i think both are good :)

>>2325576
I think both are bad ):

I think both are average :|

I have no particular opinion on any of them.

File: 0852ydfh59302hf87340202jhd.jpg (277.8 KB)

277.8 KB JPG

As a seasoned GT player who played everything they made, including all DLC, I'm thinking about writing, recording and editing a comprehensive video tutorial series for Graviteam. Nobody else seems to have attempted this, just a few often incorrect tutorial videos exist focused on specifics like artillery, and some.

List the areas that new players struggle with most. Also, how best to structure such a series?

>>2325576
Wanted to get into these graviteam games then I saw that unit deployment shit with the squares on the ground and noped out

File: 1767835196777374.jpg (140.7 KB)

140.7 KB JPG

>>2328678
-not sure how to load my infantry into transport vehicles.
-struggling to understand how the radio/communication mechanics work.
-It's difficult to figure out when it's best to use orders and which in def and assault.
-Artillery seems to work, but im no clue to actually understand the mechanics.
-how to win an engagement with flamethrower units?

>>2328678
>do all that
>andre changes the entire game again

File: 3322.png (58 KB)

58 KB PNG

Reminder that the CM team is nothing but late-war fags who REFUSE to give us the Battle of France for some reason

>>2328678
>just a few often incorrect tutorial videos
Most of them are incorrect because there's been a few engine overhauls that have changed things a lot. I've seen the same for Combat Mission too.
>>2329495
Graviteam is early war, but they're slavoids on a mission to document every single minor engagement that happened on the eastern front.

>>2328678
I'm good with most of it now, but I remember having some issues with artillery, spotting generally, and communications generally. There were a lot of times that I thought on map fire support should have been firing, but they weren't.

>>2328678
I learned a lot from messing about in the battle editor. You could show how to set up simple scenarios for various aspects of the game to play around with.

File: ff11.jpg (204.4 KB)

204.4 KB JPG

Anyone here played Firefight?

it's a little known banger WW2 based real time tactical game made by a lone dev. 2D top down like Close Combat, with fairly simple mechanics and surprising tactical depth. Still being improved with an active modding community. I recommend it to anyone who enjoys these games.

Here's a great tutorial for infantry tactics that gives an idea of how it works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZvG-U8VY-KY

>>2329495
I think it's just easier to work with.
As fun it would be I don't know how the game would be like in a desert environment, considering the master maps would probably be what half the maps in large scenarios would look like
Maybe in CM3

File: 160f8788c23cb345bf89635fb445436cfb776de467afe1fce0eb6063ca03c5bb.jpg (197.9 KB)

197.9 KB JPG

>>2333219
I think it's just easier for them to copy+paste PzIVs and Shermans for 80% of the vehicle roster.
>I don't know how the game would be like in a desert environment
It apparently worked fine before on the old engine

>>2328678
Give me your expert opinion on the AI, I always felt that Graviteam

a) plays itself when it works and you have very little impact
b) the enemy either does nothing or just walks or drives towards you

I look at some of these in-depth World War simulation games and I think that they could be really fun but then I consider how long it would take to actually learn the game and make use of most of the features.

>>2334435
They certainly demand considerable investment on the part of the player. However, they can reward that investment proportionately.

File: For all your tank-related problems.png (388.9 KB)

388.9 KB PNG

SF2 just got a battle pack. Guess they had some spare scenarios to throw around before we move off CMx2 for good. Mostly COIN-focused, and apparently one of the scenarios is about two gangs of Uncons chimping out over who gets the food pallet.

>>2334435
As a recent beginner, I picked up Combat Mission Barbarossa to Berlin (2002) for pennies just last week, and despite the lack of an in-game tutorial, it's surprisingly simple to work. The hard part is gitting gud and applying tactics, plans, and reacting to unforeseen consequences. Here's a QRD for B2B from one beginner to another:
>move and turn the camera with kp 8,4,5,6 and 7,9 as you would wasd and qe. The mouse at the screen edges works too.
>read the scenario briefings! The Manual also contains very useful information,
>to give an order select a section, hit space, select the order you want to give, then click to set a waypoint, or right click to chain multiple waypoints
>in the setup phase this will immediately transport the unit to where you click within the Green Zone
>you will have to give individual orders to each section
>you can drag existing waypoints using right click
>you can pause units for co-ordination purposes (ie, allowing a section to begin supressing the enemy for a moment before another begins to move across its line of fire)
>Platoon HQs issue your orders to its sections, keep them within range (connected via a maroon line when selected) to prevent long waits before a section begins to perform orders
>you can issue target arcs to prevent units from firing at targets the moment they're spotted or at extreme range
>units like mortars and HMG teams take time to set up before firing
Then the rest is being aware of basic combat principles:
>terrain, cover & concealment
>observe, decide, act
>fire and manoeuvre
>unit skill, morale, endurance and self-preservation
I suggest watching some combat mission videos where the player explains the decisions they made and why to get ideas you can apply to your own game, such as this:
https://youtu.be/HyiubalpzJ0
I also suggest, if you start with Barbarossa to Berlin like I have, to start with small scenarios, like Rude Awakening which was my debut battle as the Axis.

>>2329495
Most boomer WW2 enthusiasts from the US/UK are interested mainly in post-Normandy western front, and as another anon mentioned keeping it all to a similar period lets them use the same vehicles/OoBs/uniform models between a lot of the games which probably saves a ton of dev costs

>>2334907
It's a real shame we don't get more North Africa kino
>has both of the major English speaking nations
>has Germans and Italians for a little Axis diversity (that no one cares about anyway)
>major personalities on both sides
>alien landscape
>not bocage
I don't really understand why they don't care. For the British boomers you have the whole 'us and the commonwealth nations alone against the axis' angle for a bit and for the American boomers you have the initial fuckups leading up to Patton's takeover and a reversal of fortunes.

>>2334907
Thinking about it, it probably is dev cost related. I do remember Fortress Italy only existing because someone just appeared and offered them $500k+ to make it, probably provided the impetus for the other games coming out at the time.

>>2336083
>makes Fortress Italy
>sets it in Sicily where 2nd rate reserves were stationed and didn't have most of the actually half-decent Italian equipment that existed
>other half of the game is post-Italian surrender vs Germany

Does anyone have a download link for CM professional edition? Apparently there was a cracked version on Baidu which then got reuploaded to Mega.

>>2337166
Check the archives, should be in the last thread or the previous one.

File: gtmf776540.jpg (294.8 KB)

294.8 KB JPG

>>2333511
The orders system is very powerful, with modifiers that can generate thousands of behavioural variations.

It is possible to set up a complex attack plan before the battle starts that will require no further intervention by the player. Of course there are usually unexpected happenings that will require some tactical adjustment. Defensively this is even more the case, good defensive deployment should enable the player in most cases to sit back and watch the enemy try to find a way through. Again, the AI can surprise you, with flanking moves, surprise strength, devastating artillery barrages or air raids etc that will require you to adjust and redeploy in order to strengthen certain areas.

Not always the case. The AI will probe and test defensive lines, it will avoid minefields and strong defensive positions when it's aware of them. Of course once an attack is underway and forces are committed then wholesale altering of the plan mid battle is often more risky than pushing on. Although the AI will fall back, regroup and try something else if the situation and time remaining allows. One reason why 3 hour battles are the patricians choice, it really gives the AI time to work. As mentioned above the AI will attempt flanking moves which can include sending units 'off map', or outside the tactical deployment area, in order to exploit cover, roads and other obvious terrain advantages. Personally I love this, as it makes sense that armour would take that road around as opposed to going across muddy field or infantry using a gully to move through. It forces the player to react and keeps things interesting, although it does pose questions such as 'what about the forces occupying that area on the operational map?', I don't worry about this too much. Player forces also have access to areas outside the designated deployment zones if modifiers such as 'use roads' or 'move covertly' are enabled.

TL;DR Play 3 hour battles and keep a reserve force handy.

File: gtmf776548.jpg (221.6 KB)

221.6 KB JPG

>>2333511
>>2340720
To further elaborate...


Simulation vs RTS:

How much does a Battalion commander actually do once the reconnaissance has been done, intel analyzed, conditions assessed, forces appraised, tactical plans finalized, officers briefed, orders given and the battle begins?


The answer? It depends upon how well the above tasks have been executed. In ideal circumstances he will simply wait and watch as events unfold to his satisfaction. In a less than ideal situation he may be desperately putting out fires while trying to salvage something from the unfolding disaster.

As in the real world Graviteam games are mainly played in the hours before the fighting starts. So yes, sometimes there is very little for you to do during the battle. What the player does during the deployment and initial orders phase will largely decide the results of the battle. Just as field commanders have very little ability to influence individual events, the player and the AI have limited influence once the ball is roiling.

As to the AI. It has clearly defined objectives dictated by historic events, finite resources and a strict time limit with which to achieve them. If it's the last turn of a campaign and the AI requires this key point in order to achieve its objectives and you gave it an hour in which to do that, then of course you're going to see a rapid and direct assault that will be much easier to prepare for.


It's not an RTS, it's a battlefield command simulator.

File: 9845609345lkh5340954.jpg (102 KB)

102 KB JPG

Boт дepьмo

>>2340830
I generally don't give crazy complex orders in the beginning and I'm doing shit the entire battle. I'm not too sure what they're looking for. Combat mission is pretty much the same but I don't see this criticism as much.

I wish these games had bigger maps, its not that bad in most graviteam maps but in CM unless you play with the lowest point preset it feels so crowded

File: gtmf88764.jpg (214.3 KB)

214.3 KB JPG

>>2342845
Graviteam maps never feel crowded though. Even during particularly densely populated battles, 5-6 company's per side, the field is 9 square km plus ability to maneuver outside the boundaries, and normally the unit count is way below that. Even in the corners of the operational map where you're sometimes fighting on a 3x2 grid the space is limited to 6 sq km, but so is the number of units involved.

Ultimately the entire operational area is hundreds of square km, recreated from the real world at 1:1 scale. Not sure how it can be done more realistically, except to run the entire operation in real time. But that would result in the same historical unit to territory ratio.

I agree CM and others in the genre can feel very cramped tactically.

>>2325576
https://community.battlefront.com/topic/145291-20252026-combat-mission-report/
New yearly CM report

>TL;DR not much to talk about
>CMx3 development continuing, still no dates or more detailed info
>CMx2 development winding down but "no hard decision against further Battle Packs"
>support will continue for CMx2 games for the forseeable future

>>2343514
All I want from CM3 is
>better performance
>full match replays
>proper handling of HE

File: DONTDOITBUD.jpg (21.1 KB)

21.1 KB JPG

>>2336181
>recently start playing FI for the first time
>play an Italian battle
>designer's notes: Italians don't have radios

>>2344541
I'm guessing gtos is graviteam operation star? Do the newer ones have medics?

File: grazi.jpg (35 KB)

35 KB JPG

>>2344016
The experience is more miserable then I originally thought.
>no radios except for the occasional vehicle
>single unit in my company can call artillery and it takes 11 minutes
>can't split basic infantry unit
>full infantry squad, despite being in contact with 2 levels of their superiors, broke after a single injury
This is allegedly an elite Italian unit, too.

>>2347207
One of the battle briefings said that I should be able to have units nearby spot for light mortars. Is that actually possible in Combat Mission? They don't seem to do anything unless they're directly firing or I'm playing a nation that isn't shit and has radios.

Fewgoodmen is down. Anywhere else I can get Scenarios/Campaigns?