User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2016 9:22 pm

Hands-On With Armored Brigade: Close Combat's Secret Successor

Wed Mar 28, 2018 4:21 pm

There has been a lot of cynicism regarding Matrix Games’ decision to move Close Combat to a 3D engine.

http://www.wargamer.com/articles/hands- ... successor/

Nomada_Firefox
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon May 28, 2001 8:00 am

Thu Mar 29, 2018 8:26 am

Seriously? the Close Combat succesor is the Bloody First. Armored Brigade graphics are poorer than the graphics from the previous Close Combat games (the color pallete from this screenshots is poor) and the Close Combat Bloody First is almost as a Close Combat even if it is at 3D. Differences are very few.

User avatar
EICJoe
Posts: 591
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2016 2:50 pm

Re:

Thu Mar 29, 2018 8:42 am

Seriously? the Close Combat successor is the Bloody First.
You'd think that, but you'd be surprised. I've got a write-up of Close Combat to do as well which will provide some context.

That's not to say The Bloody First isn't good - It is, and I enjoyed my time with it. It's got a few issues to sort out but nothing major.

Armored Brigade represents a genuine evolution of 2D Close Combat - thus a 'successor' to the legacy those games created. 3D Close Combat is indeed a CC game, but the move to 3D means that it'll be able to start doing a lot more things that 2D CC can't do, and I reckon after a few iterations it'll end up being quite different to what classic Close Combat. That's a good thing, and both can exist as heirs to CC's throne, just for different reasons.

Think the successor kingdoms to Alexander the Great's empire.
"Determining the appropriate level of influence in somebody else's war is never a simple matter."
- Special Circumstances

Editor-in-Chief
Wargamer.com
PocketTactics.com
StrategyGamer.com

Hexagono
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 10:51 am

Re: <t>Hands-On With Armored Brigade: Close Combat's Secret Successor</t>

Thu Mar 29, 2018 11:04 am

To be fair this game could be defined as the realtime modernized version of "Steel Panthers", a mix of squad level and the platoon level version (SPIII) but not Close combat succesor, both games are in diferent scales.

CC is all about small combat, under company level combats (every single soldier counts + his ammo +combat condition) in very limited combat areas while AB moves more in the battalion-brigade level in big maps... CC is pure tactical and AB is a step over it, apart this in CC the presence of vehicles is important but infantry has more impact, in AB for me looks a little oposite with infantry doing the support role of vehicles in original CC and vehicles doing the role as main actor from CC infantry because the units under player command are a lot bigger than in CC.

I dont know how is going to be the "Bloody first" but in scale and combat orientation is closer to be CC successor, for me AB is as i said SP in real time or a more "classic" wargame version of "Wargame" serie but in 2D VS 3D.

Dont understand me bad, AB looks interesting and is in an not very covered period even when maybe i prefer see it starting in WWII or at least in a less modern period because real time + fast combat action allways is a problem for me, i like enjoy wargames looking for details and following every small action.

Nomada_Firefox
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon May 28, 2001 8:00 am

Thu Mar 29, 2018 2:41 pm

EICJOE, I will not be surprised and there is nothing which you can show me about the BF which I do not know yet. I have followed the game from the begining.......the game is as another CC game with the exception from the 3D engine which it will let us to make some new features.

About Armored Brigade, I see the images and I see a game with poorer graphics than previously released CC games. Why? probably the maps from Armored Brigade were not painted with the hand of anybody and they are product from a map editor.

Return to “Wargamer Front Page Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests