Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please!

Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Wacht am Rhein

Message

eddy1514 -> Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 6:05:27 AM)
Hello everyone, and Matrix games staff The game that got me into the CC series was a Bridge too Far. That game was awesome. I installed it not to long ago and couldnt play (because of my own feelings) due to graphics resolution and tiny little querks that were changed in the newer versions of CC (CC5 and WaR). I think it would be great if the next remake Matrix did would be a Bridge too Far. The maps were awesome, the large selection of units (american side anyways, including british and another country, cant remember), used point system for units, etc etc. I remember playing that game for hours at a time, rushing to the germans to get them from blowing the bridge! Not to mention Operation Market Garden is not a scenario that is touched on a lot with video games. What does everyone here think? what do the staffers and Matrix games think? Is it doable? Thanks for reading, EddyC

TheTomDude -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 10:02:17 AM)
I'm pretty sure, if you are patient enough, you will find a Market Garden mod for WaR in a few months. No need for a remake. [:D]

squadleader_id -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 10:27:22 AM)
The Op Market Garden mod for CC5 has been on hold for a few years now...Buck Compton is concentrating on finishing Battle of The Scheldt first. There is Firefox's CC5: ABTF mod...but the CC2 maps turn me off. How about CCWAR: ABTF with repainted CC2 maps? Anyone dare take the challenge? Maybe Firefox?

Nomada_Firefox -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 12:31:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: squadleader_id The Op Market Garden mod for CC5 has been on hold for a few years now...Buck Compton is concentrating on finishing Battle of The Scheldt first. There is Firefox's CC5: ABTF mod...but the CC2 maps turn me off. How about CCWAR: ABTF with repainted CC2 maps? Anyone dare take the challenge? Maybe Firefox? I will not make new maps, I only go to make the same from CC5 with some changes. By the moment I do not need more challenge.

pelle75 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 3:31:17 PM)
I loved the campaign game in CC2, allocating very limited reinforcements to the three paralell campaigns, then having to use those even more limited resources within each campaign to reinforce several paralell operations within each campaign. I still keep coming back to that game. I think it also had the best balance of features for the tactical level game, except there was no waypoints for movement orders.

TheReal_Pak40 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 3:59:15 PM)
I agree with Pellen. CC2's campaign system, although simplistic from a strategic view, was challenging with respect to using x amount of points to "purchase" units. I would welcome a blend of WaR strategy layer with the point system of CC2 if and when a remake is made of CC2. There should be a lot more maps made if the game is updated and maybe enlarge some of the existing ones too.

pelle75 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 4:47:21 PM)
One thing that was fun was that with the very limited number of units on each side for most operations you got to know them very well, and the loss of a mortar or two in some operations would mean you had no chance to get a new one perhaps for the rest of the game. There was no fresh battlegroups to use for each new battle, on either side.

TheReal_Pak40 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 5:39:10 PM)
Yes, and part of the love of ABTF is just the battle itself. It's very interesting from an operational standpoint, how the battle unfolded, how vulnerable the airborne units were etc... Also, the operation as a whole is very infantry oriented, which is portrayed well in the scale of Close Combat. 5 v 5 tank battles in CC3 and CC4 at the CC scale tends to be a bit out of whack.

LitFuel -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 6:10:01 PM)
ABTF was actually the re-make I wanted most. Love this one. Interesting maps with limited resources...lot's of bridges to take and defend. Polish units :). Of all the old games this could benefit the most from a fresh coat of paint...hope they get to it.

crushingleeek_slith -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/3/2008 6:29:25 PM)
I disagree. I dislike point systems. Its too akin to gathering resources to pump out units based on how much currency you have. this is why i like games like CC and suddenstrike/blitzkrieg.

GS_Schimpf -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/5/2008 10:10:42 PM)
I also vote for a ABTF remake! It was the game that brought me in contact with the CC series many years ago, still playing it from time to time.

TheReal_Pak40 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/5/2008 10:52:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crushingleeek I disagree. I dislike point systems. Its too akin to gathering resources to pump out units based on how much currency you have. this is why i like games like CC and suddenstrike/blitzkrieg. The point system in CC:ABTF, while not exactly realistic, was a good way for a player to customize his force without going overboard. In WaR, a player can go completely overboard and end up with unrealistic forces (i.e. 12 panthers).

crushingleeek_slith -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/6/2008 3:47:16 AM)
quote: In WaR, a player can go completely overboard and end up with unrealistic forces (i.e. 12 panthers). Good point Pak-40. (Control the forces yourself, stick to realism and H2H players who also do too?) I've only played single player so far, and I'd never do 15 tanks. I have to say though, I still dislike a point-system more. Buying infantry and tanks is just so "game-y," for lack of better word. Yuck! I have an idea: 1) on the grand strategy map in WaR, you have to commit individual teams to being localized to particular maps. 2)Each team will still be associated with a regiment and division. 3)You still have to place your regimental HQ in a specific map too. 4)Units that are on a different map from their regimental HQ will suffer a performance penalty similar to not being within the circle of a good platoon leader. 5)Units (individual teams or teams grouped together as platoons) move from map to map much like regiments on the current WaR map move. This will increase realism, as battalion reserves were often in towns different from the rest of their regiment. Also, it will probably discourage players from placing 12 tanks on the same map. Hence, it'd be unlikely to have 12 panthers on a map like you may have now. (Although when the Germans crossed the River Our, these columns were common!) Campaign makers can also restrict players from placing, say, armor from CCR/9th armored up on the front lines.

Neil N -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/6/2008 4:16:48 AM)
The Battlegroup point total was left on the battlegroup screen, so that when playing H2H you and your opponent can agree on a point limit. My opponents and I always use it, and it seems to help balance out the battles. Leek, those all sound like good points to add to the CC6 wants/wish list.

TheReal_Pak40 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/6/2008 5:23:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crushingleeek I have to say though, I still dislike a point-system more. Buying infantry and tanks is just so "game-y," for lack of better word. Yuck! I like the point system better. Part of the challenge (and part of the fun) is picking a balanced and appropriate force for the upcoming battle. It's like the battalion commander is ordering me to capture that town; and I respond by saying "OK, I'm going to need 5 tanks, 3 81mm mortars, and a company of infantry". The Battalion CO says "I can only give you 2 tanks and a platoon of men with 1 81mm, I need the rest to fight other battles". So, as a player I don't see it as a currency to buy units, I see it as a Company CO being told by a Battalion CO that I have to make do with what's available.

crushingleeek_slith -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/6/2008 7:16:08 AM)
quote: Part of the challenge (and part of the fun) is picking a balanced and appropriate force for the upcoming battle. I see it slightly differently, because i don't always need balanced fights to have fun. Sometimes I find it pretty exciting to fight a delaying battle...see if i can just hang on to that one last victory location before i need to pull back the forces. Can my ill equipped engineers hold on against an armored platoon/company? If its too balanced everytime, to me, it gets monotonous. I'm talking about single player, campaign though...H2H may be different. quote: "OK, I'm going to need 5 tanks, 3 81mm mortars, and a company of infantry". The Battalion CO says "I can only give you 2 tanks and a platoon of men with 1 81mm, I need the rest to fight other battles". I think my 5-point suggestion above addresses this portioning-out of forces concept. If your forces are stretched thin, which they will be, the only immediate help you could get is from units on adjacent maps. quote: 1) on the grand strategy map in WaR, you have to commit individual teams to being localized to particular maps. 2)Each team will still be associated with a regiment and division. 3)You still have to place your regimental HQ in a specific map too. 4)Units that are on a different map from their regimental HQ will suffer a performance penalty similar to not being within the circle of a good platoon leader. 5)Units (individual teams or teams grouped together as platoons) move from map to map much like regiments on the current WaR map move. How you amass forces would be up to you; ie you also play the role of colonel in ordering out regimental forces. Aside: In the way way way future: This opens up the possibility of extra-multi-player campaigns. One player on each side could play HQ. And moving around forces on the map, and order artillery fire missions - (see other thread.) The other player on each team is the company CO, and actually fights the battles. If it got really grand, there could be one player for each regiment, each battalion, or each company!

goldenlion -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/6/2008 8:34:23 PM)
Sounds like a very interesting idea, Crushing. I hope to see something like that come to fruition.

Tejszd -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/7/2008 4:00:43 AM)
They have re-released CC3 as COI and CC4 as WAR which leaves CC1, 2 and 5. CC1 was already redone by Atomic games by CC5 going back to Normandy so that really only leaves CC2 and CC5 to go. Might as well post ideas/suggestions here for either one....

Neil N -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/7/2008 8:33:37 AM)
quote: Aside: In the way way way future: This opens up the possibility of extra-multi-player campaigns. One player on each side could play HQ. And moving around forces on the map, and order artillery fire missions - (see other thread.) The other player on each team is the company CO, and actually fights the battles. If it got really grand, there could be one player for each regiment, each battalion, or each company! Something similar is being used in the latest military training version CM v 6...and I can personally say that testing it out was a blast...especially once we learned what we were doing. Having a separate person on the network, requesting support, feeding him information and then adjusting fires. Of course at first we had no instructions, so when something actually worked, it was a feeling of...well, go get the idea.

berndn -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/8/2008 12:14:48 PM)
I would love a rerelease of CCII ! But this has some time as the great campaign in CC WaR played as allied and then as axis will take some time for me [:)]

pelle75 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/8/2008 3:23:50 PM)
I think the point system is good enough to simulate limited resources. CC2 also had limits on the number of each type of unit you could bring into each operation. I think the combination of those two mechanics was an excellent way to abstract lots of complex things (like road and air drop capacity) into something that was fun and playable, keeping the focus at tactical combat while still allowing some control of what operation to send the most reinforcements to, and to a degree what kinds of units to use for each operation.

samarobriva -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/10/2008 6:48:40 AM)
There are two things that I still find great : - bridges that can be blown up - soldiers that can stay on a bridge while some soldiers go under a bridge

TheTomDude -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/10/2008 10:49:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: crushingleeek quote: Part of the challenge (and part of the fun) is picking a balanced and appropriate force for the upcoming battle. I see it slightly differently, because i don't always need balanced fights to have fun. Sometimes I find it pretty exciting to fight a delaying battle...see if i can just hang on to that one last victory location before i need to pull back the forces. Can my ill equipped engineers hold on against an armored platoon/company? If its too balanced everytime, to me, it gets monotonous. I'm talking about single player, campaign though...H2H may be different. That's excactly how I play this game and how I played CC4 and 5. I love the freedom to vary the composition of my own battelgroup and also the one of the AI opponent. I never liked the fact that the only difference between the difficulty levels was the composition of the BGs since the most interesting units are not available if you want more or less difficult battles. Hence I usually play "Line". I therefore love the fact that I can virtually strentghen the opponent and/or weaken my troops without effect on any points. So the freedom to fight with and/or against the forces I can personally choose from without any limitations through points is a vital factor that makes me enjoy the CC-series. IMHO the game would loose a lot of replayability with a point system that limits your choices what forces you can field. It would make you play the same battles over and over again. I bought COI and only played it 2 or 3 times. I did not like the point system to choose my forces and every battle almost felt like the one before. Never played it again.

TheReal_Pak40 -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/10/2008 2:53:03 PM)
TomDude, The point system, as I would implement it if I were the game designer, would allow you to fully pick your force, just up to a limit that's realistic. In other words it would be more flexible than the typical CC2 battle where you only had enough points to buy an extra mortar. For example, if you wanted 2 King Tigers in your battlegroup then you wouldn't have too many points left over, but still enough to fill your ranks with infantry and a couple of cheaper support elements - but if wanted 2 King Tigers and 3 Panthers then you'd be out of luck, or at least out of any more points to spend for infantry. Also, the point cap could vary between battle groups. Armored unit caps would be higher than infantry unit caps. This way you're still forced to pick realistic yet flexible infantry battle groups. A goal of any wargame is to be realistic yet fun to play. I believe that a point system could be created to allow this.

berndn -> RE: Next CC for Matrix to remake - A Bridge too Far please! (12/10/2008 4:07:55 PM)
For me the forcepool as it is is a good idea. However it would be great if tanks, guns & infantry would gain experience through my various battles and if I choose let's say infantry from my forcepool it would allow me to select the goup with the experience I think is needed [;)] I think it was at CloseCombatSeries where someone pointed to the bug/feature that my battlegroup loose medals when I deselect the battlegroup for the next battle. So in terms of programming the class soldier should have all the experience and medals it has gained through a battle. If I deselect the group for the next battle it should be not recycled. I don't want super heroes but it would help to motivate myself and take more care bringing a group of men throough a campaign. All IMO [:)]

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.859375