Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> The Mess

#1: Close Combat in 3D Author: mooxe,

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:14 am
—
I think it can be done, and work out great. Heres some screenshots of other MechCommander (1998, 3D'ish) and Mech Commander 2 (2006, 3D). Try and imagine you are looking at Close Combat.

Last edited by mooxe on Sat Nov 10, 2012 9:03 pm; edited 3 times in total

mc2d.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

59.48 KB

Viewed:

634 Time(s)

mc2c.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

210.02 KB

Viewed:

530 Time(s)

mc2b.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

47.09 KB

Viewed:

518 Time(s)

mc2a.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

369.26 KB

Viewed:

505 Time(s)

mc2.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

40.33 KB

Viewed:

486 Time(s)

#2: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 12:38 pm
—
That looks pretty good.

Or ... maybe it will look more like Rome Total War. The greatest war game every devised. 1 game (2 expansion sets). Apx 30 bucks in 2008.

If it wasn't for this game, I would have done a lot more to Modern Tactics.

The screenies are from my Alexander Magnus Mundus mod, which extracts Persia, India, and Macedon from the Alexander expansion, and integrates them into the Magnus Mundus world, where all the standard RTW barbarian factions await.

#3: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:12 am
—
Here is a better pic of what I am thinking.

Close combat needs to move away from squad level, and goose up the number of participants in a battle.

Check out the pic, below, there are more than 7,000 soldiers in this battle. You can just see all the Macedonians, but you cant see all of the Persians.

Imagine this size of a battlefield for 3DCC. The incoming air strikes, artillery barrages, could really be awesome, if done correctly. With a wide screen prespective, you could direct and observe a tank battle in the valley, just as easily.

Its amazing, I have a very old system board (2001 vintage), but RTW (actually the ALX exe) runs these huge units no problem. Its a testament to the skill of the programmers at Creative Assembly.

#4: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: southern_land,

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:27 am
—
TW medieval2 was better esp with the stainless steel 6.0 mod

#5: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 6:02 pm
—
Perhaps,

I have the gold version of that game also. It cost 20 bucks as well. The graphics are better, but my system chops some when the soldier count gets too high.

But me thinks, it takes Magnus Mundus to get those outrageous battelfields like the one above.

When you do find something you really really enjoy, it is no longer a money issue. Its hobby money anyway.

I have added hundreds of custom locations that I figured out from the campaign region map, and to that I have added a similiar number of preset army lists.

For the most part, I have just used the system, as mods past transporting units from Alexander to my own mod, or installing Magnus Mundus, only took a few hours.

For my interests, this game beats all others by light years.

#6: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: lamurt,

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:03 pm
—
3d generated objects still can't reach the image quality of a the sprites / maps of 2.5d

#7: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 7:56 pm
—

lamurt wrote (View Post):

3d generated objects still can't reach the image quality of a the sprites / maps of 2.5d

I agree, and the generated maps will suffer as well. That is what keeps us playing Close Combat.

But CC will never match the intensity or animations of the TW stuff. It isn't supposed to.

Also, modding TW games is sooooo much easier than CC, with all its tools and nausea that go with them. Having to cutdown maps for Modern Tactics was a real drag.

Here is my best mod, Persia Magnus Mundus, which changes no graphics. It just uses the Magnus Mundus map, to create a campaign with the same start date as the original game. It just assumes that both Darius and Alexander were killed at Guagamela, and a new Persian coalition arrises in what would have become the Seleucid Empire.

The Pontus faction was used for the Persians, and the game is just too much fun. I like it when I can make a mod, just by changing a few lines in a text file.

#8: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2012 10:54 pm
—
But apart from the 3d engine coming for CC. There is the new UI, that has been promised.

Sadly, no one involved in Close Combat development has every ranked the UI as a top priority, and in so doing, as time marches by, it becomes more dated. Never mind trying to mod the darn thing. What a total pain in the ass.

I really hope by the time the 3d game comes out, someone has decided to bring the UI into the present.

CA, in contrast, had these features worked out as early as 2002. It's great when you have a ton of programmers.

Screen pic is just showing non-native mode for widescreen monitors, which simply allows the desktop background (on the right) to remain in place.

Very simple (for back then), but nowdays CA completely utilizes widescreen graphics, not just for the 3d engine, but for the menus as well.

What will Close Combat do. I wonder?

#9: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 11:47 am
—
And while we are the subject of 3d graphics for CC ...

What about the campaign map. Is it possible for Slitherene to use a 3d campaign map.

I am not going to hold my breath. Something like that would take a redo of campaign thinking and a whole new way of going about things.

They (Slitherene), left us with the impression the 3d game would be out about a year after Panters in the Fog.

But, no one is going to hold the CC team to the fire on anything. I know I am not.

Besides, when CA decided to go 3d on the campaign map, it solved a lot of issues normally associated with region to region movement. Not to mention it is just more fun, as armies can be ambushed and even destroyed by unseen (hiding enemies).

The screen pic shows my campaign game for Alexander Magnus Mundus. I think I had to touch just 2 dds files, to fix up the in game faction symbols, since mine were different than the original Alexander expansion.

The rest was just modding text files. Very simple. I wish CC could do something like that with their strat maps.

#10: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: caruso, Location: Livorno

Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2012 2:11 pm
—
Hi all!! I don't know what to say, i mean, for a right impression i should have to try a 3dcc if it would comes out one day, but at least, at the moment, i don't think that would be such a big resault!!

cheers

#11: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Nacrox,

Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2012 1:15 am
—
Still, even with all those impressive engine improvements, rome total war has a very poor AI, and the tactical decisions that you can make are by far very limited compared to what you could do.

Even in multiplayer with mods like Europa Barbarorum it feels a little arcadey.

#12: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:38 pm
—
Yup,

You nailed it, the worst AI EVER Exclamation

This is what I use for Medieval stuff, since MTW2 lags on my sad old system. (Athelon 2000, Radeon 9600).

What is cool, is that you can modify even mods. Here I simply deleted about half a dozen vegitation and geography files and folders, and poof, I was back to the original environment provided by RTW. This allows me to have thousands of soldiers on the battlefield.

Note the inferior AI (English), mounted a heavy duty charge straight at moi (Normans). Laughing

... just too much fun.

Norman Invasion, plus Viking Invasion (both mods for RTW), sastisfy most of my dark ages and Medieval urges.

You just got to hope that CC 3d will not look too much like the pics mooxe posted above (no offense to mooxe). Idea

Last edited by Stwa on Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:08 am; edited 1 time in total

#13: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2012 11:57 pm
—
But most likely,

In CC 3d, we will get the top down view, (perhaps with panning), that we all know is vital for CC gaming. The 3d engine will solve LOS and gunfire issues. Plus it will cut down on all that disk space need for all those 2d maps. My CC mod folder is now over 13 GB. My RTW mod folder(s) come no where near that.

You just have to imagine NORMANDY INVASION. Perhaps each 100 man unit being a company or so. With 20 unit slots, maybe this could be 2 battalions. Idea

Of course, the troops would be spread out over a much larger space, and you just would not be able to monitor (or see) all the action simultaneously, but hey, big deal. Idea

When you consider that the RTW engine was mostly developed around 2002-2003, and subsequently improved with MTW2 around 2006, you gotta think back to what CC was up to at that time.

Anyway, maybe the best thing to do, is to beg the Lordz Studio to make a modern mod for the latest CA engine. Of course, they will never do that, because they would have to start over with all new 3d models.

#14: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Oct 04, 2012 9:47 am
—
Close Combat needs a new make over. Just looking at the PITF screenies on the home page (although very nice looking), reminds me that its still going to be the same ole game.

Perhaps Slitherene could approach CA, about using their 3d engine. Surely they could make some deal where they could license the mod that they finish.

Viking Invasion was made by the same modders (basically) that did Norman Invasion.

Hint: Use Single Player. Idea

... and massive amounts of soldiers. Idea

Tactics are pretty simp. When you see the enemy, just charge the entire army. The AI does the same. Laughing

#15: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: ScottP, Location: Illinois

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:00 am
—
Hi all! I'm Scott Parrino, the Public Relations Manager for Slitherine/Matrix Games. Great to see an active community for Close Combat! This is a series that has a special place in my heart ever since downloading the Bridge Too Far demo on my 14.4 modem, waiting hours to download that 200mb MONSTER of a file!

I'm sure you all know that PITF will be the last 2D CC that will be coming out. No fear that it will be short-changed though, it's getting a bit of polish done to it, with new 32-bit graphics, troops and weapons that can mount to vehicles during the tactical battles, and of course the much-wanted integrated multiplayer lobby. I am sure it'll bring some new life into the series and keep everyone more than happy while we work on the eventual 3D Close Combat.

What sort of features and implementations are you guys interested in seeing for the 3D version? I'm sure everyone will be happy to be able get a better view on the LOS and LOF issues for their troops, that's one thing I remember trying to get a grasp of when I first started playing.

#16: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:10 am
—
Hi Scott,

Nice of you to stop by and make inquiries.

My understanding of PITF, is new graphics (32 bit), new scales (vechicles, maps, etc.), and a new UI.

Of those features, the UI sounds the most appealing to me. I used to hope for a generic UI, that could be re-used by modders without having to change it, but I gave up on that, since it seems modders want to change it no matter what.

Clearly the 3d engine will make LOS and LOF much more precise, and I do think this will have a very positive effect on Close Combat gaming.

Apart from the "recommendations" I have been making in this thread, CC will benefit even if you merely provide the same top down view that you more or less get now with the 2D engine. Being able to pan down to ground level, allows you to see the spectacle in RTW games, but CC games probably won't provide the same level of excitement due to the nature of the combat alone.

If there is a map generator provided with the game (its a rumor me thinks), and credible nice looking maps can be produced and then used with the game you have purchased, I think you will have a great game on your hands.

It you allow 3d modellers to create and insert addon models into the game as well, (i.e. a easy to use or modify textual way to describe the created models to the game), then it might be possible that wannabe 3d modellers will start cranking out lots of cool stuff and uploading to sites like this one.

To what extent things might boom, is impossible to tell, but otherwise Slitherene would be making all the models, and offering them is subsequent releases, which might be the slowest way to get to everything.

I am not sure anyone can ressurect multiplayer, by any means or methods. But I am not in the business. Multiplayer means you must have time on your hands, and that usually means being a student or unemployed or both. But perhaps your marketing data says otherwise.

Multiplayer seems to work with games where you can dictate the intensity level, like first person shooters, where you control and infantryman or a tank. In those arenas, you can always find a place to hide, and go to the kitchen or take a smoke break, or whatever. You probably won't be missed even if you log out and then log back in.

But with CC there are just two players, and you might be invloved in 30-45 minute streteches that might not let you multitask (like taking a leak) while you play. And then if there is going to be scoring and ladders and stuff, if there are not just jillions of players, everyone will know how badly you suck at the game. That is mainly why I don't do multiplayer. Laughing

With this type of game multiplayer (ladders) just stifles creativity (IMHO), and for the longest time the host usually had specific advantages that just took forever to code out of the game.

Anyway, thanks again for the inquiries.

#17: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Dima,

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 7:53 pm
—
Stwa,

no need to develope something new as there was CC in 3d called GI Combat (E.Young (Routins om matrix) - CC creator) and WF Squad Assault (E.Young (Routins on matrix) - CC creator).

Didn't work well as there was no H2H GC.

#18: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 9:23 pm
—
Hi Dima,

So what your are saying is that the absense of multiplayer ruined it for many people.

I am not saying you are wrong, but if there is not enough for a single player to do with the game, I can easily see how your comments would be dead on.

Ageod's Birth of America was like that. The only way to have a memorable gaming experience was to play other humans.

Plus, I am surprised, no one wants to comment back to the Public Relations dood.

I am guessing, CA does not have the rights to even the RTW engine, maybe SEGA does. But just looking at the images, and the environmental possibilities, I for one can easily imagine tanks instead of chariots, artillery instead of seige engines, and light infantry instead of archers. Of course animations would all have to be different.

CA just wont do a modern game. To bad. But maybe Slitherene can work something out.

#19: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2012 10:29 pm
—
Here is the text of an old post from the Matrix site, that I posted sometime in 2005. It was meant for WITP, but it will work with most any MULTIPLAYER strategy game. You can use this to help calculate the actual duration of any sceneario or campaign.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scenario duration calculator

g = number of game turns as stated in the scenario editor for a given scenario.

t = turn-around time in minutes, or the average time it takes to play 1 complete turn (for all players) and takes into account all posssible delays, except sleep.

s = sleep time in minutes, or the average amount of time any player will sleep each calander day.

d = a calander day expressed as total minutes or normally 1440 minutes.

dm = duration of a game in minutes.

dd = duration of a game in days.

dy = duration of a game in years.

therefore:

dm = ((g * t) / (d - s)) * d

dd = dm / d ...

dy = dd / 365.25

example 1:

Bert and Ernie decide to play WitP scenario 15 by mail. The game lasts the maximum number of turns the scenario will allow.

Each turn took 30 minutes to complete on average. During the game Bert and Ernie sleep about 8 hours a day. How many days elapsed while Bert and Ernie were playing the game?

dm = ((1576 * 30) / (1440 - 480)) * 1440

dm = 70920

dd = 70920 / 1440

dd = 49.25

example 2:

Ralph and Fred decide to play WitP scenario 15 by mail. They agree to do 1 turn per day in the evening after work. Both Ralph and Fred sleep 6 hours a day on average. How many years elapsed while Ralph and Fred were playing the game?

dm = ((1576 * 1080) / (1440 - 360)) * 1440

dm = 2269440

dd = 2269440 / 1440

dd = 1576

dy = 1576 / 365.25

dy = 4.31

#20: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 2:47 am
—
WoW

I'm so impressed with your skills stwa

It's Remarkable.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

23.84 KB

Viewed:

403 Time(s)

#21: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:47 am
—
Thanks Exclamation

I dumbed them down for guys like you. Wink

#22: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 3:59 am
—
I would also like to mention modding with the 3d engine.

People are going to want to mod the 3d game, and usually that means skins at the very least.

CA has a great way of handling that, where you can unpack their graphics, but you cant re-pack them. I think that is a good idea.

What they let you do, is put your modified skin in a new location and then you can change an entry in a text file that indicates to the system that your skin is in a different folder.

I am not sure if CC does this now, because I have always been under the impression most graphics in CC has to be repacked using a variety of packing tools based on what graphic you are modifying.

The way CA does it, if you don't like your modified skin, you can simply change the text entry back to use the skin from CA. This method is good for testing as well.

Anyway, I think CC 3d would be well served with this type of method.

#23: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Dima,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:40 am
—
Stwa,

Quote:

So what your are saying is that the absense of multiplayer ruined it for many people.
I am not saying you are wrong, but if there is not enough for a single player to do with the game, I can easily see how your comments would be dead on.

actually I meant it didn't work well for me due to the lack of H2H GC - had to return to CC5.
Same problem for me with CM Normandy - better game than CC overall but the lack of H2H GC forcces me still playing CC.

#24: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:41 am
—
Again, allowing modders the ability to (at the very least) reskin models can increase the longevity of any game, and or correct any graphic in the released game that might not seem quite right to the community.

This was important when RTW was released and most of the community just did not agree with the Egyptian Faction as presented.

Anyway, modders were able to assign Seleucid models to Egypt and re-skin them to give the faction a more Ptolemaic look.

I was able to get a credible Egyptian faction simply by using existing game 3d models and modified textures. The whole mod just took just a few hours to implement.

#25: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 4:56 am
—
actually I meant it didn't work well for me due to the lack of H2H GC - had to return to CC5. Same problem for me with CM Normandy - better game than CC overall but the lack of H2H GC forcces me still playing CC. -Dima

OK, thanks for the clarification.

Apart from my own preferences regarding Single Player mode, I have always been aware that most CC gamers nowdays do enjoy the campaign game, and there are many lifers around here that have actually completed one.

And I would agree, it would be a mistake for any game to not furnish a H2H campaign game, when they have one for single player.

#26: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:22 am
—
If Slitherene does decide to just go with a squad base game. The good news will be that even with a 3d engine, even older systems will probably be able to handle the games, and in fact performance may actually be improved over the 2d versions.

As I have mentioned several times so far, my box is not exactly on the cutting edge, so if it can do RTW, I am guessing it can do CC 3d.

I believe mooxe started another thread commenting on fog effects for PITF, which of course is a 2d game. But weather effects will be perfect for 3d if you are able to pan down and observe their effect.

#27: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:46 am
—
Here are my key points so far. I don't really expect most of this stuff to happen, but I sure wish it would.

+Close combat needs to move away from squad level, and goose up the number of participants in a battle. (platoon or company size units)

+Perhaps each 100 man unit being a company or so. With 20 unit slots, maybe this could be 2 battalions (battalion or brigade sized battles)

+I really hope by the time the 3d game comes out, someone has decided to bring the UI into the present. (widescreen support for in-game and menus)

+With a wide screen prespective, you could direct and observe a tank battle in the valley, just as easily. (large battefields that assume widescreen monitors)

+I have the gold version of that game also. It cost 20 bucks as well. (reasonable prices, unlike alot of Matrix games so far)

+They (Slitherene), left us with the impression the 3d game would be out about a year after Panters in the Fog. (spend 2 years in development)

+What about the campaign map. Is it possible for Slitherene to use a 3d campaign map. (3d strat map with its own 3d models)

+Note the inferior AI (English), mounted a heavy duty charge straight at moi (Normans). (an AI that can defend and attack)

+I was back to the original environment provided by RTW. This allows me to have thousands of soldiers on the battlefield. (avoid FPS killing vegitation and geography)

+Perhaps Slitherene could approach CA, about using their 3d engine. (remember dating, the worse that can happen is they will say NO)

+And then if there is going to be scoring and ladders and stuff, if there are not just jillions of players, everyone will know how badly you suck at the game. (don't alienate users by design and provide a game where anyone can succeed)

+Then it might be possible that wannabe 3d modellers will start cranking out lots of cool stuff and uploading to sites like this one. (allow 3rd party models and textures an easy pathway into the game)

+If there is a map generator provided with the game, its a rumor me thinks. (Provide a map generator, but better yet a custom BATTLE generator ala RTW)

+And I would agree, it would be a mistake for any game to not furnish a H2H campaign game, when they have one for single player. (not really, so don't supply a multiplayer campaign game that even the lifers can't finish)

#28: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2012 1:18 pm
—
Hi,

cool that you come here along to see what the fans are waiting.
Why do you say "eventual" 3D close combat? I believed your team was already busy to work on the next gen close combat with the unitiy engine? What I want for the next gen is that the game keep the same readability of the battle and the facility to play as the previous versions but with all the improvements that the 3D allows. I have heard that the stratmap dissapears but I hope that the strategic part introduced in close combat 5 will remain. I hope too that you will make the game moddable with the release of tools (map tools by sample with the possibility to import our own models).
Thanks to keep the cc series alive!

ScottP wrote (View Post):

Hi all! I'm Scott Parrino, the Public Relations Manager for Slitherine/Matrix Games. Great to see an active community for Close Combat! This is a series that has a special place in my heart ever since downloading the Bridge Too Far demo on my 14.4 modem, waiting hours to download that 200mb MONSTER of a file!

I'm sure you all know that PITF will be the last 2D CC that will be coming out. No fear that it will be short-changed though, it's getting a bit of polish done to it, with new 32-bit graphics, troops and weapons that can mount to vehicles during the tactical battles, and of course the much-wanted integrated multiplayer lobby. I am sure it'll bring some new life into the series and keep everyone more than happy while we work on the eventual 3D Close Combat.

What sort of features and implementations are you guys interested in seeing for the 3D version? I'm sure everyone will be happy to be able get a better view on the LOS and LOF issues for their troops, that's one thing I remember trying to get a grasp of when I first started playing.

#29: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 11:37 am
—
I'd like to see the exact same game but in 3D Including but not limited to..........

Strategic Map
Great Graphics
Great Animation
Soldiers can mount Vehicles
AT_Guns can be towed
Built in Lobby to play online but not limited to that
A 2 on 2 online option
A GC like what MMCCIII has to offer
Weather effects including Snow and the animation of falling Snow
A camera angle of my own choosing
Vehicles that have sounds and leave Track marks on the ground,No More hovering Vehicles please
A sound file that includes soldiers whispering if there is a Night Battle option
A fully editable game,NO HARD CODDED files or colors,let me be able to change the layout of the game.
Back ground graphics that are dependent upon what side you play as.A simple example being Grey background for playing as Axis,Olive Drab for Axis Pictures would be better but not necessary
Or if your really nice allow the back ground music to do the same.

And yes a Map Making program needs to be included,but not one that's so complicated like say Co. of Hero's.

I'm also curious about what scale is going to be used,while I like Large pretty detailed graphics they hinder game play by limiting the amount of area that can be seen while playing thus leaving me to have to scroll way to much to be totally enjoyable.

Scale can also represent a problem for people like me who will probably want to edit the game but lacks the skill,time,"Software" to do so.
I'm going with the theory I will have to get graphics from other games to get the Tanks/Vehicles for any project I choose outside whatever theme the game ends up being.

And last but definitely not least "GREAT LONG LASTING CUSTOMER SUPPORT"
While you can't control the length of time a Co. stays in business at least make the game stable and fully editable.
As you have seen with those of us who are die hard about a game,you can always come back and do re-releases of a great game.
Cant say that about a crappy game.

#30: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:26 pm
—
Good list Michael....

#31: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2012 11:30 pm
—
Okaaay, moving right along.

I would like to make some additional points regarding modding.

If you followed the thread, I put up some pics of RTW mods for Viking Invasion and Norman Invasion. These are some of the more expert mods available for RTW. They were made by REAL modders, who know what they are doing, and they can mod just about any aspect of the game.

Considering the vast effort required to do mods of this nature, it is generally considered bad form to critisize them. But to that end, I would mention that in most games, I find the original graphics to be the best going, even in cases were modders employed higher resolution graphics.

Additionally as these game engines evlove, they start reaching graphics levels that would be hard to improve upon. Certainly just applying ever higher resolutions just doesn't register as a noticeable improvement.

In my own case, I generally always try to use existing models, and existing textures in a game mod. Third party 3d models are notorious FPS rippers as new modellers learn the skill, and textures sometimes 4 times the resolution of the original graphics do not always show that much detail.

Then in the case of NI and VI, sometimes the textures don't really match the underlying model. (i.e. part of a helmut painted as hair). It is OK at a distance, but up close in can be noticed.

So, with all this in mind, I could see a new pattern develop over time where game creators return to packing or locking away their 3d models and textures. From a business model, it is not such a bad idea, as the modder revolution does not always return direct (accountable sales) to the game developers.

#32: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 6:48 am
—
Expanding upon the previous post, sometimes it is adventageous for both the game producers and fans that the games not be moddable in any way.

This way the games are kept light, consistent, and the game producers will provide additional content on a periodic basis, which in turn generates new interest.

I think this was perhaps the approach with Slitherene's Field of Glory series. Now I am not too knowledgeable about these games, but it seems you purchase a base game, and then you can purchase additional armies (factions), that require the base game.

The whole series seems to target tabletop wargamers from long ago. I did some of this myself in the 80's.

I am not sure if these games use the Unity 3d engine. Probably not, but it was a Roman era waragame so I got some screenies when I was at the site.

#33: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:05 am
—
...or, maybe CC 3d will look more like Battlefield Academy. Panzer General, Battlefield Academy, and Field of Glory are Slitherenes best sellers.

I have no idea if Battlefield Academy uses the Unity 3d Engine. Question

But the game seems to emphaisize tactics, as the following video should demonstrate.

Link

#34: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:30 am
—
But, like mooxe was trying to tell us (or did tell us). Mech Commander (or is it Warrior?) is a game that does use the Unity 3d engine.

Now I am not sure if Mech Warrior Online uses it, but if it does, perhaps we should be playing that game. Idea

FCC

#35: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:03 am
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Okaaay, moving right along.

It's hilarious how you portray your posts as being the only ones important to any topic your involved in.

Especially when you don't provide anything important or new to say.

#36: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 11:11 am
—
Okaaay, moving right along. Idea

I have to admit, I heard a while back that CC 3d was going to use the Unity Engine, and I just haven't taken the time to check it out.

But, it definately looks promising. Here is a link if anyone else want to check out their site.

Unity 3D Engine

If CC terrains can look this good, we will be in business. But I bet my box won't display all that vegitation. Laughing

#37: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: mooxe,

Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2012 7:47 pm
—
The images in my post are from MechCommander. I do not think its a version of Unity3D, if it is its a very very old version.

#38: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Fri Oct 12, 2012 8:16 am
—
more and more games are using the unity engine. I think it is a good bet!

#39: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 5:23 am
—
The images in my post are from MechCommander. I do not think its a version of Unity3D, if it is its a very very old version. -mooxe

Unity is the development environment that gets out of your way, allowing you to focus on simply creating your game. Developing for web, mobile, or console? Unity is the tool for the job. - Unity Web Site

OK, thanks mooxe. There is a partial game list on the site.

Also, me thinks maybe CC3d will be a console game or a game you play on your phone or from the web. That would be a hoot. Laughing

There is going to be more and more of this kind of thing going forward, even web based games where the content does not have to be distributed via media (like a CD).

In addition, modding will be out of the question, especiallly for consoles or hand helds, as they have strict parameters and usually zero scaling.

Oddly enough, despite my comments regarding modding on the top of the page. I went to the Total War Center to check the community. And as we go along, CA is now supplying more modding resources to the public and even construction kits for the newer titles in the series, even for those that are purely web based.

#40: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Oct 14, 2012 9:34 am
—
Anyway,

All this talk about CC 3d makes me want to post some screenies of Barbarian Invasion. I know this game is old now days, but I just cant get enough of it.

The other CA titles have much better graphics, but there is just something I can't quite put my finger on about RTW and BI.

Maybe its the fact that there are only 3 kinds of trees. Or maybe it just looks great without the grass effect.

Or maybe it is the fact that all the soldiers in a unit look the same. I can't figure it out.

I just know that I will not shop for another box until I cant run XP anymore (or its browser), then I might do something. Meanwhile, this game is about the best 3D wargame ever, and it runs on my box. AMAZING Exclamation

#41: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Pzt_Kanov, Location: México

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 4:26 pm
—
Yes RTW and BI are amazing one of my favorite games. It needs more strategic stuff like supplies, morale, weather affecting weapons etc. Some mods take care of that using traits on the generals which is great and adds to the immersion, for example I really like the trait that counts number of troops killed and the trait that counts how much time you've spent in enemy territory I think they are on the extended cultures and europa barbarorum.

What I think can be translated to CC is the 3D strategic map where the actions takes place by turns and how the battle map generated corresponds with the geographical area in the strategic map, never knew how they did it, is it a lot of small maps interconnected? are they automatically generated based on some settings on the files?.

For a taste of what can be done in 3D check out Achtüng Panzer, I gather is not really liked here but it is the best example of how a CC in 3D would look like, even the creators are known CC fans. Such an amazing game really a shame most of you didn't give it a chance.

Achtüng Panzer: Kharkov 1943

Achtüng Panzer: Operation Star

#42: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2012 6:01 pm
—
Hi Kanov,

Nice points on the strategic map. I have attached the region map for RTW. This map has several corresponding "twins" that describe height, terrain, climate, and other relavent data to the 3d engine for RTW.

Each pixel on this map corresponds to one square (I think) on the strategic map in the RTW game. That square is in turn contained in the map.rwm file, which includes the 3d terrain information you see when you play the tactical game. For instance if you make changes to vegitation, trees, etc, you must delete the map.rwm file, and when you restart the game, an new one is generated.

Anyway, the region map can also be used to derive the map coordiantes for custom battle locations when during Single Player mode. The black pixels indicate the location of the settlements in each region, and the white ones show the location for the ports.

The pixel coordiantes from the region image itself can be used used in the custom_locations.txt file if you want to.

For instance the map in Gimp is 255 (x axis) by 156 (y axis) pixels.

To find a coordinate for a settlement for custom locations take the exact x axis coordinate and use 156 - (y + 1) for the final y coordinate. (Use the black pixels on the map). Also note, that a settlement will not appear in a custom battle unless you ask for it. The settlement locations are generally nice locations for battles.

I believe the other maps of the same dimensions can be used in a similar way.

Here is a sample entry that I use in the custom locations file.

; custom locations, add new locations at the bottom
; custom locations, by region(s), compatible with Rome Total War

custom_location Aegyptus ()
{
location 183 13
image locations/rome_tw_map.tga
sett_locked no
}

custom_location Middle Egypt
{
; location settlement 183 13
; location port 194 9
location 183 13
image locations/rome_tw_map.tga
sett_locked no
}

custom_location Nile Delta
{
; location settlement 178 19
; location port 176 19
location 178 19
image locations/rome_tw_map.tga
sett_locked no

...

#43: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Fri Oct 19, 2012 12:44 pm
—
here is a video of the next wasteland 2. This game is using the unity engine.
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10151165199101220

The end of the video shows different camera angle possible included a top down view (1:00)

#44: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:46 am
—
Thanks Manoi,

That video looked really cool. Maybe we should be playing Wasteland 2.

Slitherene won't come even close to my vision. They are smarter than that. Laughing

And, I have also noted the poll results, and in some ways, I have to agree with the poll. Idea

I am really sorry to say, that as much as I would like to see a cool 3D game, I am very content with CCMT as it stands. In fact, I could say that if any CC game insists upon or enforces fixed Victory Locations on any map, then I probably won't enjoy it.

Despite their efforts, I just wouldn't pick up any of the re-releases. I am really stuck on CC4 maps right now, and Yuma's modifications of same. It is a total blast playing CLOSE Combat on these smaller maps.

#45: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: dj,

Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 4:31 pm
—
Not feeling it...I hate how primitive and childish the scale looks on 3D games. Whereas 2D top down is about as accurate as any game can get. Maybe quasi-3D with keeping the roots of 2D top-down to be able to handle large numbers of units. Otherwise the scale and realism look horrible in 3D.

@Stwa - yes keep CC "CLOSE" and the map scale smaller for true realism of house-to-house close quarters combat

#46: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2012 5:39 pm
—
Map scale has done nothing but increase over the years.
Weather it be through Mods or the re-releases.
And nothing has ever been done to increase the amount of Units

In some cases its just becoming absurd.

#47: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2012 8:46 pm
—
Agreed Exclamation

But perhaps PITF will solve some of that. I wonder if anyone, perhaps like yourself, has thought ahead to the possibilities of converting stuff to PITF.

Since PITF is to be the last 2d game. The purgatory phase will come to an end. The last time this happened was after CC5.

As for moi, I will continue on with what I have for a while longer. My elements file has been tweeked to my liking, and among other mods I have made for myself, I am not nearly ready to give them up.

But I do hope the community will find a way to maximize PITF in all respects, if it is possible to do so.

Me thinks DJ has a point, and I find even simple maps combined with the CCMT battle editor, can yield many small battles that are the true essence of Close Combat.

#48: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: JohnW,

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:55 pm
—
One of the features I like about the current CC series is that it can be played on almost any computer. I can put it on my laptop for trips. The game is very familiar to me and easy to jump in and play.

I've always liked the appeal of a 3D version. Probably like many here, I began with Squad Leader, progressed to Steel Panthers, and then Close Combat. I keep trying the 3D games like GI Combat, Squad Assault, Theatre of War, and Combat Mission. Combat Mission Fortress Italy is the current game under investigation. Currently, TOW2 and TOW3 seem like the closest to a 3D version of CC. TOW3 also has the campaign map. These games are MOD-able. Maps are the easiest to modify. Objects require 3D software and a knowledge of model building. Unless you have a good group effort, MOD's take time. Combat Mission appears to offer similar options for MOD-ing. I like the variety of vehicles and equipment offered with CMFI.

An important feature of 3D games appears to be the added processor and graphics requirements for all of the objects and rendering, ie: lots of computer power. There always seems to be limitations depending on your hardware.

#49: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Mana,

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 3:16 pm
—
Hello, I stumbled uppon this thread and it catched my attention because I have played close combat for years.

Maybe this sounds rough but I think the Panthers in the fog release is a small step towards a new close combat version.
It will take a bold step to do a succesfull close combat version which will shed new light in the series.

Currently I'm experimenting with 3D graphics to create a representation of how the new series should look like. In my beleive it should breath the same atmosphere as the current series but introducing more detail, both in graphics and context. If you are interested i'd love to share some of my experiments.

Games that inspire me allot are:

Wargame European Escalation

Red Orchestra 2

#50: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:43 pm
—
One of the features I like about the current CC series is that it can be played on almost any computer. -JohnW

A most excellent point, and one that seems to gets brushed under the carpet alot, since most of the lifers around here probably have beeg time computers.

I rely on this "feature" myself, as I have a "lower end" system, even though it plays many great 3D games flawlessly. I like the fact that my CC game tanks move nicely across a 1360x768 32" LCD widescreen during the tactical battles. It makes for a great gaming experience IMHO.

#51: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Mana,

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:18 pm
—
Hi, here's a basic terrain render. I'm still in the process of creating terrain details such as trees and other.

cc_render.jpeg

Description:

Filesize:

174.19 KB

Viewed:

510 Time(s)

#52: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: MF_Church,

Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 1:40 pm
—
Up to 8 ! players ~ ~ ~ oy !

Wargame European Escalation.

$39.00

#53: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Schmal_Turm,

Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 3:33 pm
—
I read with interest on the ideas for CC3D and checked out the two games. The Wargame™ European Escalation game intrigued me as a game I could get into for a period of war that is very seldom dealt with. I spend 4-5 hours at work four nights a week as a security guard playing CC and this game is another avenue I would have. Thanks for the info. By the way, the graphics on a game like that would work for me for a future CC.

I love reading all the ideas this community has, even many of the old ones. I am an old CC gamer way back when CC3 first came out and have added over the years all of the new additions. I am glad to see that there is a community to keep it going and the many mods that certain of your members create to help to make sure I don't run out of scenarios. Many thanks guys and keep it coming.

#54: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Pzt_Crackwise, Location: Switzerland

Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:01 pm
—
@Mana, it looks quite good! I personally would not want CC 3D to lose the 2D view's situational awareness. So such a design as yours sound logical. Keep sharing your ideas : )

#55: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Mana,

Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 8:29 pm
—
I have to agree to both of you Smile

The best part about close combat is probably it's community because it keeps the game allive. It probably does not matter if the game is in 3D or 2D.

But I hope to introduce some new graphics with the new 32-bit system in Panthers in the fog.

Nearly all kind of operations and scenarios have passed the modding subject, what should the next title be for a panthers in the fog mod?

thanks in advance!

#56: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: MF_Church,

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:03 pm
—
O.K. again with Europe Escalation ............................ :)

Utube ... simple, and highlighting things for the beginner.. like pathfinding etc. quite cool !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nf2OcCpeaI

enjoy!

Game did go on sale for half price! 20$

Have to wait for that.. again Very Happy

#57: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: kweniston, Location: Netherlands

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 4:33 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

But perhaps PITF will solve some of that.

No. At least not if Matrix/Slitherine has their way.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3228385

Unbelievable.

#58: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Stwa,

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 5:58 pm
—
Hi Kweniston,

Thanks for the heads up on this. I agree, Matrix is UNBELIEVABLE.

Since most of you guys did not get CCMT and because most of you are unfamiliar with my story. I would like to point out the following:

CCMT, had a similar situation going, kinda like PitF, regarding team size and available teams and map size.

The CCMT maps were huge (~1KM x ~1Km), the largest team size is 8 soldiers, but most of the ARMY teams were 5 soldiers or less. And of course there were only 15 teams available for each side.

It was my finding, early on, that this created a game that just was not fun most of the time. Most games you had to spend a lot of time just searching around for the enemies. The AI has a hard time defending multiple VL's on maps this size.

So, for me, to make the game more fun, I cut down the maps substantially to 600M x 600M (3K pixels square). In the end this created another advantage, because at this map size, mounting vehicles became kinda pointless. I found this a feature since the AI never mounted vehicles anyway.

#59: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Lt_2nd,

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 6:38 pm
—
Good suggestions on the graphics and the other suggestions mentioned above. Also, If the developers continue to incorporate the strategic map component they need to make some improvements to the movement capability of BGS. All BGs are only capable of moving 1 map per turn so currently there is no advantage in the strategic phase of a full recon/motorized/armoured BG over that of an infantry BG. Unrealistic and ironic given that three of the last CC releases (PiTF, WaR, LSA) are based on operations which the success of the attacking force depended partly/entirely on an armoured component to breakthrough and achieve its ojectives quickly. Motorized/Armoured groups should have increased mobility in the strategic phase over infantry BGs. Also, maybe units should be able to move quicker through friendly controlled maps vs unfriendly uncontrolled maps.

#60: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: WilliamTheSilent,

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 7:22 pm
—
The most annoying thing in CC for me is when you order a vehicle somewhere and it starts to do onrealistic things, like turning it's back to the enemy (AT guns), moving towards an odd direction. going in circles, etc. Can that not been fixed?

For the rest. CC has to stay 2D. It will give all kinds of new problems that are related to graphics and not gameplay.
If you play CC you want to play realistic WW2 battle, not some graphic stunning game expierence.

I still love to play napoleonic games in 2D. Rather then the TW version with battalions of 50 men with a max of 20 units. That's NOT REALISTIC.

#61: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: southern_land,

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:50 pm
—
You can generally reverse a vehicle by using the sneak command, if there is an enemy in range it will generally reverse along the path you have set

#62: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: Antony_nz,

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:47 am
—
Haha mooxe. Look at all the pictures you uploaded. They look like crap.

Im very pessimistic about Close Combat being 3D. Especially the Terrain

I love Total war. Because it feels like a more like a realistic simulation. But WW2 Era combat is harder to follow.
As long as they keep it 3D.

Total war inspires me.

#63: Re: Close Combat in 3D Author: pigu,

Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 5:01 am
—
The developer who could potentially provide the graphics engine for a 3D close combat?

Running With Rifles - Steam

Obviously it's different gameplay to Close Combat, but the potential is there?

I have fond memories of CC and I'd love to play an updated modern release.

Close Combat Series -> The Mess

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1