Han Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 A year or so ago I downloaded the first demo of ToW. I was less than impressed and it didn't remain on my computer for long. Two weeks ago I decided to give it another try, mostly because of the new patched demo, and the editors that come with the patch. This time around I like what I see! I read that the developers of the game are Close Combat fans; that's noticable in the game. ToW comes a long way in being the 3D version of Close Combat I always dreamed of. The graphics are top in my humble opinion; the tanks, the way damage shows on them when they are shot up, crews bailing out and such. The guns, recoil and all - I can't get enough of it! ToW plays well, it's one of a few realistic battlefield-simulations. I'm not a big fan of Command-and-Conquer clones myself for that matter. It's a huge memory-hog though; framerates tend to suffer on my computer, especially when reinforcements arrive on the scene. For that matter the Battle Generator is something I like very much, it enables editing smaller battles that run well on my rig. The less well...maps seem to be fairly generic. All maps look fairly similar, fields, the occasional farm, trees scattered all over the place. Even a map like Provorovka which I imagine to be fairly devoid of trees in real life has trees all over the place. Normandy theatre maps lack bocage, which is IMO an essential part of the Normandy battlefield! Anyway, with the map editor more realistic maps can be made, I'm looking forward to seeing those created! The handling of infantry is a bit cumbersome in my opinion. While it's a neat feature that one can select and order around individual soldiers, it leads to a lot of unavoidable micro-management. In reality soldiers work together as teams; for that matter I like the approach of Close Combat, where you select and order around teams instead of individuals, a lot better. I'd like it better when selecting a team would be default, whereas detaching soldiers from the team would be optional. That would reduce the amount of micro-management needed quite a bit. There are a few things I sorely miss in ToW - the ability to have infantry enter buildings being foremost. Another issue is the inability to move HMG-teams after the battle starts. Also lacking is an option to end battles by a ceasefire instead of having to fight every single engagement to the last man. Another issue is that as it is now, crews of destroyed tanks double a (potent) infantry. In reality, crews of destroyed tanks would retreat to fight another day instead of continuing to attack the enemy. As a member of the Close Combat Gold-Juno-Sword mod team I've got a slight bias towards the British Normandy theatre of operations. There are a few important items missing in the British inventory as it is now. On my wishlist would be: - the mighty 88, AA version - the British 17pdr ATG - a British version of the M9 halftrack - the Achilles TD - (rocket) Typhoons! That would be my two cent's worth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Han, I think if you get a little deeper...maybe the JSH mod you might see some of the things that you see missing. I've seen Achilles and Typhoons. As far as your other assesments...I agree totally!One of my last and tiresome problems with the way things are now is the lack of any real Campaign mode. What I mean by that is, IMHO, a Campaign that actually has some real Historical significance to it. With the fight to the death mode that has TOW in it's grip, right now, It's kind of hard to keep moving on in the Campaign with any of your troops unless you play each game 20 times or more! I just feel like I go NOWHERE! MP is good but It's still a 1 BATTLE deal. The CC system is the best. I just want this game to get more of CC's mode into it. That, and TOW's 3D graphics will push it over the top as far as best ever! Until it reaches a higher level...I'm a bit bored with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Han Posted March 13, 2008 Author Share Posted March 13, 2008 I'm using JSH v1.2, which does have Tommy Shermans, but no Achilles and Typhoons as far as I can see? Another type of Campaign would be a good thing indeed. As much as I like the CC5 Campaign for which I created the GJS mod, it's not very well suited to ToW. I think a CC3-type of campaign would fit ToW very well. A series of operations stretching over a few days, with the ability to advance, retreat and cease-fire. That would be quite an improvement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Tzu Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Well, looks promising. I liked CM a lot and I liked the demo, so i guess i`ll make the order from BF after all. Pity about the patch mess with Kalypso. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MG TOW Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 Ive read a few threads where people mention tank crews did not carry on combat. I came across accounts where they did. A documentry on kursk recently, the tanker stated they carried satchel charges in the tank for such a thing. Which seemed a little odd but. This guy actually abandoned his disabled tank with his crew and then crippled a russian tank. And dont forget adding marders [ March 13, 2008, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: gundolf ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 It's just a 1 battle game as it stands right now. A real honest campaign mode is nowhere in sight at the moment. Unless of course you play the same battle over and over until you get lucky and defeat the swarms of enemy that will overwhelm you. This of course, even if your the Russian Army in May of 1945! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnasher Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 Originally posted by Sfox28: It's just a 1 battle game as it stands right now. A real honest campaign mode is nowhere in sight at the moment. Unless of course you play the same battle over and over until you get lucky and defeat the swarms of enemy that will overwhelm you. This of course, even if your the Russian Army in May of 1945! LOL! To be honest that's unfair on the engine & bang on the money on the mission designers. The stock mission design IMHO is too hard & lacks imagination. I'm 75% of the way through developing a custom campaign & can say it's entirely possible to make non single solution battles. How do you do this? Well, you make missions with lots of credits, then assign most of your deployment forces as reserves. This allows you to choose different OOBs from a large pool, offering variety, ala "Should I go with an extra tank or AT gun, would a couple of HMGs make the difference or an extra infantry squad?". Next is to code various events & enemy reiforcements that are randomly chosen ie different enemy compositions & positions on the field. This is all relatively simple to do programming wise. If you are that way inclined. The downside I've found is the testing. It takes ages as yuou need to test lots of times to see each permutation of the possible scenarios. IMHO is immense fun & adds replayability to SP games. You will be able to judge for yourself when I release the campaign. [ March 14, 2008, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: Gnasher ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnasher Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 Doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnasher Posted March 14, 2008 Share Posted March 14, 2008 Double Duplicate post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Han Posted March 15, 2008 Author Share Posted March 15, 2008 @ Gundolf: I can see why tankcrews would take with them some AT-devices as a precaution against the eventuality of having to bail out, and than run into enemy armor. However I would think that especially tank crews where highly trained specialists, so their commanders would not want them to act as infantry when their mount was shot from underneath them. That would be a waste of valuable human recourses. Not to mention that I've seen tankcrews attack right after they left their tanks, and right after they got banged by numerous shells on their tank. I'd imagine that an experience like that would be unnerving to say the least, so chances are those crews wouldn't be in any shape to continue an attack. I noticed this tread: "work in progress report" I see some of the items I previously mentionned are already planned for. Handling of infantry teams like in Close Combat, smoke, house combat. Excellent news indeed! @ Gnasher: is it possible to script a CC3-like campaign; in such a way that when certain victory locations are captured one can advance/has to retreat and such? From what I read in your post it sounds like a heck of a lot of work to create a decent campaign, and than it's still fairly scripted affair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted March 15, 2008 Share Posted March 15, 2008 Hey gnasher, Kudo's to you and what you are trying to do. Yes, what you said and are doing is the right way to make it work in a real campign mode. Unfortunately,I will just speak for myself, I'm just too dumb and or do not have the time or expertise to get things right! I was speaking of...how the game is now in it's pure form. There are some people who just want to play multiplayer...which is fine and I love that. But after a while, even that gets a little boring. Why have all the individual promotions and awards (Medals) in the game if you can't keep making your core cadre a strong one. The bottom line is that what your doing (gnasher-campaign) is what makes games like this and the CC series really work! Major Kudos...to all the great modders that make this kind of gaming fun for IDIOTS like me! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts