Question regarding full game

[Zebbe]

Hello all

 

I am new to the forum but have recently spent alot of time with the demo for Black Sea. I find it very interesting and entertaining. I do however have a question.

 

In the demo there are three missions. Two (if you count the training mission) are rather small or medium in scale whereas the third one is a large battle on a large map with many units. I find such large operations difficult to manage and much prefer the medium/small battles. So in the full version, what size are most battles?

 

 

[A Canadian Cat]

I think there is a pretty good variety.  I just fired up the game and here are the size counts I have:

 

Tiny: 3

Small: 7

Medium: 8

Large: 7

 

Be warned I might have a few downloaded scenarios in there so a vanilla install might have lower counts on a few (but I checked the Tiny and Small and they are all stock scenarios).

[mirekm61]

Most are size medium (50%),  large (25%)  and small/tiny (25%) so indicative, but interesting game is a big scenario (at least map). It is best to play against a man on a large map.  There are 3 campaigns, media size together several scenarios.

[mbarbaric]

just to mention that i shared the opinion of the OP regarding huge battles. it is kind of difficult to keep track of all units once you have full batallion under control. this is very valid for a first encounter with CM. when i started playing it was a nightmare to keep track of anything that went above two platoons. however, once you get more time with the game (playing we-go and not real time) things get more clear and easy to manage. it depends a lot on the mood. sometimes you just don't want to bother with full scale engagement.

 

the bottom line is, you need to get used to the game and once there you will get intrigued about large scale battles to overcome initial uncomfortable feeling you get atm.

[Jim1954]

Zebbe'

 

HUGE difference between playing real time and turn based. Your original post did not differentiate, but it sounds like you might be playing real time. That alone can be a deal breaker in big battles. Too much info to process on the fly.

[Bud Backer]

Another thing you might want to consider is that with the Quick Battle generator you can make a great number of combinations of map size and force size. Like a large map and a lot of scouting? Set the QB to large map but small battle, which will give you space to roam, but not a lot of units to manage.

I too don't like a very large force - it's a lot of work to micromanage, so I understand your desire very well. I tend to play with reinforced platoons or companies, not battalions.

The thing about QB's is that they are best played against a human, and not the AI. The scenario designers (Battle designers) can compensateir the AI's limitations. But the QB generator cannot. However, I think the true fun is playing with others and you should have no trouble finding willing opponents of similar experience level, right here on these forums.

[Zebbe]

Thank you all for you responses. Yes I have been playing in real time. I'll buy the fullversion and get stuck into it.

[kraze]

The best part here is that eventually many community-made scenarios will appear providing any battle size you want (I've played lots of those for CM Shock Force that were far better than the official ones). And when I started with CM I also didn't like large scale battles at first but when I got a hang of the game I began to truly appreciate the scale and detail of what's going on on the screen. Plus Combat Mission: Black Sea is the most detailed modern war strategy game available thus far, especially if you are into realistic combined arms warfare.

Edited May 10, 2015 by kraze

[Stagler]

Don't forget you can make quick battles of any size.

 

Most multiplayer matches are these anyway.

Edited May 10, 2015 by Stagler

[John Kettler]

Zebbe,

 

Welcome aboard!

 

I'm absolutely in agreement with Bud_B on playing QBs as a way of learning to cope with a very demanding game in which annihilation is often one or two turns of combat. There is a ton of stuff to stay on top of and, compared to WW II, the pace is blistering, likewise the firepower, weapon accuracy and lethality. The very first time I ever screwed around with a QB, I lost 40% of my reinforced Motorized Rifle Company (BMP-3 Company with attached T-90AM platoon) in two withering turns. Naturally, it was the vital tank force which got clobbered, leaving me with a greatly diminished force of powerfully armed eggshells on flat ground with Abrams and Bradleys on dominating terrain above them. That, was with Bradleys and Abrams firing on the move as they dashed for cover, too! I hit a few of them, but my force was so savaged I simply quit the game, reeling in shock. So shattering was this initial outing that I found myself wondering whether I'd made a serious mistake in using scarce resources to pre-order the game, rather than waiting weeks for the CMBS Demo. What ultimately made me plunk down my very hard to come by bucks was not just getting this wonder ASAP and for less money than at general release , but also finally having a physical game manual and a separate one for CMx2 Version 3.0. That was money very well spent, despite the special tin being a letdown. 

 

My brain's been through an awful lot in the last few years, but even before, when I was able to keep no less than five CMx1 PBEM tournament games going, at the rate of at least a turn per game per day, I seriously doubt that brain would allow me to play RT now. I simply have no idea how that's possible, and I say this as someone who found Halo 3 more than adequate when it came to dealing with fast moving combat situations in a battle in which I had to handle exactly one unit consisting solely of my character. If you wish to play RT, then good on you. In closing, I wholly concur that vs human is the way to go in both QBs and generally. Humans are far smarter and more clever (and twisted) than the AI which, though brilliant compared to what we had under CMx1, still can't really attack effectively or operate in a fast breaking fluid environment. As far as I'm concerned, baby steps are the way to go, and I say this as someone who freely admits he hasn't yet mastered the equivalent of crawling in the game. Am, as the saying goes, not ready for prime time! I believe you'll do very well, though, and I look forward to reading about the fierce engagements you'll fight in the days, weeks, months and maybe years to come. Enjoy!

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Edited May 11, 2015 by John Kettler

[agusto]

@ Zebbe: you can also always use the Quick Battle function to generate a battle of your likening. It takes a bit of time to figure out which QB configurations work well and which dont, but it is entirely possble to have fun playing QBs vs. the AI.

[Zebbe]

Thank you all for your responses and advice. Ive been learning the hard way the past few days and have truly come to appreciate smoke screens, fire support and the importance of good cover. It is a great game.