They are all boomer shit but Graviteam is good boomer shit
>for some reason CM doesnt get much love here though
/vst/ is a zoomer central, and anons here can't handle pvp. CM is a boomer game, like [...] has said, and it's pvp-focused.
Imagine having to wait for others to play a videogame, also Graviteam doesn't need multiplayewr since the AI is competent, CM doesn't have any AI to speak of.
At this point we'll have better luck waiting for an AI to get good enough to create custom tailored video games than expect a competent dev studio to make a modernized Combat Mission-like game.
>Combat Mission >Psychic AI >Soldiers pull out of arty strike zones even before ranging shots land
Frick these buttholes.
I used mission editor to set up AT guns vs tanks and play the scenario vs AI multiple times from both sides. AI was consistently ’luckier’ no matter which side it was playing.
graviteam combat mission rivalvry doesnt make any sense at all and seems forced. Both are great games, for some reason CM doesnt get much love here though.
all of the threads about good games on /vst/ get derailed by complete autism. Meanwhile HoI4 threads and similiar trash keep thriving. Good job, morons.
M8 we tried to keep discussion about these games alive for months back in /wgg/, and even all the games combined and riding on the influx waves of new wargame RD players due to discounts couldn't keep the general alive after flight simulator players left. What makes you think discussion would thrive here and now? And for the record, a lot of the few posters left in the last months went away exactly because most of the posts were shitposts about how game/series-X couldn't be discussed anymore due to inane shit that didn't make them "fit". Kinda like how we now could have graviteam and combat mission both to discuss but graviteam shitposters are too busy baiting and CM players don't post at all to avoid the shitpost.
Graviteam gets a few more threads going now and then, but notice how no one actually discusses any gameplay, they post some recicled screenshots and gloat about how "hard" the game is, hiding behind this perceived difficulty to avoid saying anything about the game itself, because in truth they have no idea how to play, otherwise they wouldn't call it hard. The guy posting AAR was a noob and he beat several operations, and was pretty much the only one who posted gameplay.
>they post some recicled screenshots and gloat about how "hard" the game is, hiding behind this perceived difficulty to avoid saying anything about the game itself, because in truth they have no idea how to play, otherwise they wouldn't call it hard
Only difficult is moronic UI and lack of instuments for control, with moronic delay between orders mechanics.
If player have 200 shells and want them be fired only on specific target, it should be possile to do that manually or by make order.
But no, devs too moronic, so player should
1. Mark target.
2. Allow fire.
3. Watch continuously until target hitted.
4. Disallow fire.
For every fricking target and every fricking separate groups of squads. With moronic delay between orders.
Also, AI so moronic so he just walk from point to point, and you can just hide inf in nearest brushes and recap when AI go away.
Also, random positions for arty and vehicles make them easy targets for hunting groups.
Hell, SD with that moronic "front line" mechanics a lot harder vs AI since we should hold that line instead of circling around when casually shooting stragglers.
And yeah, the smartest move to assault with infantry is to send it through the open fields, steering as far away from the tree lines as humanly possible.
Yeah.
Asi said, all what AI can do is walk from point to point.
And in some cases AI keep his blob in one place enough long for be hitted by 152mm arty.
Works fine with 200% scaling. Looks pixelated, but I don't mind.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Did I miss a scaling option or is that the built in Windows scaling? I had to disable the Windows one on the compatibility menu because it wouldn't open otherwise.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>the built in Windows scaling
this
The game itself doesn't support 4K natively, but it's built with Windows controls.
1 year ago
Anonymous
I'll have to try to reinstall and frick around with the compatibility settings again I guess.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Ok so scaling works for me now but god damn the UI/UX is baffling.
asiaticclick=spamming clicks, singleplayer or multiplayer doesn't matter
With be forced make 4 fricking actions for every fricking heavy wep team which i see?
Instead of single click in "gooclick" games, or single script in "strategy" games?
Wow, i think graviteams shillers break another record of stupidity.
>Instead of single click in "gooclick" games
In Graviteam you set one order and that's it, in asiaticclick games you click one three hundred times a minute to make small adjustements
1 year ago
Anonymous
Read posts properly you moronic shiller.
1 year ago
Anonymous
All i'm reading is someone that is mad that he can't "game" the game like it happens in most other strategy games
>In Graviteam you set one order and that's it
Isn't it amusing how gravishills clearly never even played the fricking game?
Another one
1 year ago
Anonymous
So you should stop be fricked in eyes and meet your oculist asap.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>In Graviteam you set one order and that's it
Isn't it amusing how gravishills clearly never even played the fricking game?
1 year ago
Anonymous
Yeah, it's second most funny thing.
First is >AI just don't have time to action smart, set time limit to 6000 hours and you won't beat him!
1 year ago
Anonymous
So you should stop be fricked in eyes and meet your oculist asap.
Shut up ESLs, go back to Total War of whatever the frick you think has "good AI" or "proper troop movement", its certainly not Combat Mission by the way
1 year ago
Anonymous
Frick yourselfs, tard. Mb it relieve your helpless rage.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You sound like you are the one raging, i'm not the one sperging out about the game.
Or.
Oh.
Look like i get him. > he can't "game" the game like it happens in most other strategy games
Gravitard mean player shouldn't kill most dangerous target first or use any other sensible moves.
Gravitard mean player should send all of his troops towards enemy, so he can watch this massacre and huge losses from both sides w/o using direct control, so he have his hands free for jerking off.
With be forced make 4 fricking actions for every fricking heavy wep team which i see?
Instead of single click in "gooclick" games, or single script in "strategy" games?
Wow, i think graviteams shillers break another record of stupidity.
>Hail to the king. Can it be topped?
In terms of real time tactical battles nothing can come close, the fact that the tactical battles are snapshots of a much wider campaign is what really sets it apart. That and the detail, realism, depth of simulation and historical accuracy, all unmatched by anything else out there.
Or.
Oh.
Look like i get him. > he can't "game" the game like it happens in most other strategy games
Gravitard mean player shouldn't kill most dangerous target first or use any other sensible moves.
Gravitard mean player should send all of his troops towards enemy, so he can watch this massacre and huge losses from both sides w/o using direct control, so he have his hands free for jerking off.
The "one order and off you go" thing is true at times. At the same time with tanks and field guns, trenches and generally anything that requires a positional advantage, one inch of height can make all the difference and often the game requires a lot of babysitting if you dont want your troops to die needlessly.
This problem annoys me. Happens in Armored Brigade and Wargame, too. Units have no autonomy or self preservation so they just sit there getting reamed instead of adjusting their position. It's probably a hard problem but god damn does it annoy me, as a kid I thought unit AI in strategy games would be more advanced by now.
they have a positional AI in graviteam, but its just inferior and often nonsensical in comparison to the player micromanaging each tank/field gun. This is even worse in the tunisia spin-off.
GT is kino af, it has its flaws but when you consider such a small indie studio is behind it then it's hard not to be impressed by the scale of what the achieve.
Massive battles raging in 3D, with every bullet and projectile fully simulated, affected by things like wind and temperature, with every armour plate on tanks behaving as it should, and even shells after penetration bouncing around inside is simulated, with fragmentation taken into account and damage to internal mechanisms and crew factored in. Even the soldiers anatomy is basically modeled, with certain areas more vulnerable to blood loss, organ damage or simple mobility penalties in the case of a shrapnel wound to the leg.
But even if you ignore all of that, there's the atmosphere the game generates, it really is a special piece of software and historical military gaming is far better for its existence.
Tried today for the first time Armored brigade. And it turned out to be quite a fun game. The campaign generator can make some kino fights.
GT, Flashpoint, Shadow Empire are such cool games. Anons what else can i find? Help me
Yeah I'm really looking forward to the Armored Brigade sequel, sounds like there's some good improvements in the works.
You could try Combat Mission which seems to be in the same vein of janky strategy and tactics games but I hear it's mostly multiplayer focused which is why I haven't played it.
I also want to get around to the Close Combat games but I'm not really sure where to start. Some people recommend the remasters and others say to avoid them which is confusing.
You could have a look at Gary Grigsby's War in the East which I've read good things about, but it was a bit too much for me to digest.
Yeah I'm really looking forward to the Armored Brigade sequel, sounds like there's some good improvements in the works.
You could try Combat Mission which seems to be in the same vein of janky strategy and tactics games but I hear it's mostly multiplayer focused which is why I haven't played it.
I also want to get around to the Close Combat games but I'm not really sure where to start. Some people recommend the remasters and others say to avoid them which is confusing.
You could have a look at Gary Grigsby's War in the East which I've read good things about, but it was a bit too much for me to digest.
Combat Mission isn't just a multiplayer game, and in fact you are more likely to find singleplayer scenarios and campaigns to use more than other people willing to go through WEGO emails. You can torrent Normandy, Shock Force 2, and Black Sea on any torrenting site, grab one of the "All-in-One" mods from the combat mission forums, and now you've got a frickton of custom campaigns and scenarios to play with. I would not start with Black Sea though, because the lethality is insane and minor mistakes will get your whole unit killed. Also, I wouldn't even try Cold War because the map sizes are so fricking large and the game lags like hell. The other games aren't well optimized either, but CW is a special brand of hell and should just be avoided tbh.
Huh, ok maybe I'll give it a pirate. Whenever I've asked about it on this board I've just been told not to bother unless it's multiplayer.
I suggest Combat Mission as well, there's so many games in different time periods that you're bound to find something you like, and you can dip into late war stuff if you want WW2, which GT will sadly forever lack. Plus it's basically the best at handling small scale firefights, even a platoon scale mission can get quite endearing.
[...]
Close Combat games haven't been lucky by what I gathered, get the classic 3 (don't know if the renamed remaster was good) and either 4 or 5 if you want a small risk-style map, but it can soon get quite repetitive because of stuff like having to fight the same identical battle over and over if you take control of a border region the enemy spawns from.
[...]
Can you say anything else about operation victory? Was interested in it but I fear it might just result in quite dull gameplay like the old russia/iran conflict in operation star. Is the terrain more interesing? Is there more infantry?
>Close Combat
I'm thinkin I'll start with A Bridge Too Far just because I had a demo of it from a magazine back in the day, so it has an odd sort of nostalgia for me. A game I played but didn't really get to fully experience.
I suggest Combat Mission as well, there's so many games in different time periods that you're bound to find something you like, and you can dip into late war stuff if you want WW2, which GT will sadly forever lack. Plus it's basically the best at handling small scale firefights, even a platoon scale mission can get quite endearing.
Yeah I'm really looking forward to the Armored Brigade sequel, sounds like there's some good improvements in the works.
You could try Combat Mission which seems to be in the same vein of janky strategy and tactics games but I hear it's mostly multiplayer focused which is why I haven't played it.
I also want to get around to the Close Combat games but I'm not really sure where to start. Some people recommend the remasters and others say to avoid them which is confusing.
You could have a look at Gary Grigsby's War in the East which I've read good things about, but it was a bit too much for me to digest.
Close Combat games haven't been lucky by what I gathered, get the classic 3 (don't know if the renamed remaster was good) and either 4 or 5 if you want a small risk-style map, but it can soon get quite repetitive because of stuff like having to fight the same identical battle over and over if you take control of a border region the enemy spawns from.
They all offer different things, so it's very much down to what interests you most.
Personally I'd recommend >Furtive spring - a collection of small but connected operations that results in a nice little narrative experience with a variety of tactical challenges and a nice mix of units. >Raid - A classic based on Peipers raid to break through to resupply and evacuate mebers of the 320 ID. >Operation Victory - Iran Iraq war, modern and dynamic with some great set piece tank battles.
But those are entirely based on my personal preferences and interests. Have a read through the reviews and check out steam forums for more detailed info.
Can you say anything else about operation victory? Was interested in it but I fear it might just result in quite dull gameplay like the old russia/iran conflict in operation star. Is the terrain more interesing? Is there more infantry?
[...]
Combat Mission isn't just a multiplayer game, and in fact you are more likely to find singleplayer scenarios and campaigns to use more than other people willing to go through WEGO emails. You can torrent Normandy, Shock Force 2, and Black Sea on any torrenting site, grab one of the "All-in-One" mods from the combat mission forums, and now you've got a frickton of custom campaigns and scenarios to play with. I would not start with Black Sea though, because the lethality is insane and minor mistakes will get your whole unit killed. Also, I wouldn't even try Cold War because the map sizes are so fricking large and the game lags like hell. The other games aren't well optimized either, but CW is a special brand of hell and should just be avoided tbh.
Thanks, I'll definitely check it out. And also I would love to try the mod you are talking about, but sadly I do not understand what kind of mod it is and what game it needs, for example, black sea, etc. plz explain
Basic graphics are kinda lacking in the base games so a lot of users make new skins and visual effects, some games end up looking pretty good. I wouldn't know where to find the new ones since I only ever modded shock force 1.
For example this video provides the link to the black sea all in one mod: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aKa7-E85N7o&feature=youtu.be
But the majority of mods are found on "Afewgoodmen.com", and most mods will include instructions on how to install them. It's very easy because every game uses the exact same directory path
They all offer different things, so it's very much down to what interests you most.
Personally I'd recommend >Furtive spring - a collection of small but connected operations that results in a nice little narrative experience with a variety of tactical challenges and a nice mix of units. >Raid - A classic based on Peipers raid to break through to resupply and evacuate mebers of the 320 ID. >Operation Victory - Iran Iraq war, modern and dynamic with some great set piece tank battles.
But those are entirely based on my personal preferences and interests. Have a read through the reviews and check out steam forums for more detailed info.
Is it actually shooting at you still? Like IRL whoever is seeing/shooting it are always looking for some change in behavior to tell that its knocked out. Hatches opening, a fire, visible dead people/disappearance of people (in open tops), turrets/the vehicle/weapon fire suddenly stopping and so on.
I suggest Combat Mission as well, there's so many games in different time periods that you're bound to find something you like, and you can dip into late war stuff if you want WW2, which GT will sadly forever lack. Plus it's basically the best at handling small scale firefights, even a platoon scale mission can get quite endearing.
[...]
Close Combat games haven't been lucky by what I gathered, get the classic 3 (don't know if the renamed remaster was good) and either 4 or 5 if you want a small risk-style map, but it can soon get quite repetitive because of stuff like having to fight the same identical battle over and over if you take control of a border region the enemy spawns from.
[...]
Can you say anything else about operation victory? Was interested in it but I fear it might just result in quite dull gameplay like the old russia/iran conflict in operation star. Is the terrain more interesing? Is there more infantry?
There is infantry on both sides, but the terrain is poorly suited to them with mostly fallow farm fields. There are still fields with tall grass to crawl through, and a few orchids as well as plenty of canals and a couple of villages and hilly areas, but its very hard to move around.
>Is it actually shooting at you still?
In that case it was driving around like a moron while getting shot up by my entire army, shot around a little, then drove around again. It eventually died, but after taking over 400 shots and a comitted ATR team on its ass. That's just entirely unrealistic. Also with 40 man being around it, you should be able to kill the crew "manually". That was a bit of a disappointment, hearing all the hype about the realism of this game.
Finished the first campaign with a minor win, don't get all mechanics yet, not at all, but its good fun. Feels like a proper WW2 Total War. What annoys me is the combat AI of my own units though. When i have my weapon teams on a hill, it shouldnt take 5 minutes for the mg team to reposition itself to shoot back at the enemies. And they often do not follow manual orders either. THere are some benefits to this indirect order thing, but particularly weapon teams like Paks, ATR's or heavy MG's i wish would just hurry the frick up and take their positions quicker when i haven't ordered them to stay put.
Are they taking long to move around because you deploy them far away on their own? Those section leader units you have around are meant for that, better fire control and quicker orders in general, have them nearby so they can give orders by voice.
You know what, Gravitards? You guys are alright. I know Combat Mission players and Graviteam players have had differences in the past but I much prefer you guys over say, Starcraft players or God forbid, CoH players.
So I'm sorry for calling it an Attack Move simulator and you're right, you do have to micromanage a lot in CM.
At the end of the day we all love realistic tactical battle sims, both games have strengths and weaknesses and both are the best at what they do. Just ignore the toxic excessively partisan trolls.
For me, it's the old CM games.
You can get them from GoG for like 5 bucks each, and you have the entire Western Front/Mediterranean/Eastern Front at your disposal, with countless custom scenarios and campaigns to play around with.
nu-CM doesn't even have 1941-1943 Eastern Front and North Africa campaigns which is lame as frick because I love middle era WW2 shit the most
What a kino battle, my trench positions are slowly eaten up by the soviets but they are eating dirt for it. Only gripe is that for whatever reason my mortars refused to fire until enemies were right in their face
Depends on what AA you have available, but most of the time you're better off staying put.
What a kino battle, my trench positions are slowly eaten up by the soviets but they are eating dirt for it. Only gripe is that for whatever reason my mortars refused to fire until enemies were right in their face
You usually want to have direct los with mortars unless you have cables set up, which you should have when defending, be sure to keep mortars and officers on AI directed fire control so that linked troops will ask for fire support.
I put my mortars behind the woodline, with the squad lead 2 tiles ahead so that they can give out coordinates via voice com, but sadly in this case it didnt work. Maybe combat was just too intense, because otherwise mortars have been working fine
A minor assault on farmstead was easily repelled
My own airforce arrived and is giving the bolsheviks hell (it was only a short but lethal bombardment of the soviets)
They already offered a ceasefire so i think they took a lot of casualties but i'm on the simulation difficulty, so a battle goes on for 2 hours, which may actually allow me to do a counter attack.
Okay, I've only done a few battles as defender so far and I think it's been time limit every time. Does the time limit scale to how large the battle is?
its set in the option, normally 1 hour. The ceasefire offer appears on the right side of the screen if you opponent offers it, you have to accept it by clicking on it. Otherwise the battle only ends if you retreat yourself
maybe there would be more CM threads if battlefront wasn't still deluded enough to try to sell their 10-20 year old games at 60+ $$$ like they're premium AAA titles >still waiting for the ww2 releases on steam anyway
you sure about that?
boomer shit
Ah, so graviteam is zoomer shit. Makes sense actually.
They are all boomer shit but Graviteam is good boomer shit
Imagine having to wait for others to play a videogame, also Graviteam doesn't need multiplayewr since the AI is competent, CM doesn't have any AI to speak of.
not part of this moronic contest but graviteam would profit a lot from mp. Its campaign system would lend itself perfectly.
>Imagine having to wait for others to play a videogame
>the AI is competent
That's some high octane coping right here.
>The AI is competent
Lol lmao.
I should get into CM.
Put it on modern engine and we can actually talk.
Combat Mission is clunky and outdated as frick, but it's still the best of its kind no matter how hard nerds try to shit on it.
And that fact alone makes me sad.
At this point we'll have better luck waiting for an AI to get good enough to create custom tailored video games than expect a competent dev studio to make a modernized Combat Mission-like game.
>Combat Mission
>Psychic AI
>Soldiers pull out of arty strike zones even before ranging shots land
Frick these buttholes.
I used mission editor to set up AT guns vs tanks and play the scenario vs AI multiple times from both sides. AI was consistently ’luckier’ no matter which side it was playing.
Did you pray to RNGesus before testing?
graviteam combat mission rivalvry doesnt make any sense at all and seems forced. Both are great games, for some reason CM doesnt get much love here though.
>for some reason CM doesnt get much love here though
/vst/ is a zoomer central, and anons here can't handle pvp. CM is a boomer game, like
has said, and it's pvp-focused.
all of the threads about good games on /vst/ get derailed by complete autism. Meanwhile HoI4 threads and similiar trash keep thriving. Good job, morons.
It wouldn't get derailed if OP actually started a discussion instead of posting bait.
M8 we tried to keep discussion about these games alive for months back in /wgg/, and even all the games combined and riding on the influx waves of new wargame RD players due to discounts couldn't keep the general alive after flight simulator players left. What makes you think discussion would thrive here and now? And for the record, a lot of the few posters left in the last months went away exactly because most of the posts were shitposts about how game/series-X couldn't be discussed anymore due to inane shit that didn't make them "fit". Kinda like how we now could have graviteam and combat mission both to discuss but graviteam shitposters are too busy baiting and CM players don't post at all to avoid the shitpost.
Graviteam gets a few more threads going now and then, but notice how no one actually discusses any gameplay, they post some recicled screenshots and gloat about how "hard" the game is, hiding behind this perceived difficulty to avoid saying anything about the game itself, because in truth they have no idea how to play, otherwise they wouldn't call it hard. The guy posting AAR was a noob and he beat several operations, and was pretty much the only one who posted gameplay.
>they post some recicled screenshots and gloat about how "hard" the game is, hiding behind this perceived difficulty to avoid saying anything about the game itself, because in truth they have no idea how to play, otherwise they wouldn't call it hard
Only difficult is moronic UI and lack of instuments for control, with moronic delay between orders mechanics.
If player have 200 shells and want them be fired only on specific target, it should be possile to do that manually or by make order.
But no, devs too moronic, so player should
1. Mark target.
2. Allow fire.
3. Watch continuously until target hitted.
4. Disallow fire.
For every fricking target and every fricking separate groups of squads. With moronic delay between orders.
Also, AI so moronic so he just walk from point to point, and you can just hide inf in nearest brushes and recap when AI go away.
Also, random positions for arty and vehicles make them easy targets for hunting groups.
Hell, SD with that moronic "front line" mechanics a lot harder vs AI since we should hold that line instead of circling around when casually shooting stragglers.
This is why Command Ops 2 is a superior wargame. The only thing Graviteam truly has going for it is graphics.
And yeah, the smartest move to assault with infantry is to send it through the open fields, steering as far away from the tree lines as humanly possible.
Yeah.
Asi said, all what AI can do is walk from point to point.
And in some cases AI keep his blob in one place enough long for be hitted by 152mm arty.
>Command Ops 2
Shame about the UI. Idk if it's fine on 1080p monitors but above that it's absolutely miniscule.
Works fine with 200% scaling. Looks pixelated, but I don't mind.
Did I miss a scaling option or is that the built in Windows scaling? I had to disable the Windows one on the compatibility menu because it wouldn't open otherwise.
>the built in Windows scaling
this
The game itself doesn't support 4K natively, but it's built with Windows controls.
I'll have to try to reinstall and frick around with the compatibility settings again I guess.
Ok so scaling works for me now but god damn the UI/UX is baffling.
>with moronic delay between orders mechanics.
Not enough asiaticclick for you?
>asiaticclick
>in a singleplayer game with pause
Frick off back to your containment thread, moron.
asiaticclick=spamming clicks, singleplayer or multiplayer doesn't matter
>Instead of single click in "gooclick" games
In Graviteam you set one order and that's it, in asiaticclick games you click one three hundred times a minute to make small adjustements
Read posts properly you moronic shiller.
All i'm reading is someone that is mad that he can't "game" the game like it happens in most other strategy games
Another one
So you should stop be fricked in eyes and meet your oculist asap.
>In Graviteam you set one order and that's it
Isn't it amusing how gravishills clearly never even played the fricking game?
Yeah, it's second most funny thing.
First is
>AI just don't have time to action smart, set time limit to 6000 hours and you won't beat him!
Shut up ESLs, go back to Total War of whatever the frick you think has "good AI" or "proper troop movement", its certainly not Combat Mission by the way
Frick yourselfs, tard. Mb it relieve your helpless rage.
You sound like you are the one raging, i'm not the one sperging out about the game.
Not enough asiaticclick for you?
With be forced make 4 fricking actions for every fricking heavy wep team which i see?
Instead of single click in "gooclick" games, or single script in "strategy" games?
Wow, i think graviteams shillers break another record of stupidity.
Your post wouldn't sound crazy and unhinged if it wasn't the CM poster replying first and derailing the thread, schizo
>shit OP
>shit thread
Who would have thought?
Paradox threads stay alive because their autists only discuss the games to b***h about paradox.
>Hail to the king. Can it be topped?
In terms of real time tactical battles nothing can come close, the fact that the tactical battles are snapshots of a much wider campaign is what really sets it apart. That and the detail, realism, depth of simulation and historical accuracy, all unmatched by anything else out there.
interesting
Or.
Oh.
Look like i get him.
> he can't "game" the game like it happens in most other strategy games
Gravitard mean player shouldn't kill most dangerous target first or use any other sensible moves.
Gravitard mean player should send all of his troops towards enemy, so he can watch this massacre and huge losses from both sides w/o using direct control, so he have his hands free for jerking off.
The "one order and off you go" thing is true at times. At the same time with tanks and field guns, trenches and generally anything that requires a positional advantage, one inch of height can make all the difference and often the game requires a lot of babysitting if you dont want your troops to die needlessly.
This problem annoys me. Happens in Armored Brigade and Wargame, too. Units have no autonomy or self preservation so they just sit there getting reamed instead of adjusting their position. It's probably a hard problem but god damn does it annoy me, as a kid I thought unit AI in strategy games would be more advanced by now.
they have a positional AI in graviteam, but its just inferior and often nonsensical in comparison to the player micromanaging each tank/field gun. This is even worse in the tunisia spin-off.
GT is kino af, it has its flaws but when you consider such a small indie studio is behind it then it's hard not to be impressed by the scale of what the achieve.
Massive battles raging in 3D, with every bullet and projectile fully simulated, affected by things like wind and temperature, with every armour plate on tanks behaving as it should, and even shells after penetration bouncing around inside is simulated, with fragmentation taken into account and damage to internal mechanisms and crew factored in. Even the soldiers anatomy is basically modeled, with certain areas more vulnerable to blood loss, organ damage or simple mobility penalties in the case of a shrapnel wound to the leg.
But even if you ignore all of that, there's the atmosphere the game generates, it really is a special piece of software and historical military gaming is far better for its existence.
Tried today for the first time Armored brigade. And it turned out to be quite a fun game. The campaign generator can make some kino fights.
GT, Flashpoint, Shadow Empire are such cool games. Anons what else can i find? Help me
Yeah I'm really looking forward to the Armored Brigade sequel, sounds like there's some good improvements in the works.
You could try Combat Mission which seems to be in the same vein of janky strategy and tactics games but I hear it's mostly multiplayer focused which is why I haven't played it.
I also want to get around to the Close Combat games but I'm not really sure where to start. Some people recommend the remasters and others say to avoid them which is confusing.
You could have a look at Gary Grigsby's War in the East which I've read good things about, but it was a bit too much for me to digest.
Play Command Ops 2
Combat Mission isn't just a multiplayer game, and in fact you are more likely to find singleplayer scenarios and campaigns to use more than other people willing to go through WEGO emails. You can torrent Normandy, Shock Force 2, and Black Sea on any torrenting site, grab one of the "All-in-One" mods from the combat mission forums, and now you've got a frickton of custom campaigns and scenarios to play with. I would not start with Black Sea though, because the lethality is insane and minor mistakes will get your whole unit killed. Also, I wouldn't even try Cold War because the map sizes are so fricking large and the game lags like hell. The other games aren't well optimized either, but CW is a special brand of hell and should just be avoided tbh.
Huh, ok maybe I'll give it a pirate. Whenever I've asked about it on this board I've just been told not to bother unless it's multiplayer.
>Close Combat
I'm thinkin I'll start with A Bridge Too Far just because I had a demo of it from a magazine back in the day, so it has an odd sort of nostalgia for me. A game I played but didn't really get to fully experience.
I suggest Combat Mission as well, there's so many games in different time periods that you're bound to find something you like, and you can dip into late war stuff if you want WW2, which GT will sadly forever lack. Plus it's basically the best at handling small scale firefights, even a platoon scale mission can get quite endearing.
Close Combat games haven't been lucky by what I gathered, get the classic 3 (don't know if the renamed remaster was good) and either 4 or 5 if you want a small risk-style map, but it can soon get quite repetitive because of stuff like having to fight the same identical battle over and over if you take control of a border region the enemy spawns from.
Can you say anything else about operation victory? Was interested in it but I fear it might just result in quite dull gameplay like the old russia/iran conflict in operation star. Is the terrain more interesing? Is there more infantry?
Thanks, I'll definitely check it out. And also I would love to try the mod you are talking about, but sadly I do not understand what kind of mod it is and what game it needs, for example, black sea, etc. plz explain
Basic graphics are kinda lacking in the base games so a lot of users make new skins and visual effects, some games end up looking pretty good. I wouldn't know where to find the new ones since I only ever modded shock force 1.
For example this video provides the link to the black sea all in one mod: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aKa7-E85N7o&feature=youtu.be
But the majority of mods are found on "Afewgoodmen.com", and most mods will include instructions on how to install them. It's very easy because every game uses the exact same directory path
Here are all the modpacks
/folder/izmk6muctniv5/Combat_Mission
for mediafire
The games are on sale on Steam rn.
Planning on buying the game now that it's on sale, what's some good DLC to go along with it?
They all offer different things, so it's very much down to what interests you most.
Personally I'd recommend
>Furtive spring - a collection of small but connected operations that results in a nice little narrative experience with a variety of tactical challenges and a nice mix of units.
>Raid - A classic based on Peipers raid to break through to resupply and evacuate mebers of the 320 ID.
>Operation Victory - Iran Iraq war, modern and dynamic with some great set piece tank battles.
But those are entirely based on my personal preferences and interests. Have a read through the reviews and check out steam forums for more detailed info.
2autistic4me
Sale just at the right time for me. Let's see how this compares to Tank Warfare
Just bought 'Bird Grove', playing as Russians and first impressions are epic and kino.
Playing my first battle. Is this piece of shit bugged? Neither my MG, ATR nor Grenades seem to even scratch it.
Is it actually shooting at you still? Like IRL whoever is seeing/shooting it are always looking for some change in behavior to tell that its knocked out. Hatches opening, a fire, visible dead people/disappearance of people (in open tops), turrets/the vehicle/weapon fire suddenly stopping and so on.
There is infantry on both sides, but the terrain is poorly suited to them with mostly fallow farm fields. There are still fields with tall grass to crawl through, and a few orchids as well as plenty of canals and a couple of villages and hilly areas, but its very hard to move around.
>Is it actually shooting at you still?
In that case it was driving around like a moron while getting shot up by my entire army, shot around a little, then drove around again. It eventually died, but after taking over 400 shots and a comitted ATR team on its ass. That's just entirely unrealistic. Also with 40 man being around it, you should be able to kill the crew "manually". That was a bit of a disappointment, hearing all the hype about the realism of this game.
Finished the first campaign with a minor win, don't get all mechanics yet, not at all, but its good fun. Feels like a proper WW2 Total War. What annoys me is the combat AI of my own units though. When i have my weapon teams on a hill, it shouldnt take 5 minutes for the mg team to reposition itself to shoot back at the enemies. And they often do not follow manual orders either. THere are some benefits to this indirect order thing, but particularly weapon teams like Paks, ATR's or heavy MG's i wish would just hurry the frick up and take their positions quicker when i haven't ordered them to stay put.
Are they taking long to move around because you deploy them far away on their own? Those section leader units you have around are meant for that, better fire control and quicker orders in general, have them nearby so they can give orders by voice.
You know what, Gravitards? You guys are alright. I know Combat Mission players and Graviteam players have had differences in the past but I much prefer you guys over say, Starcraft players or God forbid, CoH players.
So I'm sorry for calling it an Attack Move simulator and you're right, you do have to micromanage a lot in CM.
At the end of the day we all love realistic tactical battle sims, both games have strengths and weaknesses and both are the best at what they do. Just ignore the toxic excessively partisan trolls.
Nobody cares about your console wars, Black person. Go back to your containment thread.
For me, it's the old CM games.
You can get them from GoG for like 5 bucks each, and you have the entire Western Front/Mediterranean/Eastern Front at your disposal, with countless custom scenarios and campaigns to play around with.
nu-CM doesn't even have 1941-1943 Eastern Front and North Africa campaigns which is lame as frick because I love middle era WW2 shit the most
Started the second campaign of the base game. First battle, have to defend, and these frickers show up. Fricking hell.
Is it better to let my dudes shoot back or to try to stay hidden?
What a kino battle, my trench positions are slowly eaten up by the soviets but they are eating dirt for it. Only gripe is that for whatever reason my mortars refused to fire until enemies were right in their face
Depends on what AA you have available, but most of the time you're better off staying put.
You usually want to have direct los with mortars unless you have cables set up, which you should have when defending, be sure to keep mortars and officers on AI directed fire control so that linked troops will ask for fire support.
I put my mortars behind the woodline, with the squad lead 2 tiles ahead so that they can give out coordinates via voice com, but sadly in this case it didnt work. Maybe combat was just too intense, because otherwise mortars have been working fine
A minor assault on farmstead was easily repelled
My own airforce arrived and is giving the bolsheviks hell (it was only a short but lethal bombardment of the soviets)
They already offered a ceasefire so i think they took a lot of casualties but i'm on the simulation difficulty, so a battle goes on for 2 hours, which may actually allow me to do a counter attack.
Very new to the game, just started playing after picking up a few of the campaigns on the sale.
What determines when a battle is over?
time limit, an offer of ceasefire or if one side chooses to retreat
Okay, I've only done a few battles as defender so far and I think it's been time limit every time. Does the time limit scale to how large the battle is?
its set in the option, normally 1 hour. The ceasefire offer appears on the right side of the screen if you opponent offers it, you have to accept it by clicking on it. Otherwise the battle only ends if you retreat yourself
maybe there would be more CM threads if battlefront wasn't still deluded enough to try to sell their 10-20 year old games at 60+ $$$ like they're premium AAA titles
>still waiting for the ww2 releases on steam anyway
Anyone got the pirate links to the CM games? With updated missions and everything?
Because Battlefront is never going to change this. Might as well introduce more people to the franchise like that