Jump to content

DerKommissar

Members
  • Content Count

    730
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DerKommissar

  • Rank
    Inconsequential Rambler

Profile Information

  • Location:
    RL Cadia

Recent Profile Visitors

1,273 profile views
  1. Any update on release date? I presume it's end of October?
  2. As a fan of both franchises, I think the comparisons are Apples vs Oranges. CM focuses on depicting the crucial moments of the tip of the spearhead. GT focuses on the day-to-day operations of a Brigade across a wide front. CM battles tend to be incredibly fast paced, which each minute being of significance. GT battles tend to be slow paced, many being operationally trivial. In CM, you command squads and teams with WE-GO. In GT, you command platoons in RT and companies in TB. Me too. I think Steel Armour: Blaze of War was a fantastic sim. For some reason, they've stopped updating it. There's an untapped market for a serious tank sim, that's also a game (unlike Steel Beasts).
  3. Much like the Division on which its based on, this game is going through a brutal baptism of fire. Hopefully, it'll learn its lessons quickly. I spent much of yesterday night playing this game. It's buggy AF! Ironically enough, I feel the 2D ones had higher visual fidelity. Yet, 3D does give a better idea of hills and valleys. I had 3 C2Ds, just playing the main campaign. In addition, streaming the game on Discord crashed the game every time my buddy connected. All this being said, I found the core gameplay loop engaging. I loved the sound affects, and morale system. Sergeants shouting, "GET BACK HERE!", to a member of the squad running away in sheer horror of a snub-nosed P. 4. I hope they keep polishing it, to resemble something more than an early beta. Because, I can see myself playing this game. Unless Rome to Victory drops soon -- in which case, I may forget all about the Bloody First.
  4. That was a solid record though -- why stop pre-ordering after that? Never figured them for being Royalist. Last thing I pre-ordered was Rome to Victory, xD. I'm guessing the CMRT module will come out in 2020. I hope a CMBS module will come out before the heat death of the universe.
  5. Fair enough. ROF is higher for a mortar. I'll concede indirect fire support firepower. Mobility, as well -- wheels are quick, and the tube is lighter. During my time in the Shield of Kiev campaign, I struggled to establish fire superiority. In my understanding of Soviet doctrine, fire superiority IS maneuver. I am but a humble Canuck, so I may be entirely wrong. I tended to use BTR-4s as IFVs, which lead to some disastrous losses. The Oplot-Ms were my only real means of engaging entrenched infantry, and they were of short supply. I have big love for indirect fire support, in terms of both howitzers and mortars -- but, even with modern tech, direct fire is still more expedient. What I wanted were those old Soviet assault guns or a Mobile Gun System. Something that can lob serious shells on overwatch, in support of infantry. That'd make the Cossacks think twice before popping out of a house to gun down a squad advancing along a street. 2s1 ticked most of my boxes: big shell, tracked mobility, decent magazine and small silhouette. After seeing videos of them being used widely in Syria, both in direct, and indirect roles -- I agree with augmenting a Jager brigade with such machines.
  6. In which regard? Surely the D30 is more powerful than a 120mm mortar. If I remember correctly, the 2s1 also carries more ammo.
  7. I'd take a 122mm assault howitzer over a fancy MRAP mortar -- any day of the week. Could have used some on-map 2S1's in the Shield of Kiev campaign. There's really no better choice in the light mobile howitzer/assault gun role, and 122mm is such a versatile caliber.
  8. RT is there for new players, who are used to mainstream tactics games -- which are mostly RT. CM's WEGO takes some time to wrap a neophyte's brain around. Now I play Iron, WEGO, only. However, I played my first tutorial on Normal, RT. It's fair to say that "spectrum" and "fidelity" are inversely proportional to each-other. Narrower scope means less details to focus on, wider scope means more abstraction. It's always a compromise. Some games strike a better rate of exchange than others, but it really depends on what you value more. Didn't know old CM games were on GOG. I'll probably pick them up -- well worth the 8 CAD.
  9. Sounds superb. Polishing takes time, there's no way around it.
  10. You know the 105 tank is effective when the Huns ditch a bunker voluntarily! Best form of Recon, in CM. Open fire and see if the enemy is brave enough to return fire.
  11. Are you certain that this will increase the rate of releases? Parallelism must be taken into account, and BFC usually makes scenarios/models in parallel AFaIK. Could be that vehicles and scenarios are the critical path? That's just one problem of product development. No one can predict the future. There are so many virtually unpredictable variables that go into deadlines, that even the most educated and experienced developer will be off. These variables generally increase with the size of the production, as well. Fair enough! xD
×
×
  • Create New...