CM:BN vs PC:O like Blur vs Oasis?

[Nicdain]

The forthcoming releases of these two titles, which are likely to be almost coincident, reminds to me the release of the two big hits "Country house" by Blur and "Roll with it" by Oasis which occurred both on the 14th of august 1995.

Ok... pointless thread

[dpabrams]

OK, I'll bite, what the heke is PC:O?

Pete

[para]

Yeh and Roll with it was better!

[whako]

What the hell is PC:O?

[ClarkWGriswold]

Panzer Command: Ostfront

[Blackcat]

What are/were Blur and Oasis?

[para]

What are/were Blur and Oasis?

Do you not remember Brit Pop?

[dpabrams]

Do you not remember Brit Pop?

I do remember Brit Pop. I had several Oasis and Blur CD's. Back then I fell on the Oasis side and 15 years later, I think I made the right choice. Don't get me wrong I still spin up Park Life and dig Blur. I think a little time and reflection has made it clear that Oasis left a bigger footprint, especially here in the states.

Pete

[Michael Emrys]

Do you not remember Brit Pop?

Not from 1995. In fact, that whole period from a decade before to a decade after is one big vacant wasteland for me as far as British pop goes. I suppose that if one was just entering adulthood around that time, it might hold a certain sentimental nostalgia for one, but I am not included in that group.

Michael

[Blackcat]

Do you not remember Brit Pop?

No. Who or what was it?

[Michael Emrys]

Gee, I wish I'd said that.

Michael

[General_solomon]

PC:O is waiting to be release because it wants to ride on the coat tales of cmbn. Dont get me wrong, I am a fan of the panzer command series but its 5 years too late. cmbn is light years ahead of pco. why abstract infantry when you can have 1:1 to better simulate close combat.

they should have released pco two months ago so that more people would have picked it up in anticipation of cmbn. its too late now, most fans of the cmbn series will be out of pocket a couple months after the release.

I am probably going to pick up both titles but will not play pco after cmbn comes out.

[Blackcat]

Gee, I wish I'd said that.

Michael

You will, Mr. Emrys, you will.

[stikkypixie]

PC:O is waiting to be release because it wants to ride on the coat tales of cmbn. Dont get me wrong, I am a fan of the panzer command series but its 5 years too late. cmbn is light years ahead of pco. why abstract infantry when you can have 1:1 to better simulate close combat.

they should have released pco two months ago so that more people would have picked it up in anticipation of cmbn. its too late now, most fans of the cmbn series will be out of pocket a couple months after the release.

I am probably going to pick up both titles but will not play pco after cmbn comes out.

Is PC any good? From my limited knowledge about the game, I get the impression it's quite similar CMx1. In your opinion what are the main differences?

[scottie]

"you gotta roll with , you gotta take your time ...." i think Liam may have been a CM fan

[General_solomon]

Is PC any good? From my limited knowledge about the game, I get the impression it's quite similar CMx1. In your opinion what are the main differences?

this is from Mad Russian who is one of the guys working on the ostfront update:

"The way I see it there are several differences between PCO and CMBB.

Although PC is always referred to as a CM clone that's not accurate. Unless silver is a clone of gold. They are related in the same way.

CM and PC are both games that are at the lower tactical level. The same as ASL and a myriad of other board wargames went before CM. They are in the same genre.

If you are happy with CMBB and IT STILL PLAYS FOR YOU then there may be little reason for you to buy PCO. CMBB doesn't play on my new machine. It might if I were to invest the time to research the fixes.

But I'm not going to and here are my reasons for supporting PCO with my playing time instead of CMBB.

*CMBB won't play on my new machine. PCO does. That's only one reason. Where is any ongoing support for CMBB? Has it been back coded to allow it to play on my machine like all of the PC series? Has it been upgraded like CMAK for Vista? If it has I haven't seen it. There is a total lack of support for CMBB, at the current time, that I'm aware of.

*PCO is the third installment in an ongoing series of games. CMBB is in a series, seemingly, no longer supported by it's parent company.

*PCO was made by wargamers with no limits on what we could make changes to. The original project was to be a simple patch. I would say it's anything but that. Matrix supported us even when the ride wasn't all that smooth. We are all gamers with CM backgrounds so we know what we liked from CM and what we didn't like. We also know what we like from CC and ASL, Panzer 44 and Fireteam Leader, and....well you get the picture. We are wargamers. We want the best of them all rolled into one. We couldn't do everything we wanted in a free update but we went so far as to be offering you an entirely new gaming experience. I don't see CMBB doing any of those things.

Each gamer has their own likes and dislikes. This forum absolutely shows that. Our group is pretty diverse. From those wanting mostly a game to those wanting mostly a sim and those that want a blend. PCO is the result of our efforts. I think we did a really good job. The game plays great and has as much history and factual data as we could get under the hood in this amount of time. My own personal preference is to have all the historical data under the hood, to be there but to be hidden away and let the game play be as smooth as possible. PCO does that for me.

This is the game we wanted to make and play!

*PCO can be made to do anything tactical. PCO was developed to be as wide open as possible. You can add any vehicle you like, we added the Maus so we know you can too, weapons system, squad, fireteam, nationality, gun, blast area, animation, texture, structure....ANYTHING.

You could do any time period with the engine if you wanted. We could add Centurions or T-72's and it would simply be a matter of doing the mod and fixing the data files. We know that because we tried it already.

These are not just different skins over a set data base. The data base can be added to support the new data for new weapons systems as well by modders.

*Game play doesn't have holes in it. All units respond the same. There is no such thing as a JS-2m refusing to fire at a King Tiger from ambush with flanking shot. There is no Dance of Death while entire platoons of tanks reverse into each other and then are shot to junk by the enemy.

*Game turns can be made to play however you like. Whether that is with or without a reaction phase. Whether you want 40/60/80 second turns.

*The map maker is quick and easy. For those that want it to be it can also make actual pieces of ground associated with battles. Actual height and terrain maps can be generated from satellite mapping or you can use whatever other sources you like.

* A full editor which can include the ability to use any structure ever made. You can make the Reichstag and put it in a scenario if you like. Water, both still and moving is differentiated, weather, fog, time of day, lighting conditions, shadows, etc. is all under your control.

Okay then, enough about the box credential differences.

Let's move on to game play.

CMBB and PCO play fairly similar with some very important distinctions.

*PCO has had the entire orders structure reworked. The orders structure is leader based with the ability to micro manage if that's what you want. I normally go through an entire Bn OOB to give orders in about 10 minutes. Even if I have to give specific orders to someone that is quick and easy. I can click on the unit and then move anywhere on the map and give the orders I want. I don't have to start at the unit and go outward from there losing my way and starting over. This is a very handy item and saves lots of time when you are issuing orders.

PCO has formations in the orders selections such as bounding overwatch and charge. These are nationality specific.

* PCO has unit ID coins that are fully functional. I get tremendously more information from a PCO ID coin that I do from a CMBB ID label.

In PCO the ID coins can be modded to look like anything you want. You want NATO symbols to show on them you can do that. You want Red Star/Black Cross you can do that too.

The ID coins are fully functional in regards to issuing orders as well. Click on the ID coin and the orders menu comes up. You can the issue orders without ever having seen the actual unit.

The ID coins for enemy units can be targeted. Again, without ever actually seeing the enemy unit.

The ID coins show if a vehicle is buttoned or unbuttoned.

They show if the unit is a leader, a replacement leader or a normal unit member.

*Combat resolution is based on ballistics and accuracy. Not much that you would notice different in game play between the two. As much actual known data for the weaponry we could get went into the combat engine.

* Camera angles and moving around the map is much easier in PCO.

* There is a hot key for everything in PCO. The interface is fast and easy.

* You can turn a tremendous number of options on or off in PCO. In all areas. That includes the map maker, scenario editor, random scenario/campaign editors and game play.

* PCO has all the same immersion factors that CMBB did. The fighting can be extremely intense.

*Artillery has been redone and is a more accurate model now. It doesn't just fire non stop as it does in CMBB until you run out of ammo. It fires for a period until the mission is over and you retarget. Artillery requires a communication link between a leader and the artillery unit. Each leader with a working radio is displayed in the HUD and highlighted for easy identification of who can call in fire when.

*PCO has had each unit in the game researched to supply a time line for the type of ammunition it can use. If APCR wasn't available in a particular time frame it's not in the game for you. Some are more accurate at longer ranges than others. You can find all that in the unit ID that is available during game play if you need it.

* Something I didn't think was going to make much difference to me when we started is the graphics of the game. We have actual aircraft and not just shadows in the game. It makes a tremendous difference to see them doing the attack and watch the bombs falling away and hitting. But not just aircraft. Other areas as well, such as the infantry being flat on their faces when suppressed and dust kicking up around tanks that are under fire but the rounds are missing them.

* Sound has been completely redone. It's all size and distance appropriate.

* Where is the Borg? There is not much Borg spotting in PCO. No computer game is going to do away with some form of Borg spotting at a squad level model. What PCO does is limit what can be seen from each unit. If you physically can't see it then it's not represented on the map at all when you give orders to your unit. You can see all units that your forces can see when you click on the map to determine units in contact and what would be reported to you as the commander but each unit can only physically see what they have an LOS to.

*Each unit/vehicle was researched so that they are as accurate to original as possible. There are no holes in the OOB that we are aware of. No Super Stug's that can't be killed. Even if there are and we didn't find them any modder can fix that issue by redoing the data table for that vehicle.

Before we go there, all data for all aspects of the game must match up or the scenario won't play. Sorry, I just knew where you were going with your next rant mode turned on.....:laugh:

*PBEM - TCP/IP. Using Drop Box you can play PCO as a combination of PBEM and TCP/IP without any connections through your ISP or any server. This is quick and easy and the turns can be done either back to back as in TCP/IP or saved for later as in PBEM. This is how I play most often and this is great!

Wrap it all up together and I much prefer to play PCO. I have CMBB on an old XP machine. I haven't played CMBB since before thanksgiving of last year. I've been a pretty active member of the CM community to that point. Now I'm not. I much prefer the gameplay of PCO to CMBB.

I could still be doing things with CMAK and wondering when BFC will update CMBB so my new machine will play it. Instead I've joined this team. I can't imagine anyone seeing that list of changes we made and not realize just how much work we put into this.

If you have your doubts, then wait. There will be those that will buy it and reviews will come out. There will be ladders and tournaments started using PCO. You can watch those and see if you find the same kind of support and enthusiasm you're looking for.

I waited until PCK before becoming a part of the team, because I wanted to see some things, before I went any further myself. So, I fully understand. Very soon you won't have to take our word for it. Others will be telling you as well.

Only you will know if PCO is for you. I just know it's for me."

what he said.

[Frankster65]

This infantry model is not as sophisticated as CMBN. They say it will improve with Panzer Command four. I will probably get it myself just to try it out but the two things which do give me pause is the "infantry model" since I love infantry vs infantry battles and I don't care for their HUD interface. I think what Battlefront has done with bringing the information to the player is much, much better.

[General_solomon]

This infantry model is not as sophisticated as CMBN. They say it will improve with Panzer Command four. I will probably get it myself just to try it out but the two things which do give me pause is the "infantry model" since I love infantry vs infantry battles and I don't care for their HUD interface. I think what Battlefront has done with bringing the information to the player is much, much better.

agreed, by they time the come out with pc 4 cmbnx2 engine will be out to improve on a already superior infantry model.

[Other Means]

PC:O sounds like Oasis to CMs Beatles.

Oh and Blur for me.

[umlaut]

Well, I bought PC Kharkov when it was released three years ago, having high hopes that this would be the new CMBB. I was utterly disappointed.

Yes, it had some real improvements over CM, but I really can´t believe the poor quality of the graphics - especially when you consider that CMBB is more than six years older than PC:K. It was like playing with solid cast rubber toy tanks when you´re used to handpainted Airfix models.

I played one (1) scenario and decided I liked CMBB better.

And it really puzzled me what a former die hard CM scenario designer like Mad Russian saw in Panzer Command. Now I can read it above, and I think I understand him a bit better.

But I´ve just checked out the PC:O site - and the graphics still put me off.

Now can I have my CM:BN soon, please?

;-)

[ZPB II]

I browsed the PC forums for a bit and in a sense, it felt a bit like stepping into a time warp or sumfink. Everything was compared to CMx1 and even then it seemed a bit so-so, really outdated.

The CMx2 engine appears to do most things vastly better and has been out since 2007. Granted, there's been no WW2 CMx2 game yet, but I assume (having read about the features and watched the videos about PC:O) that CMBN will blow that dinosaur out of the water. Couldn't find a demo to confirm my suspicions.

[Blackcat]

I vaguely remember Mad Russian from the old days on this site (pre CMSF). He is comparing his new game with one released nine years ago. Good luck to the guy, but it sounds to me like he comes fom the "Battlefront are Doing it All Wrong" fraternitiy that once made this site uninhabitable.

[Sergei]

Ultimately, Panzer Command is just a different type of game to what Combat Mission (CMx1 or CMx2) is, so comparing them is pointless. It is like comparing them to Close Combat. I have a ton of respect for the PC:O team for widening the scope of the game so much, but to me it's still Panzer Command so I'm not all that interested.

Besides, there's no Finns in PC:O. What's the point?!?

[inff]

CMx2 engine is very broken.

It looks good, yes, but the 1to1 mechanic is years behind new Close Combat releases.

[born2lose]

CMx2 engine is very broken.

It looks good, yes, but the 1to1 mechanic is years behind new Close Combat releases.

You Sir after reading your other posts are what is described as a "Class 1 Forum TROLL" and a close combat fanboi (sorry couldnt resist putting in the dig)