kabex

As far as I know the only WW2 tank that could turn on its own axis(pivot turn or whatever) was the Tiger. However, Tiger commanders never did this because it overstressed the transmission or some such, and it would often break down. Basically: pivot turning was never done, the only tank that had the capability didn't do it.

Hmm very good question. Smoke is extremely important and extensively used in WW2. There's many types of smoke: hand grenade smoke artillery smoke barrages mortar smoke barrages german tank smoke mortars(forget the name its hard as hell) tank shell smoke(fired from the gun/cannon) etc

Paras would be awesome. Falschirmjaeger ftw.

Oh well. I hope multiplayer is good.

This is not CM, this game has absolutely nothing to do with CM. It's being developed by Russian developer 1C Games, makers of IL-2 Sturmovik. Battlefront is publishing it and helping with the final phases of development. It's real-time, not turn-based. No such thing as orders phase or anything like that I'm afraid.

Is "Faces of War" using the same engine as this? They are both from 1C right? I never played Outfront1/Soldiers: heroes of WWII. Faces of War sounds interesting.

Basically, let's say Theatre of War has a campaign system like Close Combat 3. That is true. Let's say you have good success with the game comercially. Good. Let's say there are a lot of things which you'd like to add to the game, an expansion pack is a good idea, right? The community will be yelling for one. Adding an "strategic layer" and "modding platform" would be a godsend for the community. Think of Close Combat 3 vs Close Combat 4. In 4, you have the strategic layer where you can move your little guys all over the place and request artillery strikes, air strikes, you have supply points, roads, ammo, fuel and all that stuff. I think an expansion pack based around a "Mega Campaign" like CC4 and 5. Basically, instead of IL-2 Sturmovik campaigns, Combat Flight Simulator 3 campaigns! The community also needs a very modifiable "platform" from the game. Think of FPS games and Close combat. 1. you can add new weapons, soldiers, vehicles, etc 2. you can edit and make maps, missions and entirely new campaigns Just like Close Combat. You know what has kept Close Combat, and many other games selling all these years? Replayability, multiplayer and modding. People still buy Close Combat games to this day. Why? Because people are still making mods and campaigns. I think this would be VERY beneficial to the commercial well-being of the game. If you added strategic campaigns and full-fledged modding, Theatre of War would still be selling copies for many years.

1.3ghz Athlon or Pentium? That sounds pretty damn good actually! That is a very low-end system these days. Having the game run on old computers means many more people will buy it!

Actually a strategic campaign sounds like an excellent thing for an add-on. "Theatre of War: Mega Campaigns" or whatever. Sort of like CC4 and 5. Wow, that sounds damn good for an expansion pack. They could release a bunch of them like the close combat guys(normandy, kharkov, stalingrad, north africa, italy, meuse crossing, winter war, okinawa, berlin, bulge, etc). Make them moddable of course, and add unit modding and all that just like Close Combat.

Thanks! It'd also be nice to be able to select the timeframe of the battle(available equipment) and force strength(axis 50%, allied 100% etc, it limits your available numbers and equipment) you can also choose who is what country(even usa vs russia or france vs poland, all kinds of crazy stuff). For the exact "skirmish" system I am asking, refer to the game "Codename Panzer: phase two". This game had an excellent skirmish/quick battle mode.

I just started a new CC5: Gold, Juno, Sword campaign. As fun as ever! Great mod btw, it's widely regarded as the greatest CC5 mod.

Bump for Megakill. Let me put it another way: make it possible to play multiplayer against the AI. When we create a game, let us set up who is AI and who is human, like other RTS games(age of empires etc). This would be awesome.

Hi, I believe having some sort of quick-battle/skirmish mode would be very beneficial for the replayability of this game. Most of us would finish the SP campaigns then say to hell with it, thankfully it has multiplayer so we are going to enjoy that for years to come, I am sure. However, aside from multiplayer battles I think it'd be nice to have a "skirmish" mode like most other RTS games. Basically, you pick one of the maps in the game but you have many available forces to buy, for you and the computer(you can also choose how much money you are giving yourself and the AI). After you buy your units you start the map. I think this would add a lot of replayability. This skirmish mode is already available for multiplayer I assume? Some games don't make it possible to play it against the AI though, so that is why I'm writing this. Skirmish/Deathmatch mode against the AI is a very important feature for the replayability of the game.

Yes, I still play CC5. I have CC3 but I prefer 5 because of the mods and the strategic level. It gets very frustrating at times though, and I hate to make ridiculous house rules to handicap myself(playing with a single platoon for example) because the game is very easy. Other than that, CCS are absolutely amazing games.

Yes, I belive Italy was a major player in WW2. It's a shame they are often ignored.

No. Not unless you compress everything this including speed, rotation, enemy profile, shell speed, etc etc. Basically, if this happens, German tanks are very screwed. The Tiger and TigerII are a joke because they can be easily outmanouvered. It benefits the Allies, and cripples the Germans(which I don't like, personally).

Good points. I think it's important, if there are a very small amount of buildings I don't think it'll be a micromanagement nightmare.

What about German "Legions" which had many nationalities? Norweigans, Dutch, French, Spaniards, Italians and Eastern Europeans all fought in German/SS uniforms(many of them voluntarily).

First of all, hello to everyone this is my first post. I am impressed by the level of intelligence and professionalism displayed by the members of this board, and the people of Battlefront, who seem to be extremely active and involved in the community. I have been following WWIIRTS since it was first announced, and as a fanatic Wargamer I was very interested. Just yesterday I found out about the venture with Battlefront, which in my eyes is a great thing as the CM series are great Wargames. I also noticed discrepancies in the game's penetration ranges. We all understand that there needs to be a compromise between fun and realism, for the benefit of the developers and the commercial well-being of the game, however the Wargamers always prefer to have by-the-book technical data and performance. Personally, I prefer the Wehrmarcht, I guess I could be called a bit of a Germanophile. What kind of dissapointed me about what I've seen of this game(it's still not finished, so I may be completely misinformed) is that the ranges seem to be very small. If one is not going to bother using tanks in a realistic fashion, one should not try to achieve realism in this form. As we all know tank warfare in WW2 took place at very long ranges, especially in the late war. The best thing about German armor was that in mid-to-late war they were incredibly precise and deadly at extreme ranges, thanks to their unparalleled optics and cannons. Tigers, for example, are deemed as untouchable behemoths by popular culture, but this was not the case. The only advantage the Tiger had on the 44-45 Western front, was that Allied tanks were very underpowered, the Tigers medium-velocity 88mm cannon could quite easily engage and annihilate Allied tanks at upwards of 1.5 kilometers(to a maximum of 3km). I don't even have to mention the Tiger2's high-velocity 88! Basically, at 500 meters tank combat is utterly unrealistic and meaningless, as almost any tank is deadly and the deadliest tanks are completely average. A Tiger2 can be outmanouvered with ease and annihilated. If the penetration ranges are "compressed" one would have the same performance at 500 meters in-game than in 2000 meters in real life(exclusively in regards of penetration, not in tactics or maneuvering). Okay, we can understand this, however this is not a realistic depiction of WW2 warfare. Personally, I'd rather have tank warfare limited if it can't be realistically displayed. 500m ranges were suicide for German crews, no one in their right mind would dare get that close. German tankers(especially those with powerful tanks) always preferred to engage at upwards of 1 kilometer, where being outmanouvered is not a problem and your situational awareness, training and cannon will, without a doubt, win the battle every single time. German panzers were unparalleled in all of these qualities. Thanks for your time.