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



Message

lstp04 -> Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 4:31:43 AM)

Just curious how others feel about CCMT - Would you say the game plays out on a somewhat realistic way? On a tactical level? In which proper tactics produce positive results........Or is it more run and gun?

Playtesting at a limited amount thus far.....I can't really decide yet myself....



Fred98 -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 4:58:05 AM)

All the Close Combat games have been somewhat accurate tactically.  That is the whole purpose behind the game
-



lstp04 -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 5:31:46 AM)

That may be the case - the goal - However, does CCMT meet that goal is my question to others who have played -



Andrew Williams -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 9:45:49 AM)

If you use sound "Real Life" tactics you will find you have general success in CCMT.

If you run out into the open ... you get shot.


If you use suppressive fire you can assault.

It works!



Marc von Martial -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 9:55:09 AM)

Absolutely, applying real life tactics paves your road. Applying typical RTS tactics will wipe you out.



Perturabo -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 2:03:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: lstp04

Just curious how others feel about CCMT - Would you say the game plays out on a somewhat realistic way? On a tactical level? In which proper tactics produce positive results........Or is it more run and gun?

Playtesting at a limited amount thus far.....I can't really decide yet myself....

I have noticed that long-range battles produce more casualties than they should and make assaulting enemy positions unnecessary.



z1812 -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 2:32:01 PM)

Hi All,

In playing wargames at a tactical level I have found that not being intimidated by turns or time left is important. If you are rushed then you will make mistakes.

In all tactical games I try to play each step as a challenge. Neutralizing the enemy occupied house up the road becomes a "game with-in a game" for me.

Preserving the "digital lives" of my troops is very satisfying. Having a larger plan that these bits and pieces support will further your overall strategy.

In my view CCMT does reward real-life tactics at the sqaud level. It is a pity there is not more online players and that it does not support PBEM.

A wego CCMT that would support PBEM would be a real winner.

Regards John



lstp04 -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (7/24/2008 5:38:21 PM)

Thanks for thoughts & comments....



Stwa -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (11/20/2008 12:21:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: z1812

Hi All,

In playing wargames at a tactical level I have found that not being intimidated by turns or time left is important. If you are rushed then you will make mistakes.

In all tactical games I try to play each step as a challenge. Neutralizing the enemy occupied house up the road becomes a "game with-in a game" for me.

Preserving the "digital lives" of my troops is very satisfying. Having a larger plan that these bits and pieces support will further your overall strategy.

In my view CCMT does reward real-life tactics at the sqaud level. It is a pity there is not more online players and that it does not support PBEM.

A wego CCMT that would support PBEM would be a real winner.

Regards John


Well spoken advice, IMHO.

Down through the years, Close Combat has provided "Long Combat" situations. Depending upon the player, sometimes the long combat is not that much fun for the true close combat player. Adding AT/AA guns, howitzers, tanks, armored cars, naval barrages, air strikes, choppers, et. al., has is some ways, negated the original premise of the game, as these new features, can generally rain down death from a distance on your poor (mainly infantry) squads.



Perturabo -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (11/20/2008 12:32:57 AM)

Close Combat 1 already had AT guns, tanks and armored cars.

IMO the worst thing about naval barrages, choppers, airstrikes, etc. is that they are much less realistic than the rest of the game and are like Command & Conquer superweapons.



Stwa -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (11/20/2008 4:03:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

Close Combat 1 already had AT guns, tanks and armored cars.

IMO the worst thing about naval barrages, choppers, airstrikes, etc. is that they are much less realistic than the rest of the game and are like Command & Conquer superweapons.



Hi Peturabo,

I actually did not know that about CC1. I didn't come into the series until CC4. I am probably going to get this game. I think I am just waiting for some info about the menu screens and game gadgets from Andrew.



VDV -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (11/23/2008 1:20:26 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

quote:

ORIGINAL: lstp04

Just curious how others feel about CCMT - Would you say the game plays out on a somewhat realistic way? On a tactical level? In which proper tactics produce positive results........Or is it more run and gun?

Playtesting at a limited amount thus far.....I can't really decide yet myself....

I have noticed that long-range battles produce more casualties than they should and make assaulting enemy positions unnecessary.


There is a definite problem with some of the games data which allows for much longer ranged engagements than there should be. Some of these data issues are being addressed by myself and a few others that are pretty impressed with this game to bring it a bit more back to reality.

Still though artillery, especially mortars and airpower, are king in this game. just as it is in real modern combat. To defeat them or avoid them being effective you do need to use good tactics. One very effective tactic is to hug the opponents own units as quickly as possible, without fully engaging them. Any indirect weapons will cause just as much damage to them as it will to you and this will take the teeth out of them and make them not viable quickly. Stay engaged where you want to with suppression and harassing fire and always keep within close distance of your opponent. Know the ranges of effectiveness of the weapons your opponent is fielding and use this.

With this game you can use APCs to ferry men and equipment... Quickly.. Use it!! You need to move fast and get into the action fast. While vehicles are good for support you need to use them as they where designed and that is fast and furious suppression and mobility to get your ground troops into the action. Only infantry units will win a situation. Get them there....

Tank fights are as they really are.. Whomever fires first wins. Same with Long range ATGM whom ever sees whom first and fires usually wins. This is really not at all, in my opinion, a fault with the game as it reflects modern battle conditions. A stupid move in this game is to get off a failed shot at a tank or ATGM armed APC then sit there and wait to reload as your opponent gets off a shot of their own. RELOCATE and do so quickly if you care for that unit to live. Know the terrain and use it. Know your environment and where you can retreat to in order to get back into the game as an effective unit. Keep mobile with armored units. Always keep them in both an active and spotting role. Using them in multiple overwatch positions of an infantry advance is best. Take opportunistic potshots then move...Infantry AT equipment can take care of those within range use them instead of your tanks or ATGM armed APC if you can get in close. Infantry can often sneak up on Tanks and APC and get into a kill position more effectively than vehicles can.

Using tactics that suppress, screen, conceal or deceive an opponent of your plans and objectives also works. (Especially with a human opponent) Take on the fight on your own terms and choice of where and how. Don't just run into a fight then plan it from there. know what you intend to do beforehand use cover and get in close and you will often win..



Stwa -> RE: Do other war-gammers find CCMT "tactical"? (12/1/2008 3:38:54 AM)

Hi VDV,

I am a long time player/lurker of the CC series and I was really hoping someone with some real skill and knowledge of the game's weaponry would look through the weapons database and make some changes.

I agree with you on the relocation strategy you mentioned above.

I was also wondering, what other changes people see in the game vs previous CC titles.

I for one can see that visibility rules have been changed quite a bit for CCMT.

Also, I noticed the element mod, someone did that allows soldiers to shoot through walls and stuff like in previous CC games. I tried it, but went back to the game original after one scenario.

This game looks to be CC3 based to me. (i.e. not CCV), even though it uses CC5 map coding and elements, etc.. Anyone want to comment?



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.578125