sand digger Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 Is this it, CMAK revisited? Loved that game, except for the awful graphics, in particular the lack of ground surface detail. Which made it exhausting and frustrating when trying to work out the topography for cover and protection purposes. Anything that improves that aspect will be a big step forward, as will some sort of LOS indicator which covers the whole battlefield from a particular point in one click, a blanket coverage LOS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted December 26, 2008 Share Posted December 26, 2008 Is this it, CMAK revisited? Not really. It's more like New Improved Theatre of War. Or perhaps New Improved Close Combat if you want. Coming from a great and experienced dev team at 1C, TOW2 takes the original ideas from TOW1, mixes them with a lot of very good user feedback from this very forum, and gives you a very polished and robust tactical game experience. The scale is probably a little lower than CMAK but not much so, especially now that maps have expanded over the original game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiloAlpha4 Posted December 31, 2008 Share Posted December 31, 2008 tow is better then cm, in cm terrain, obstacles, and buildings are a after thought and suck visually. It also has a very limited assortment of "eye candy" as far as what you can put out into a mission thus every mission environment feels very very generic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MG TOW Posted January 4, 2009 Share Posted January 4, 2009 what sand said. Lack of Ray tracing the ground, shadows, and highlighting terrain was non existent in CM and not done well enough in TOW. The sample pics for TOW2 seem to indicate some very pronounced terrain ray tracing, which is a big bonus. No more guessing where the dead ground lies, hull down positions, and ambush locations will bw obvious. (I hope) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lampshade111 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 One of the big issues I had read about ToW1 was that you could not send troops in buildings. Has that changed? Generally I don't recall it getting good reviews but it has always interested me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacquess Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 well i'm not sure what the reviews have said but i have the game and have been playing it for a couple of weeks - i am very happy with the game and the ubder patch has just made it better. the fact that you are unable to send troops into building is irritating and i believe i read somewhere that its to be fixed in ToW2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneaksie Posted January 22, 2009 Share Posted January 22, 2009 Troops can enter buildings in TOW2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRider3/3 Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 I am glad that they fixed the infantry problem in TOW2. Now at least infantry will not get mauled in the open all the time. My question is; I loved the CMBB, CMAK series with its editor, it was easy to create your own mahem and chaos, from the forums of TOW1 its seems like a real pain in the arse. Has this been rectified so us bonehead wargamers can easily make scenerios, I swear even putting in the Mission briefings were a no brainer for guys like me, I guess Im old school. Anyways I still play Cmak, and CMBB, graphics are not the greatest, but the game is still awesome. If TOW2 is anything like that I will get it, but only if it has a good mission editor thats easy, and if they plan in the future to use their TOW2 engine for a Russian and Western front campaigns. Otherwise I will stick to CMBB, CMAK. and Shock Force series Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRider3/3 Posted January 26, 2009 Share Posted January 26, 2009 tow is better then cm, in cm terrain, obstacles, and buildings are a after thought and suck visually. It also has a very limited assortment of "eye candy" as far as what you can put out into a mission thus every mission environment feels very very generic. Yes but at least with Cmak, CMBB the mission editor was friendly, and was turned based which gives the user a more strategy field of play rather than a fast moving arcade game. I know you can pause it, but it gets ridiculous trying to manipulate moving all of your vehicles, infantry and armor while the AI has already computed its decisions and employs them in milla seconds. Maybe I have not got used to TOW1, it was glitchy to begin with and locked up even after patcing, seemed like an unstable platform... and from the scren shots TOW2 looks like you will need a state of the art graphics card and PC to run at tip top, and in this economy whos going to go out and buy a 4-500 graphics card and 2k system just to play it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlapHappy Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 TOW 2 Russian demo so far for me plays much smoother than TOW 1. Might be the switchover to DirectX from OpenGL. Hard to say. New engine is smoother though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimguy Posted February 22, 2009 Share Posted February 22, 2009 Um, is the CM comparison really fair? That engine was developed in the late 90's. . . Not to mention CM was turn based. I do think it compares favorably with CMX2 though, which has developed nicely since its' release. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts