Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

question . . .

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat - Cross of Iron >> question . . . Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
question . . . - 3/3/2007 5:16:30 AM   
Daggerlab

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 7/9/2006
Status: offline 		Ok, this may be a truly stupid question, but . . . is there a way to save a game during a battle? I have searched all the manuals, and pushed every button I can think of during a battle, but the only option I can find besides truce/surrender is the option to quit without saving. Am I just badly overlooking something here?
Post #: 1
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 5:23:38 AM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline 		    Nope, from CC1 thru CC5 there was never an option to save a battle in progress...and IMHO there's no need.  Why would you want to do that?  It's not realistic to save your progress  in the heat of battle

_____________________________


http://www.moddb.com/mods/cc5-battle-of-surabaya-1945

(in reply to Daggerlab)
Post #: 2
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 5:29:39 AM   
Hertston


Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline 		It would be a nice feature to add to CC6. "Heat of battle" or not, real-life can get in the way sometimes!

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 3
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 5:31:46 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		You can press F3 to pause.

Then Alt-TAB to minimize...


you can then return to the heat of battle at your leisure.

(in reply to Hertston)
Post #: 4
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 6:14:30 AM   
Daggerlab

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 7/9/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: squadleader_id

    Nope, from CC1 thru CC5 there was never an option to save a battle in progress...and IMHO there's no need.  Why would you want to do that?  It's not realistic to save your progress  in the heat of battle


If you want to see heat of battle, try explaining to your wife that you can't help her with the two screaming kids until the battle is done, due to the lack of a save game option!
Thanks for the quick replies, all! That option would be a helpful feature, in my opinion, for those times when real life intrudes.

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 5
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 6:25:07 AM   
old man of the sea


Posts: 454
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: Waynesboro, PA
Status: offline 		never let real life intrude on your game son.....

E

_____________________________

"Point me to a 'civilised' part of the General Forum and I'll steer way clear of it." - Soddball

Some people can tell what time it is by looking at the sun, but I never have been able to make out the numbers.

(in reply to Daggerlab)
Post #: 6
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 5:39:29 PM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2459
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: squadleader_id

Nope, from CC1 thru CC5 there was never an option to save a battle in progress...and IMHO there's no need. Why would you want to do that? It's not realistic to save your progress in the heat of battle


There were two great beefs about CC from the "granny-gamers:"

1) There was no way to SAVE before crucial events.

2) They insisted that a PAUSE game function be implemented, one that would allow them to plot moves and select targets during the respite.

If you scratched the surface of these guys' psyche, what you'd find is a deep-seated desire to "failure-proof" the game, to make it such that they COULDN'T lose. When Close Combat failed to fill their pre-requisite for a "proper" wargame, they assigned to it the monikor, RTS, or clickfest. It's also worth noting that many of the folks who complain the loudest about CC don't play human opponents. "Why For God's sake," they'd ask themselves, "I might lose?"

Well, here's the deal on this issue...

The fights in Close Combat depict thirty minutes or so of frequently hair-raising action. The inclusion of loss pre-emptive features like save-game functions and pauses totally distort this time element and undermines the effectiveness of the design. In other words, superimposing, deliberative and/or "second-chance" functions into a small-unit, tactical environment characterized by NO SUCH CHEATS wrecks what is perhaps the most important advantage of computer wargames over those played with cardboard counters and maps, simultaneous, real-time simulation and gaming.

Close Combat forever, unadulterated, PLEASE!!!

PoE (aka ivanmoe)



< Message edited by Prince of Eckmühl -- 3/3/2007 6:04:46 PM >

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 7
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 6:27:44 PM   
Beeblebrox

 

Posts: 200
Joined: 10/27/2006
Status: offline
quote:

The fights in Close Combat depict thirty minutes or so of frequently hair-raising action. The inclusion of loss pre-emptive features like save-game functions and pauses totally distort this time element and undermines the effectiveness of the design. In other words, superimposing, deliberative and/or "second-chance" functions into a small-unit, tactical environment characterized by NO SUCH CHEATS wrecks what is perhaps the most important advantage of computer wargames over those played with cardboard counters and maps, simultaneous, real-time simulation and gaming.

Close Combat forever, unadulterated, PLEASE!!!
Gets my vote! 

However, a replay function will be a very welcome addition.  It is in the Military versions already, and will come with subsequent releases (but not re-releases).


(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 8
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 6:42:46 PM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Beeblebrox

Gets my vote!

However, a replay function will be a very welcome addition. It is in the Military versions already, and will come with subsequent releases (but not re-releases).




Yessss!! Please add a replay function. For the current CC games, I have to settle with studying screenshots taken during the game as a 'home-made replay' feature. You can use third party screen capture programs lika Camtasia...but the movie sizes are too huge...a simple replay function like modern RTS games is a must for future CC releases.
Once this feature is available...you can swap battle replay films...no need to write your CC AAR anymore :).


_____________________________


http://www.moddb.com/mods/cc5-battle-of-surabaya-1945

(in reply to Beeblebrox)
Post #: 9
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 6:58:45 PM   
Hertston


Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

Well, here's the deal on this issue...

The fights in Close Combat depict thirty minutes or so of frequently hair-raising action. The inclusion of loss pre-emptive features like save-game functions and pauses totally distort this time element and undermines the effectiveness of the design. In other words, superimposing, deliberative and/or "second-chance" functions into a small-unit, tactical environment characterized by NO SUCH CHEATS wrecks what is perhaps the most important advantage of computer wargames over those played with cardboard counters and maps, simultaneous, real-time simulation and gaming.

Close Combat forever, unadulterated, PLEASE!!!




A strong candidate for the "pretentious bullsh*t of the week" award!

I'd like a save game function so I can stop playing a map in the middle when life interrupts and come back to it later. Sometimes such interruptions involve time intervals where I'd rather turn my PC off, or occasionally when somebody needs it for something else. Simple. No "deep seated desire" for anything. There is no "cheat" and it doesn't undermine anything; if you don't want to save you don't have to.


< Message edited by Hertston -- 3/3/2007 7:14:58 PM >

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 10
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 9:09:31 PM   
Prince of Eckmühl


Posts: 2459
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hertston

A strong candidate for the "pretentious bullsh*t of the week" award!



DEAR GRANDMA:

Loss pre-emptive devices in computer games depicting small-unit combat are for hysterical pussies who can't roll a die without first smoking a cigarette, fondling their cat and then jacking-off for half an hour. Their nerves simply can't take the strain. It's odd indeed that so challenged an individual would be interested in combat simulation when knitting a cuddly pink afghan would far better suit his/her emotional limitations.

PoE


_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Hertston)
Post #: 11
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 9:59:35 PM   
Pford

 

Posts: 235
Joined: 11/10/2006
Status: offline 		A vote for a traditional save game function here. In single-player who cares? The saved games should be sortable by date in next version, tho.

(in reply to Prince of Eckmühl)
Post #: 12
RE: question . . . - 3/3/2007 10:12:32 PM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		I like them being sorted alphabetically.

For a real Infantry game I prface it with a

RI

Grossdeutschland

GD

Western Front

WF


eg

WF Grand Campaign

makes them easy to find and play with the correct mod.

(in reply to Pford)
Post #: 13
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat - Cross of Iron >> question . . . Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.203