First Impressions

[Panzerfest]

After frantically playing through the demo a couple (many) of times, half distracted by everything new going on, I finally sat down and played Busting the Bocage thoughtful and measured way.

Wow, at fist I didn't like the bocage but it really does make for an interesting tactical environment. Cant wait for the full game, QBs, campaigns and starting some PBEMs!

Great job Battlefront!

ps please give us cover armor arcs!

[StellarRat]

Well, so far, one minor loss and one minor victory in the Road to Berlin. All I can say is WOW, and WOW again. What a game! Battlefront you've done yourself proud! It seems like "real" combat when you look watch actual footage from war reporters. I'm just amazed. Love the 60mm mortars. Only in this game can you see how truly useful they are. Can hardly wait to get 81's in game.

[vetacon]

Loving it. Just brilliant.

Now release the game please.

[StellarRat]

BTW, I was able to play with all graphics turned to full. So, will post my specs.

Video card = ATI 4850 1 gig VRAM

Processor = AMD Phenom II X4 955 Quad core

Sound = Creative Audigy 2 card

Note that I'm not using on board sound as this uses processors cycles.

OS = Windows 7 64-bit Home

[RockinHarry]

There are foxholes and trenches in the 'Busting the Bocage' scenario for the Germans - I had a horrible time trying to clear them out when playing as the Yanks! I've not tried that scenario from the German side yet, but the foxholes and trenches are placeable during the setup phase.

As for the missing textures in the editor, it only shipped with the textures that are used in the 3 scenarios in order to cut down on the demo size, so a bunch of things are missing that will be in the full game.

Ah...thanks. Just did few turns in BtB, US side, before I decided to try the other scens, playing germans. So started BtB this time as germans and found the foxholes and trenches as you say. That´s the good thing. The bad thing is, that I find these to be the worst features in an otherwise graphically brilliant game. Additionally, you can´t place these were actually needed, so the "busting the bocage" experience is far from beeing realistic. Troops also appear to be as vulnerable from artillery as in any other terrain and I would expect, that at least the "trench" thingy would offer some overhead protection vs. tree bursts, even if not visually presented (abstracted). I´d have been more than satisfied with some abstracted forts like in CMX1, just having the 2D tile on top of the terrain and let soldier figures "sink" into these tiles, let the bullet and casualty tracking be abstracted somehow.

Even if the game engine does not allow a different solution ATM, I find those foxhole and trench things looking just like crap, not placeable where needed and not offering realistic protection. CMBN is a true beauty, but as soon as I see these, the impression is destroyed instantly.

Well, overall not a gamebreaker. It´s CMx2 WW2 and there´s no true alternative to it.

[Childress]

Agree about the eyesore part. But they seem easy to place, in a strictly linear fashion. Problem is the tranches/foxholes can't be rotated- unless I'm missing something. Maybe in the scenario editor.

I recall that BFC faced some kind of programming stumbling block in rendering these.

[StellarRat]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think foxholes and trenches with overheard cover were NOT common in WW II. My ROTC training and manuals definitely emphasize the need for overhead cover, but I don't think that was the case in WW II. I know the Japanese used trees and concrete for overhead cover on the islands, but I don't think it was common in Europe. I'm sure someone with more knowledge can comment.

[StellarRat]

Yes, there is a programming issue with foxholes and any type of underground emplacements.

[RockinHarry]

I'm not 100% sure, but I think foxholes and trenches with overheard cover were NOT common in WW II. My ROTC training and manuals definitely emphasize the need for overhead cover, but I don't think that was the case in WW II. I know the Japanese used trees and concrete for overhead cover on the islands, but I don't think it was common in Europe. I'm sure someone with more knowledge can comment.

Depends. A quickly dug foxhole (1-2 hours) surely does not have one. German HDV 130/11 (field regulation for field fortifications) suggest to add "Unterschlupfe" (miniature dug out in a 2 man foxhole) for protection vs. light mortars and splinters from bouncing (timed fuse) and tree burst for a half a days work. Trenchlines which take between days and weeks to build, surely have more of this kind, including true underground group shelters and such. So in what category do CMBN fortifications fall?

Also depends upon terrain. FHs and trenches in forests are plain death traps, without overhead cover. In CMX1 a dug in defender in forests is no less vulnerable from tree bursts as a moving attacker, which makes recreating battles from the bulge or hurtgen forest as good as impossible.

Maybe it´s not too much of an issue in the Normandy theatre, if a defender stays out of woods, but something needs to be done for the CM Bulge module.

Just played another turn (3) as germans in BtB and a 6 men german squad in a trench placed in an orchard, suffered 3 casualties. These were from 1 tree burst and a near miss. I even had that squad in "hidden" status, assuming they would benefit even more from their "cover", but obviously that doesn´t make any difference, just like in CMX1.

[Gamer4ever]

Just finished "Closing the Pocket" as the US and oh, yes. Its coming back to me. Getting more familiar with the scrolling of the map and commanding the units.

It is definitely growing on me. Nice job BFC.

Man, those Panthers can sure take a beating. Even when immobilized the crew hangs in there. Phew.

Can't wait to see meeting engagements. Can't wait for the release.

[xian]

Firstly, I must say a big well done to the guys at battlefront for what looks like the beginnings of a superb new series. 1000 thanks for bringing CM back to the Mac! It's been many years since I've been able to play my favourite game.

I have played the demo for a couple of days now and I have to say that I am thoroughly enjoying it (despite the fact that I cannot play some missions because the game constantly crashes in WeGo mode). I've watched some heroic and tragic moments unfold and am thoroughly gripped by CM2.

The new command and control system, the graphics, the TAcAI, the new artillery mode and the briefing are all a major improvement over CM1. Most importantly the spirit of the original has also been retained.

There are just a few things that seem to have been omitted in CM2 that were great in CM1. It would vastly improve the gaming experience if they could be included in CM2 as well. I'm sure many of my suggestions have been repeated elsewhere - but this is my 3 (more than 2 I'm afraid) cents worth...

Here are a few of the more crucial ones:

Clicking on a movement path or target line to select the associated unit.

Adjusting waypoints by clicking on them.

Including a 'Show all targets' hot key.

Displaying the target lines for targets automatically selected by your unit's TacAI. It's currently hard to tell what your units are aiming at. Perhaps use different colour target lines to denote the different types of targeting:

Bright Red: player selected target

Dark Red: TAcAI selected target

Orange: Area target

A 'select visible target' and a 'select next visible target' button might be useful too.

Sticky targeting on visible targets.

Units to complete a HUNT order if threat disappears (rather than cancelling the order on first contact)

Unit status hotkey - displaying the current suppression status of the unit. either using colour coding, symbols or words.

A 'Save Game' hotkey rather than having to go through menu.

Autosave option.

More information about the current cover and concealment of selected unit - a small icon in the GUI would do (and at the pointer when selecting move).

Information about the effective range of weapons and their uses by clicking on them in GUI.

Armour colour coded display on vehicle silhouette (as per CM1). This would be more useful than the current defences tab and could link in with a Penetration table at a later date.

Armour Penetration table. I know that people are saying that this is too difficult to incorporate, but I can't see why. The game must use this information under the hood - and many players need a rough guide to help them make decisions. Luckily, having played CM1, I know that a 20MM AP round wont touch a Panther tank (unless it lands on top), but I only learnt this stuff because of the detail provided in CM1. I fear that new players will lose out on this detail and their enjoyment of the game will suffer.

Some of the craters look a little 'zit' like, especially the colour around the lip of the crater. Could a grittier texture and a darker colour be used instead?

Units to 'area fire' on suspected targets (especially if fired upon) even if not fully spotted.

Terrain fires - I hear that this is in the pipeline.

To be able to view the number of kills achieved by individual units when reviewing the map at the after action report.

I really hope that you guys can find a way to feature most (if not all) of these in future updates.

[Medex]

Geez.. just got done the Road to Berlin scenario and have to say. At times the AI arty can be way off and at other times I got nailed pretty good.

It sure makes the AI game more suspenseful with arty like that.

[Hawkmek]

Clicking on a movement path or target line to select the associated unit.

Would be nice.

Adjusting waypoints by clicking on them.

Been discussed at length and I believe it is on the very long TO DO List for BFC.

A 'select visible target' and a 'select next visible target' button might be useful too.

I agree

Units to complete a HUNT order if threat disappears (rather than cancelling the order on first contact)

Yes, I wish they would continue on

A 'Save Game' hotkey rather than having to go through menu.

Oh come on, you're just being lazy

More information about the current cover and concealment of selected unit - a small icon in the GUI would do (and at the pointer when selecting move).

I agree, I never know if I am in the trees or in the open, but with 1:1 representation, not every member will occupy the same type of cover and concealment so I don't see how they could do this

Information about the effective range of weapons and their uses by clicking on them in GUI.

See the Repository file 'Alternate Vehicle and Weapon Silhouettes'

Armour colour coded display on vehicle silhouette (as per CM1). This would be more useful than the current defences tab and could link in with a Penetration table at a later date.

See the Repository file 'Alternate Vehicle and Weapon Silhouettes'

To be able to view the number of kills achieved by individual units when reviewing the map at the after action report.

Already in the game. Just Review Map after the battle and the green text in the lower right gives you Kill Stats for the selected unit

[CanuckGamer]

I am a big fan of the Combat Mission series and played all the World War II ones continuously. I am currently trying out the demo, specifically the tutorial mission where you have to capture a crossroads. I am playing on the "novice" level and was surprised that I lost 2 Shermans within a time frame of 30 seconds to what looked like a PAK 50 AT gun. I read a comment from someone who thought that AT fire from both AT guns and tanks was way too accurate for WW II. This is a concern to me as a game that is intended to simulate tactical combat on a small scale should have as its number one priority, historical realism. Also still trying to figure out how to get my mortars to fire. I put two HQ units on the 2nd floor of the big building on the left and moved them forward figuring that they could spot from there. So far though, whenever I try to target with a mortar it says no line of sight.

The demo itself runs very smoothly on my PC. I have the two main graphic settings at "Better". The initial screen when the game starts with the Battlefront "logo" in the middle of screen is garbled around the rectange where Battlefront appears. The graphics are a big improvement over the old CM series but the Shermans look a little too "clean". Also some of the motions of the soldiers look a little odd. For example when I was viewing some German soldiers crouched behind a wall, they periodically dropped to the ground and rolled in to something akin to a fetal position. At first I thought they had been hit but no cross appeared. Just as a general comment about the graphics, it appears to me that the movement of tanks and infantry is much faster then what I remember from the original CM games. I am a little disappointed by the sounds for the weapons, so far they just don't add much to the immersive experience.

It appears that the only way you can determine the line of sight of a unit is to choose target and then point in the direction you want.

[SonofDiablo]

Well at least I'll get my impression in for the Demo.

As I expected I hated it. Only the graphics were impressive everything else was like playing TOW or Company of Heroes in RT and of course because it plays too fast I missed quite a bit of the action for having to take care of the action on another portion of the map.

Without random map generations and a TacAI for them this game has nothing for me. It's reskinned but it isn't Combat Mission as I know it anymore. CMBO, CMBB and CMAK will remain the best of that game series and CMAK:ETO my favorite mod ever.

Also to find this game has no TCP/IP play that which I've played for 10 years it just ridiculously stupid not to include. PBEM is so slow and boring and RT will never be my cup of tea.

Sadly neither does Panzer Command:Osfront have TCP/IP play (what is with you developers why have you gotten so lazy of late?) TCP/IP has always been manys choice of multiplayer play, why eliminate it now? Slitherine and Matrixgams both have gone to this QuickBox PBEM sort of play and I hate it and will not participate in it.

Oh well I'm sure you won't miss my $60 or the extra $25-$35 or the modules you're sure to milk up on but at any rate that's more moeny for me to put into something "worth" buying and playing and of course I still have the old favorites that will last a lifetime CMBO, CMBB and CMAK which are still the best you ever made.

Bye (I'm sure the flames will come but I'll never read them hahahahaha)

[gunnergoz]

Well at least I'll get my impression in for the Demo.

As I expected I hated it.

Nothing like having an open mind.

[sburke]

Bye (I'm sure the flames will come but I'll never read them hahahahaha)

Yeah I agree though I really am hoping folks will ignore you. You really do waste too much of everyone's time on every forum you log into. Don't get it, but if this is how you get off...

You might want to consider dating... no I mean girls.

And yes it was expected you would hate it.

[thetzen]

Also still trying to figure out how to get my mortars to fire. I put two HQ units on the 2nd floor of the big building on the left and moved them forward figuring that they could spot from there. So far though, whenever I try to target with a mortar it says no line of sight.

You call in the mortar fire from the spotting unit, not the mortar unit.

[Stingray]

Am loving it!!!

After playing Road to Berlin (US side) I am re-learning the value of combined arms approach.

You need to have the infantry right up with your tanks otherwise the tanks will get toasted. The Germans have some pretty nast hand held AT weapons.

[skelley]

Thoroughly Enjoying it! Infantry behavior has always been most important to me. Infantry do pretty much what I expect them to do. When I handle them badly they break, when I use them properly they cause the enemy to route. While not everything is perfect, it is very, very good. I love the look and feel of the game overall. Job well done fellas. Now release it:)

[George MC]

Well at least I'll get my impression in for the Demo.

As I expected I hated it. Only the graphics were impressive everything else was like playing TOW or Company of Heroes in RT and of course because it plays too fast I missed quite a bit of the action for having to take care of the action on another portion of the map.

Without random map generations and a TacAI for them this game has nothing for me. It's reskinned but it isn't Combat Mission as I know it anymore. CMBO, CMBB and CMAK will remain the best of that game series and CMAK:ETO my favorite mod ever.

Also to find this game has no TCP/IP play that which I've played for 10 years it just ridiculously stupid not to include. PBEM is so slow and boring and RT will never be my cup of tea.

Sadly neither does Panzer Command:Osfront have TCP/IP play (what is with you developers why have you gotten so lazy of late?) TCP/IP has always been manys choice of multiplayer play, why eliminate it now? Slitherine and Matrixgams both have gone to this QuickBox PBEM sort of play and I hate it and will not participate in it.

Oh well I'm sure you won't miss my $60 or the extra $25-$35 or the modules you're sure to milk up on but at any rate that's more moeny for me to put into something "worth" buying and playing and of course I still have the old favorites that will last a lifetime CMBO, CMBB and CMAK which are still the best you ever made.

Bye (I'm sure the flames will come but I'll never read them hahahahaha)

What an odd chap.

[BloodyBucket]

Great fun.

Things I miss -

Adjustable waypoints.

Hand to hand combat.

Bailed crews being shocked.

Things that could be better -

Voice acting.

Individual sound files for each weapon (Thompson not being the same as an MP-40)

The funny half standing KIA graphics

Overall, a must-have, thank you for making this.

[stikkypixie]

I am a big fan of the Combat Mission series and played all the World War II ones continuously. I am currently trying out the demo, specifically the tutorial mission where you have to capture a crossroads. I am playing on the "novice" level and was surprised that I lost 2 Shermans within a time frame of 30 seconds to what looked like a PAK 50 AT gun. I read a comment from someone who thought that AT fire from both AT guns and tanks was way too accurate for WW II. This is a concern to me as a game that is intended to simulate tactical combat on a small scale should have as its number one priority, historical realism. Also still trying to figure out how to get my mortars to fire. I put two HQ units on the 2nd floor of the big building on the left and moved them forward figuring that they could spot from there. So far though, whenever I try to target with a mortar it says no line of sight.

Remember that the distances are very short on that map. You would expect a high first chance. It might also be a fluke, play some more .

As for the mortars, check the manual for the full explanation; but the basic gist is like this:

You make sure there is a communication line from the mortars to the HQ. Select the HQ unit (not the mortars) and via the fire support button call in a mortar strike. It's not like in CMBB or CMAK any more.

The demo itself runs very smoothly on my PC. I have the two main graphic settings at "Better". The initial screen when the game starts with the Battlefront "logo" in the middle of screen is garbled around the rectange where Battlefront appears. The graphics are a big improvement over the old CM series but the Shermans look a little too "clean". Also some of the motions of the soldiers look a little odd. For example when I was viewing some German soldiers crouched behind a wall, they periodically dropped to the ground and rolled in to something akin to a fetal position. At first I thought they had been hit but no cross appeared. Just as a general comment about the graphics, it appears to me that the movement of tanks and infantry is much faster then what I remember from the original CM games. I am a little disappointed by the sounds for the weapons, so far they just don't add much to the immersive experience.

The Shermans are clean because they are brand spanking new . The fetal position is graphical representation of troops cowering. Sounds and textures can be modded so maybe some day someone will make a mod that suits your taste.

It appears that the only way you can determine the line of sight of a unit is to choose target and then point in the direction you want.

Yes, in 99% of the time this gives the same results. But sometimes you cannot target what you can see (a feature not a bug).

[Viking]

Hello

I wanted to post my thoughts on the Demo, even though I usually dont post.

So here Goes!

First off I think the BF guys did a great job and cant wait for the release of the game itself!

I have always loved the CM's of old, so when I heard they were making a new one I was pumped!

Im alittle off with the mortar spotter and the mortar teams firing on a target. If my spotter can see an area and he is within shouting distance of the team they should be able to fire on an area even if no one can see the actual target!

Example: add 50 or drop 50?

Not sure but just does not seem accurate to me, but I will keep trying!

A funny thing happened in a upper floor building also!

I was the Germans and attacked a large 2 story next to the command post, I sent my 7 man team into the building's second floor because there was 1 lonely GI armed with a whimpy M1 carbine looking out the windows with binaculars, my team enters the first floor and charges up the stairsbusting up to the second floor, they get there and bump around, looking a bit confused, they stop and start looking out windows, 2 of my guys even stop to look out the same window the GI was at, but no killing takes place, so im thinking what the hell! At last they notice the GI after about a minute and kill him, but it was funny to watch!

I think I read somwhere that there will be no SS troops in CM:BN and no snow with the editor! Now that sucks! BAD! Also just by looking at the manual, I assume no Fallschirmjagers! That also sucks! BAD!

I fell in love with CM because not only can you make historical battles but you could make any battle you wished to fight, but O well!

Overall looks to be a great game!

Thanks Battlefront

[siffo998]

I am a big fan of the Combat Mission series and played all the World War II ones continuously. I am currently trying out the demo, specifically the tutorial mission where you have to capture a crossroads. I am playing on the "novice" level and was surprised that I lost 2 Shermans within a time frame of 30 seconds to what looked like a PAK 50 AT gun. I read a comment from someone who thought that AT fire from both AT guns and tanks was way too accurate for WW II. This is a concern to me as a game that is intended to simulate tactical combat on a small scale should have as its number one priority, historical realism. Also still trying to figure out how to get my mortars to fire. I put two HQ units on the 2nd floor of the big building on the left and moved them forward figuring that they could spot from there. So far though, whenever I try to target with a mortar it says no line of sight.

As far as i remember the pak in the tutorial mission is a 75 mm one. the accuracy seems also pretty historical accurate. the battlefield in the tutorial mission isnt that big. i have found a very interesting llink reffering to the tiger I and also his accuracy at training and battlefield conditions at least for expirienced gunners (look under the accuracy section). it clearly indicates that the accuracy for distances up to 1000 m is almost 100 %. I do not think that this differs very much for a pak 75mm. so i think the situation you have experienced is pretty much historical accurate.

http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/tiger1.htm