Thomm

Dear Cunningham! Do you consider Gamestar better than PC Games? If yes, maybe I should consider to switch over ... With regard to wargames ... I think we have to accept that we do not have an average taste in games. For example, Tiberium Sun is supposed to be a well-selling RTS game, isn't it?! I downloaded the demo and played it for approximately one minute. Then it got uninstalled. What a crap! Giant robots which throw rockets at each other from 10 meters distance! Very subtle! Nevertheless this game gets 10 page reviews in magazines, whereas Close Combat IV was reviewed negatively because they "could not find the soldiers". I do not know if they ever used the overview map! It is sad ...

Wind? No smoke shells for ships (they lay a smoke screen, but do they have smoke shells)?

Herr Oberst! Did you grab the opportunity of watching "Steiner - the Iron Cross" and playing Close Combat simultaneously yesterday?

I like the burnt-out skeleton of the truck!!!

Hey, did notice that the whole movie was shot from a "First Person Shooter" perspective? Do you think that will widen the target audience? I mean, the goal of this game is not to optimize close-up picture quality, yet this is what is presented in the movie, almost exclusively! This does, of course, not distract from the fact that some of the effects and scenes are better than even 1st person shooters (I want to mention the tiger gun barrel recoil, which is realistic down to the split-second in timing, the inertia of the struck Jagdpanther, the intense blast effects, ...), but maybe some overhead view with whole formations moving and more stuff going on would have been nice, too, and the strategy character of the game would have been emphasized. I wonder what BTS intentions were, when they concentrated on "zooming in" ... a maybe risky approach if people start to compare the game to "Team Fortress" or similar FPSs! Not that I think it will decrease the sales figures ... but still ...

Snark, with all due respect, but I think you should rephrase the question to: What are the system requirements beyond which there is no more noticeable increase in game performance (frames per second, e.g.) for the largest scenario shipped with the game. I mean, otherwise the answer will be: The best computer is implicitly defined to have the "ultimate setup". A even more specific question would be: How much VRAM must my video card have to support CoolColJ's Tweaked Textures Gold Edition?

As I wrote in another topic: some of the building fire polygons are extremely distorted. I think there should be more reasonable bonds on the aspect ratio of these polygons! Regards, Thomm

Some days ago I watched a reportage about Navy SEALs on TV. A sniper with a .50 cal rifle was target practicing on the side armour of a M60 turret. I do not know if the bullet was meant to penetrate, but this is what he did. Regards, Thomm

Hmm ... The bush fire type needs a base polygon as it had before, in my opinion ... not easy, of course. But the "polygon star" is visible too clearly. Also I note that some of the fire "tiles" are extremely distorted! Their should be more sensible bonds on the aspect ratio. It would of course be ideal to stick the flames to windows, but ... New smoke is excellent! Regards, Thomm

Dear Scott! <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>But, if the data is 'straight' now in CC4 why is that infantry are still spotted and mowed down by ANY mg/tank when they are prone, hiding in cover? Still worked that way when I played it (briefly).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am convinced that your infantry was spotted by other infantry (which you may not even have seen). Yesterday I sneaked up a Bazooka team to a group of no less than four German tanks. The team got off all it's four missiles, killed a Panzer IV and sneaked away UNDETECTED. This was possible, because there was no enemy infantry around. Now, the opposite situation: you spot a enemy team with your leading infantry element and happen to have a tank with a clear line-of-sight to that enemy team. What will you do? Exactly! And this is what the AI does, nothing more, nothing less. I do not mind to play by the same rules as the AI, which is: kill the infantry and the tanks will be easy prey. It is a pity that you have such bad feelings about Atomic and CC IV. I think it is really a fun game with a lot of improvements! And do not judge it by the demo! That one is really bad! Game's much better! Regards, Thomm

At least in terms of data, Close Combat IV seems to be quite accurate. This is expressed by the fact that Modmakers do not see a need to touch the hardware data files of CC4. They merely change battlegroup and team composition, the cammo schemes and add new vehicles. There are, however, a lot of simplifications in the game system per se, as you will hear (especially on this board) frequently! But, within the limitations of the engine, the data of part 4 seems to be quite accurate. Note: Accuracy does not necessarily mean Realism! Regards, Thomm

Ich habe den Schlüssel für meinen Panzer verloren!

The Demo sucks! The game does not, IMHO!!

Don't worry, I will get <font size=7 color=white> IT</font> when it comes out, too!!! But until then, oh well ... Hey, now I know what you mean: <font size=6>SUDDEN STRIKE</font>!! Or not?! [This message has been edited by Thomm (edited 03-21-2000).]

Jeff, do not disencourage me, please! I find it (relatively) easy, too, but a lot of fun! Maybe it is because I only recently got a computer at home and therefore I am still "fresh" at CC game play. But some of the battles are really intense and as the Americans you have to put quite a bit of thinking into your deployment and tactics to keep the German flood at bay! At least in the beginning, where I stand right now. What I really love is all the small stories that develop during these desperate fights. Like the Panther tank, which I could knock out just in front of my trench line in the woods and which then served as a shield for a Scout team hiding behind. In the end it was this single Scout team which decided the battle for the victory location because the Germans that had to come "around the corner" of that tank one-by-one fell to the Thompsons of my team. I could just sit there and watch the ammu stats of these super-scouts decrease and I could not believe how he stopped the German armada single-handedly. And this was possible only because this Panther wreck was protecting him and provided an artificial obstacle. A modern Roarke's Drift, where every single man counts!! The same applies to a bazooka team, which yesterday scored three times out of four. When they ran out of ammunition I immediately took them behind my line to protect them and keep them out of harms way! I was so proud of them I had to save them at all costs. When you have that few man that every single one counts, then this game really shines in my opinion. It shines like my eyes when I find all this nice Panther wrecks when I re-visit a map during the Campaign ! It is like each of them and every shell-hole tells the story of the past battles ... lots of atmosphere. I did not buy number III, maybe this is why I enjoy number IV now (yes, I have number II). Regards, Thomm

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think it was your Sherman 76 that took out 4 Panzer IVjs and 8 HTs before getting nailed!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>HEY, that sounds like my Close Combat IV Grand Campaign !!! Ohhhh, apart from the "getting nailed" part, of course ! [This message has been edited by Thomm (edited 03-21-2000).]

Ohhh, and I have such a great time with my Close Combat IV Grand Campaign!!!

Of course this system would also allow for a career system: you start commanding your infantry squad and end up as a battalion commander! In my humble opinion the most difficult part of this multi-level of command approach is already implemented: the AI!!!! It is certainly less complex to create a user-interface than write an AI for the same task. All this might be hypothetical, but it is some really nice food for thought. Great idea, Username!

Phewwwww! You open endless options here ... Just imagine there would be an user interace for all three layers of the AI. It could go from taking over the strategic AI down to only controlling one individual unit. You would receive orders from the higher AI levels and give orders to the lower AI levels. As a low commander, you would not see the big picture, but just try to fulfill your orders and survive ...

Maybe it would be a good thing to capture all this screenshots in <font size=7>DAYLIGHT</font>!!

Absolutely pointless to join the race. Get the cheapest (or next to cheapest) computer and save the money for a nice holiday! I bought a Celeron 466 before Christmas and now they are not even sold anymore!

Question: will we get hints on enemy air activity in the mission briefing and if yes, is there any way or tactic to prevent enemy planes from attacking (such as moving through woods). Thanks, Thomm

Unlike fighter planes a stationary FlaK cannot deliberately come "out of the sun" to gain an advantage. So this blinding would be a rather random effect and I do not see how it could be used to a tactical advantage by a groud unit other then by coincidence. But if the tactic of attacking at sunset or sunrise was indeed applied then I am sure we will hear stories about it now ... Regards, Thomm

So internally it is an infinite cylinder, isn't it?! Is the view hindrance degrading as a function of the radius, or is it constant? I assume that vehicle smoke blocks the view only right above the burning vehicle, right? Regards, Thomm

Thanks! This is going to be interesting! The one-man competition is fierce! May the better one "win"!! Regards, Thomm