killmore Posted March 20, 2000 Share Posted March 20, 2000 Graphics were cool. I loved the ability to take over abandoned 85mm and shoot down the recon plane. I recognized all vehicles including the SturmTiger and T-34. Tanks get immobilized. One tank got his gun damaged probably because it was only firing MG. Infantry was not able to kill/damage tiger with their MG fire. Maybe with granades. But here is a list of things that feel wrong with this game: 1) I saw no difference between panter and tiger and IV in performance. Or the action was too fast to notice difference. 2) All units seem to have the same ROF. Tiger seems to heve same range as Sniper and MP40 infantry and sturmtiger. 3) I don't think armor thickes (front,sides,rear) is simulated. 4) Recon unit does not seem to have larger line of sight then Armor. It feels like a game where the only way to win is to send mass of units into the slaughter. It does not matter what units and the ranges are the same. Why have different units at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eichmann2 Posted March 20, 2000 Share Posted March 20, 2000 The list is almost endless mate! I had such high hopes for this one too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolColJ Posted March 21, 2000 Share Posted March 21, 2000 There are differences, mainly in how much damage/hp a unit can take, and how much damage it can dish out - a poor model for a ww2 game I think Its just like a typical C&C damage model ------------------ CCJ aka BLITZ_Force My Hompage ----> http://www.geocities.com/coolcolj Double your immersion with my Tweaked Textures and Saving Private Ryan sound set mods for CM!! Check out my new Textures V2.0 photo Gallery and my music while your there, or grab a CM Wallpaper! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 21, 2000 Author Share Posted March 21, 2000 I would be quite happy if the game turned out to be CC RTS. But it is not even close. CC had it moments. (like waiting for the tank to show its rear before firing that bazooka) Instead it is more like starcraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Private Ryan Posted March 21, 2000 Share Posted March 21, 2000 I do agree that this is just a really ****y wargame. One thing that gets me upset when i lose my infantry and Koeningstiger to mines. I send infantry to dig them up, but they don't, and just get slaughtered. I'm really not interested in this game, just gettin me a little pissed i can't fix a problem to a simple game. Thanks, Pvt. Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Wind Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 Agreed. Turn based is best. More control. Less unpredictability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Compassion Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by killmore (commenting on CoolColJ's comment that SS is a typical C&C game): I would be quite happy if the game turned out to be CC RTS.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Killmore... You did ge taht ccj was talking about C&C, Command and Conquer and tno CC, Cose Combat, right? I and others I know have gotten tripped up talking about one or the other in newsgroups to not stop every now and again and make sure everyon's on the same page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 22, 2000 Author Share Posted March 22, 2000 By CC I meant Close Combat. RTS with all of the rules of Close combat might be cool. Not accurate like CM, but still fun with some WWII like strategies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 Umm.. am I totaly lost.. CC is RTS isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 22, 2000 Author Share Posted March 22, 2000 Close combat is not real RTS because the definition of RTS seems to include producing the units. Basically in RTS you can build units while you play. You also have a choice what to produce/research. In Close Combat you might be able to buy units between missions. The choice is not totally yours. So people don't call it a real RTS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 ok i got you.. i just assumed that RTS stood for all games where thinking and strategy were traded in for who can click the fastest. ------------------ http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted March 22, 2000 Author Share Posted March 22, 2000 That why I only play RTSes that you can slow down almost to zero! Then you can think and decide what to do. Try Total Annihilation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 I'd like to see that definition of RTS. I always categorised CC as an RTS, and C&C clones as a sub-genre. After all, the operative is 'real-time', not 'Production manager' Manic Moran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 There are no official definitions However, within the industry RTS is composed of at least 3 elements (4 if you include multiplayer): 1. Real Time play, optionally with pauses. 2. Non unit specific combat (i.e. not a flight or tank sim where you command one unit). 3. Resource management, including a two part resource gathering and producing cycle, as a part of the in game experience (i.e. you do this stuff during the actual game not before/after). Close Combat lacks #3, Sim City lacks #2, a Falcon 4 doesn't meet #2 or #3, etc. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest R Cunningham Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 People shouldn't be disappointed in Sudden Strike. The developers made it pretty clear that from the outset this was a game and not anything even approaching the concept of a wargame. The non-playable demo from september(?) showed the typical C&C damage model. I do not understand how this game will succeed because it doesn't have any of the salient characteristics of the typical RTS. Wargamers can't like it because of its lack of depth, realism and accuracy. RTS nuts will probably get bored quickly without any kind of resource management, research tree and control of production. It has gotten positive press in previews but I can't see the game having any staying power once the novelty of 1000 units wears off. And FWIW, I don't consider CC to be RTS because it doesn't fit the established mold. If someone says "RTS," the close combat series is not what comes to mind. And I don't find that it rewards rapid clicking like RTS because you actually need to think about what you're doing. CC1 was a little hectic because of the number of units you had, particularly as the Americans. Since CC2 I haven't found many occasions where I was unable to give the orders necessary because I couldn't click fast enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Instead it is more like starcraft.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's too much of a compliment. Starcraft is one of if not the best RTS games out there. Multiplayer is very smooth. The game is entertaining, balanced, well thought out. Yes it's a click fest though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Servo Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 I've been constantly bitching about SS on their forums and someone compared it to CC and I mentioned how CC was better because it wasn't a click fest, you had more time to think and plan stuff out. He then responded saying it WAS a click fest because you had to click to open a menu then click on your choice then click on what/where that choice is to be carried out. I guess the fact you can't simply right click to move, left click to target is too much clicking for them, instead you right click, left click, right, left, right,... I dunno, SS was too fast for my mind,... I played it like 4 times then promptly removed it from my sys. Someone else asked me why, if I don't like the game, I continue to come to the forum and post, I responded saying... If I don't bitch, then CDV(SS makers)will think everyone loves the game how it is, now if I bitch, they'll notice they're losing money 'cause some people want this... so in hopes of improvement I'll just keep bitching... As we did here, and from what it sounds, it paid off. ------------------ Formally Tom punkrawk "Tomorrows killed by yesterday..." -Link80 Go to my soldiers at war page~!! http://www.geocities.com/soldiersat_war or I'll sick a goat on you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 ya I saw you get put down for putting down SS at thier forum. SS doesnt hold a candle to CM. I've been following CM since Nov 1998. With CM, I can study the units and thier behavior. SS is way to simple. Its a nice non playbable demo to watch but not much fun to play as a game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 Tom Servo Someone else asked me why, if I don't like the game, I continue to come to the forum and post, I responded saying... If I don't bitch, then CDV(SS .................................... YEA, I THINK THAT WAS ME. WELL I REALLY ENJOYED IT, AND IT IS NOT A TANK RUSH.AND I BELIEVE IT COMPARES TO C&C MUCH BETTER. REMEMBER ITS ONLY A DEMO,IM SURE THERE WILL BE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FINAL GAME ,JUST LIKE COMBAT MISSION HAS MOVE LEAPS AND BOUNDS SINCE DEMO. AND AS SOMEONE SAID EARLIER,"its a poor ww2 rts" ITS GREAT!! LOOK AT IT FOR WHAT IT IS,I THINK YOU NEED TO GIVE A BIT OF THOUGHT TO HOW YOU MANIPULATE YOUR UNITS ETC,I TRIED DOING A BIG RUSH WITH EVERYTHING LUMPED TOGETHER AND GOT SLAUHTERED!!!! NOW IF I DID THAT WITH MORE NUMBERS OF TROOPS ON ....SAY RED ALERT OR AOE ,I MOST PROBABLY WOULD HAVE SMASHED EM. i THINK CM WILL BE MY FAVOURITE WW2 GAME OF ALL TIME,BUT IT DOESNT MEAN EVERYTHING ELSE HAS TO BE RUBBISHED,cause its a safe bet to rubbish evry other game on this forum. CM is defintly more for the serious wargamer like myself,but i also like abit of a change from time to time and sudden strike will be a great game to play on multi over a modem etc against a mate ,certainly better than make believe stuff like star craft and AOE, ------------------ "Some people don't see the light until they first feel the heat" [This message has been edited by Titan (edited 03-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juju Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 Close Combat? Why, we need to invent a new shortcut here, it seems. How's about RTT: Real Time Tactical! Everybody happy now? Easy as apple pie, Juju Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ol' Blood & Guts Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 OK, just finished downloading the Sudden Strike Demo and installed it. WHERE'S THE SOUND? I don't know, but when infantry can gun down a Panther with rifle fire with a hit model based solely on hit points, I say, "THIS IS STUPID!" Yeah I know, we're all spoiled with what Combat Mission has become, BUT COM'ON! That was even a poor excuse for a RTS, wargame, or whatever you wanna call it! Needless to say, I shined that little game up, turned it sideways, and I deleted that ~50MB piece of monkey crap off my HD as soon as I exited the game. ------------------ "Cry Woe...Destruction...Ruin and Decay. The worst is Death...and Death will have His day."--Gen. Chang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEVERE Posted March 22, 2000 Share Posted March 22, 2000 I do agree with OB&G re: the lack of realism when it comes to soldiers killing a panther with rifle fire, but don't forget that there are fausts and flamers mixed in with the troops. While CM is deffinately the more realistic for it's accurate combat modeling and 3d beauty,[and is my favorite]it can't compare to SS, when it comes to artillery explosions and bomb detonations; this is where CM2 could learn a thing or two. Not that this is the most important part of a game but it certainly looks beautful in SS and makes up for some of it's shortcomming, which by the way are quite a few. I guess there are about 20 differant kinds of tree in SS. I really hope that they do something about the lack of modeling but have serious doubts they will or even can! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted March 23, 2000 Share Posted March 23, 2000 In the full version,rifles wont be able to hurt tanks ------------------ "Some people don't see the light until they first feel the heat" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest R Cunningham Posted March 23, 2000 Share Posted March 23, 2000 Heh? That's a rather radical change. I would think that would upset some of the play balance. Isn't it a little late in the game to make such a drastic change? Don't get me wrong, I don't think rifles( or the officers' pistols) should have any effect on the armor but the game engine was never supposed to be realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titan Posted March 23, 2000 Share Posted March 23, 2000 well, and even better thing with it,is that you can modify all your units Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts