Talk:Close Combat series

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Criticism Entry Needed or Not?

I don't think the games were that controversial, and I wouldn't expect to see such a passage in an encyclopedia article, since it cites no sources and contains several opinions.

"Only a handful of maps were included with each game, which had to be fought over multiple times in some campaigns. The top down maps were unusual amongst games of that era for their detail and realism, but also guaranteed that terrain could not be randomly generated.
Another criticism levelled against all real time tactical games, not just the Close Combat series, by proponents of turn-based games is that the real time setting places unrealistic burdens on the single human player in command of platoon-plus sized forces, while proponents of real-time argue that it adds to the excitement and more accurately models the challenges of a real life commander."

Close Combat 3, 4 and 5, which I own, have what I would call a large number of maps each. So 'a handful' is a loaded word that also has the misfortune of being arguable. It would be far better to know how many maps were in each game or some other fact, than this uncited opinion.

The second paragraph is a statement of two opinions, and from the sentence construction (cloncluding with the positive) was clearly written by a fan of the game. The writer also discounts the argument against the game by saying it's true of all RTS games. That calls into question again whether the para is pertinent. Do articles say this or is it a disagreement between teh author and his roomate? It's unclear without sources, so unless some can be found I say kill both paras: 202.82.171.186 03:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


Knight chess piece This article is within the scope of WikiProject Strategy games, an effort by several users to improve Wikipedia articles on strategy games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within strategy games for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
Strategy games To-do:


I thought Close Combat: First to Fight was a completely unrelated game that just happened to have the same name, being released years after the original series. Thoughts, before I change stuff?-LtNOWIS 02:16, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The reasons you have stated as well as the game's completely different nature do lend to confusion. However, it's title is actually derived from the Close Combat series in spirit. This article [1] on the official website illustrates that there is a link between the two, as well as Destineer's (developer of First to Fight) relationship with Atomic Games (developer of original Close Combat series). Clue 02:33, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bayonet Fighting?

The article says that troops that are out of ammo will fight with bayonets or scavange enemy ammunition. Are you sure this is right? I have played these games a lot and I've never seen troops that are out of ammo do these things. All I've ever seen them do is hide, run away or surrender if the enemy gets too close. Fighting with bayonets I can believe might happen if you set the 'Always Obey Orders' option on but scavanging I am convinced does not happen. Shimbo 10:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Yes, they do scavange enemy weapon and ammunition. You have to move your out-of-ammo soldier to the dead enemy soldiers. I only notice that in Close Combat III and afterward.

They do fight with bayonets sometimes. Pretty rare, but it does happen. /Eric

[edit] Supported platforms?

Can someone list the operating systems on which the games can be installed?

The first two were Windows/Mac, after that it was just Windows. Shimbo 15:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Close Combat: RAF Regiment?

I removed the following text added by an anonymous user:

  • Close Combat: RAF Regiment - A new training module for the British Royal Air Force Regiment, which is a ground force. It has been rumoured that a modified version will be released commercially to the public. There is not a single reference to this on google. If anyone can provide a source for this assertation then I will put it back. Shimbo 08:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)



Hi Shimbo, I have heard of it but never seen it.See this link.

http://www.closecombat.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10250&highlight=RAF

Motorfix 23:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I've put it back, but we could do with a reference. Shimbo 09:25, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


Hi, this is the anonymous user. Sorry if I was'nt clear enough.

On the CSO website you can see a number of press releases(on the homepage where news is updated). There are currently screenshots, and photos of usage in RAF Honington and there is more info on its current Alpha state, and is being used, but not fully functional. Links http://www.closecombat.org/CSO/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=272 http://www.closecombat.org/CSO/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=271 Full article : http://www.closecombat.org/CSO/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=267

[edit] Recently removed section

The gist of this section was recently removed:

“ Close Combat was originally a simulation the effect of morale on soldiers, but was developed as a computer game version of the acclaimed Avalon Hill boardgame Advanced Squad Leader (ASL). The primary consultant for the morale model was Dr. Steven Silver, a combat-related trauma spcialist. ”

I have no idea if this is true or not, though it is very interesting. Could the editor (User:Motorfix) who removed this comment on why it was exciced, or could anyone substantiate the claims above? If it is true it is very worthy of being included in the article. If no reason why it was excised is offered I will reinsert it since it seems like very relevant information. Mikademus 13:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Close Combat Mods

Close Combat mods are a world of their own. Quantitatively, and in my opinion qualitatively, many surpass the original game. I propose making a detailed list of mods. It is a reasonable undertaking as there are under 30 mods for all 5 CC RTS games.

Close Combat 5 mods: 1. Gold Juno Sword 4.4 by Boka. Normandy landings and subsequent advance by British/Canadians. 2. Red Storm Rising 1.0 by a group of developers. Modern warfare(1989) in Germany. NATO vs Warsaw Pact. 3. Stalingrad 1.2 by another group of proficient developers. Operation "Blue" German advance onto Stalingrad. 4. Meuse Crossing 3.4 by Luer, Moloch, Tejszd. German assault through low countries into France in 1940. 5. Karelia 2.1 by Sapa. Soviet forces face Finnish ones in 1944. 6. Winter War 1.3 by PanzerEddie and kartboy. War in winter of 1939-1940 between USSR and Finland.

Close Combat 4 mods: 1. VetBoB 1.13 by TT Battle of the Bulge with much improved graphics, compuer AI. 2. Winter War 1.1b by Moloch and Luer. War in winter of 1939-1940 between USSR and Finland. 3. Rebellion 1.1. German forces that revolted against the Nazis and fought in Ardenees in 1944(fantasy). 4. True Green. A highly acclaimed early mod of CCIV. Also the Battle of the Bulge in 1944. Edit this list as with more info.

Close Combat 3 mods: 1. France 1940 by Dreaded88? Very nice mod. Early, high quality work that was upkept as years went on. 2. Real Red 8.22 by Ron Geitz? First major mod of CC3. Took community by storm. As the original, it is set on German-Soviet 1941-1945 front. 3. Die Ost Front 2.0 by ArmeeGroupSud. Currently quite popular. Soviet-German front in WW2. This is a start. CC3 is the most modded of all CC games. It would be useful to have this list on main Close Combat page.


I strongly agree. I play only the modded versions, including one that is rather recent (Stalingrad for CCV). And it's HOW many years since the games were released? For me the mods MAKE the game and ARE the phenomenon that is Close Combat, and should be addressed at the top and then in depth in the article. 202.82.171.186 03:49, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moved page

Hello. I just moved the page in order to leave the way open to create the first Close Combat under that name. If anyone disagrees, just move the page back, or leave me a message. Thanks. | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 21:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Close Combat 2 battle.jpg

The image Image:Close Combat 2 battle.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:51, 20 May 2008 (UTC)