Never played a Combat Mission game? Here is your chance to take your forces for a test drive into virtual combat.
 |
| From the edge of a forest, a US Sherman tank duels with two German AT guns. It was not pretty to watch my precious tank hit a couple of times with AT rounds, but my boys emerged victorious from this. |
You can
download the demo here. It contains three scenarios and limited access to the scenario editor.
It will leave you hungry for more. I played this thing non-stop since Friday and I like the theater of operations, the tools of war featured and the fact that there is plenty of published literature about the battle.
 |
| Plenty of cover and concealment, sloped terrain and lines of sight so rich in nuances that will make every firefight something memorable. |
 |
| This is a birds-eye view of the battlefield for the training scenario. The US forces are attacking from the background. The icons have been removed to avoid spoiling the scenario for you. |
 |
| Sh ... ermans happens! A German soldier has had enough and hits it after seeing my Sherman tank driving and firing from the main street. |
 |
| US infantry moving through dense forest. This squad will be tired of this in a few seconds. |
Cheers,
21 comments:
It's the xx-Combat Mission game with almost same engine. Pure micromanagement. I'm with the series since it's start (CM1 Normandy). I see no further development. It's a pity. The vehicles dont follow roads - everything is dumb like hell if you doesn't give detailled orders. Not for me - the days of the cash cow are over!
The greatest single wargame ever made. Nothing is this immersive and detailed.
Thanks for your comments.
Sorry to hear that from a veteran Combat Mission player ...
Cheers,
The last time I tried to run a Combat Mission demo (CMA) it had such terrible performance the game was unplayable, particularly given the degree of micromanagement required. I'm eager to check this out and see if that's been improved or if I can expect similar terrible performance from the game: they're very expensive, so I haven't gotten into the series yet although they have pushed all my impulse-buy buttons in the past: Commonwealth troops? Yes please. Soviet troops? Pozhalusta, DA! "The Bear Went Over The Mountain: The Game"? KONECHNO DA. But always, the cost and the mixed reviews.
I particularly enjoy the reviews from your blog here because of your wide breadth of gaming and the length of time you've been at it. I get a good feel for things from your reviews, since I can think that I know where you're coming from. You sold me on Gary Grigsby's "War in the East" for example, which is phenomenal, and Pike and Shot: Campaigns, also excellent. I can see you doing the same on Combat Mission, depending on CM:Bulge's demo performance.
Hi NW,
Thanks for your kind words. I will not take credit on Pike and Shot because I don't play that one. :)
As for performance issues with Combat Mission, the engine relies a lot in extensive LOS checks, which become quite a burden in larger scenarios.
There is quite big scenario in the demo, please check it out if you have a chance.
Cheers,
I agree with Anonymous nr. 2, Combat Mission is amazing. Yes, there is a lot of micromanagement needed, and it took me quite a while to get into, but now it's by far my favourite wargame. It's a great simulation of platoon level tactics.
The current one is also the third major version of the game engine, and the developers have said that now, after the release of Final Blitzkrieg, they will start working on version 4. So, we do not have to worry about there being no further improvements in the future.
Recommend CM Shock Force for folks who don't want to pay full freight on CM WW2 or Black Sea games but like the engine overall. Shock Force is set in Syria (though it is an older game that predates current fighting).
Hello and thanks again for all your comments.
I opened a discussion at this new wargaming niche community:
https://real-and-simulated-wars.mightybell.com/communities/real-and-simulated-wars/posts/801063
Your participation will be greatly appreciated.
Cheers,
I've been playing CM games since CMBO. Persoanlyl I love the CMX2 series. I did stay away from it for awhile afte rhearing the horror stories after CMSF was released. However I watched a ideo of CMSF at some point and heared they had WEGO back in so gave it ago. However I didn't fully fall in love with it until the brit module came out. I now own them all except Afgan and the Italy games. Though the engine doesn't come on in masisve elaps and bounds it is constantly being improved and yes it has quiks where you have to really plot out long distance movements and try and avoid sharp turns but I still enjoy it. Also as I'm a WEGO Single player only person I stay away from Quick battles but find the scenarios and campaigns easy keep me fully occupied and I find them no walk overs either..far from it.
I see people complaing about the games but I'm wondering what games they own that as a package do things better? Only one I really know of is Graviteam Tactics series and as that is real time only then CM does just nip it to my no 1 spot. I'm a tactical wargame obsessive and I'm truely happy we have a developer like Battlefront making this sor tof game..as I don't see many others doing it so they really enrich my hobby. Yes things can be better but CM series is still way ahead of pretty much any other tactical wargame around. As I said I just don't see what else is around for the series to be compared to and replaced by which obviously those who dislike the game do.
"I see people complaing about the games but I'm wondering what games they own that as a package do things better?"
There are no other games compared to combat mission, that's true. But some say, Graviteam is doing a better job in a lot of aspects. But that not really my opinion. But in Graviteam you got an equipmnent database with a lot of numbers and stats. And you can give more realistic and commander-perspective orders. And your units have an ai (!). The units follow roads, use the right cover and so on. But there are a lot of downsides: not as much mods as for combat mission, not as much scenarios and almost no community. Not as much equiment like cm has.
Well, i'm the guy from the first post. I played thousends of hours of combat mission (single player, multiplayer). Sorry, i'm not arrogant, i'm just old, thats what i like to say (and sure, i know what i'm talking about, like all of you ;-).
Btw, a lot of the features of the first cm-engine are superior to the second, but thats another story. I still love the series, because there are no other games compared to it. Even the old Panzer Command has a few better features. So i cannot understand, why Battlefront is not developing their engine further. You know Pewpewchewchew? In one of his videos he is making the point: "WE NEED NOT MORE SCENARIOS - WE NEED NEW FEATURES".
If you like tactical combat and the eye candy is not important i recommend you to switch to the ton of hexwar games out there! But thats maybe another story..
Anon Nr 1.
See Jason Rimmer is right. I hear a lot of complaining about CM - but nowhere do I see anyone showing me a game that even comes close to what BF has given us. I have played Graviteam and while I like it - it has all kinds of things missing that CM gives you.
I would like to know what CMx 1 features you think are better ? I cant think of any myself - and as far as tactical combat goes one to one representation is vital.
And they have been adding new features - just not with the Bulge game. Cant see why for one game its that important - and is obviously a resource issue.
"I would like to know what CMx 1 features you think are better ? I cant think of any myself - and as far as tactical combat goes one to one representation is vital."
Sure i can remember a few for you:
1. You had all that lines (if you wish) which showed you who was seeing/targeting/fireing at whom. A very important info when you had a lot of stuff going on.
2. You had a nice Window (black background i remember) with all stats for a unit (armor, speed, firepower and so on - A LOT OF STUFF) DURING a battle.
3. You could easily copy routes from one unit to another. In CM2 you had to give every unit the same waypoints and clicks (WHAT A MESS). And i'm not sure, but i think CM1 had a follow-unit-option.
4....(i must play it to rembember more of the goodies)
Btw, i posted years ago in the Battlefront-forum about the differences about those two. And in a few cases the answer was that the new engine isnt capable of this engine/ a design choice..
I'm not hater, i like CM2 a lot, but look at my previous posts what i mean...
Best wargame ever made. Period. The most polished, realistic, and playable.
Well ..
1. You had all that lines (if you wish) which showed you who was seeing/targeting/fireing at whom. A very important info when you had a lot of stuff going on.
... I dont know - it was useful i suppose - but I kind of like the lack of certainty now - more immersive. In any event - its not earth shattering for me its not there.
2. You had a nice Window (black background i remember) with all stats for a unit (armor, speed, firepower and so on - A LOT OF STUFF) DURING a battle.
... yes I miss that a bit... but replaced by the armour graphic ... and to be honest never used it after a while ... I know what a sherman is and whats going to happen if I put it in a frontal fight with a tiger... again not earth shattering ..
3. You could easily copy routes from one unit to another. In CM2 you had to give every unit the same waypoints and clicks (WHAT A MESS). And i'm not sure, but i think CM1 had a follow-unit-option.
No - not from my memory at least - there was no follow unit option - and cant remember a specific "copy route " function - the copy works the same way it does now and selected multiple units will copty the same path - so not sure what you mean by this. Long Long time since I picked up and played CMx1 but least how I remember it....
4....(i must play it to rembember more of the goodies)
Must say - if you cant remember them - they cant have been that fundamental ...
@NW ... why do you blame poor performance on the game ?
Have all CMs' and never had a performance issue on any - least of CMA which was the least demanding of the lot.
I would go take a look at the forum and seek out some graphics card tips as it will be your machine if it couldnt run CMA properly.
@sean B
Yes - very polished. and incredibly stable - never has a single crash or fault in any of the games.
Best wargames.... for some time now. However the concept is getting stale. Its all just new units and maps. The battles play the same. They need to push for an operational angle like Graviteam does, but with the WEGO system still in place.
When I was a kid I used to push the chits but now I'm middle age and the concept seems so strange.
What is wrong with CM? The same as with all tactical/operational wargaming. We suffer from pushing conters or rts approach. We must micromanage as AI is non existing (the only exception I know is Command Ops). Wether we are battalion CO or waging war on divisional level we still do push them counters. It's like Hitler's wet dreams came true.
C'mon seriuosly with all this processing power no game is offering realisticall chain of command, unit behaviour, warmachine operating (research and production) or logistics. Bits and pieces here and there but how long can one enjoy counter pushing?
I should be able to set up targets for my units and they should do accordingly. Depending on numerous factors they will reach the targets or fail but I should not be the general who is pushing companies accross battlefield!
I came a long way in wargaming and I'm getting disappointed. There is some hope as there are few games that still give hope. I've just entered Command Ops, which also can suffer from micromangemnt curse but the AI can do something on it's own and you do not feel neither in god mod nor in shuffle the chits. There is DC Barbarossa with new treats of personality and althoug the game itself is actually so-so is the implementation of personalities is most welcome.
What I'd like to see is not impossible. A hex based game with good AI that can follow my orders on it's own. Where I do not have to push chits but I can give orders. With commanders having personallity and skills/traits. With background of idiotic orders from high command that one has to follow. And this could function with real-time execution. Maybe one day this will become reality.
Chris Adamus
Hi I'm the guy from first post.
I've the duty to fight the engine again. I bought it. Once again. Funny, isn't it? Well it's Bulge - i had to do it. Panzer marsch!
As i said before: it's the same engine since years and it has so many bad mechanics and a missing ai. But i have no alternative for the Bulge. Sad, isn't it.
Cheers
Performance is pretty horrible when consider how well CMx1 ran on absolutely pathetic hardware and yet managed to simulate the exact same battles with what looks like (to this day) excellent fidelity. I've yet to see any real evidence to show that CMx2 is more realistic or more complex in way that's meaningful to what is actually being simulated. The problem is that the original CM programming team took a hike and CMx2 looks and plays like it was done in VBASIC or some other (really inefficient, poorly optimized) high level language. As another person said, CMA in particular was nearly unplayable, even on a 4.8ghz i7-2600k with a GTX780 (the last time I tried it, that was my setup). And it looked terrible. Like a lot of wargaming companies, they just don't seem to have the sort of programming expertise you'd see for a AAA title. Not surprising, given the disparity in budgets, but still depressing all the same.
Erich, each major engine upgrade has been a significant step up in realism and capabilites. For instance, there was the upgrade to 1:1 representaion, meaning that each soldier is shown on screen, instead of each man shown representing several soldiers. With line of sight, line of fire and ballistics all calculated individually for each soldier and vehicle crew member, this step up will of course require many more calculations to be done, which requires more from the hardware.
Also, I don't know what you mean about "the original CM programming team took a hike". The same people that made the original game are still running things at Battlefront (Steve Grammont and Charles Moylan). There is an excellent article about the history of Combat Mission and Battlefront At this link
Post a Comment