Combat Mission: Black Sea Up for Pre-Order

Started by Cyrano, November 05, 2014, 12:25:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Apocalypse 31

My experience with SB Infantry:


I agree that SB 4.0 has improved the infantry movement, but their ability to acquire and engage targets is still extremely sub-par.

I've been asking for more infantry options (the ability to manually control riflemen, much like LMG/ATGM troopers) but it doesn't seem to be on eSim's agenda - ever. After all, they're developing a vehicle-crew simulator, not a combined arms game.

I find CM infantry modelling to be much more accurate and satisfying - when I target an enemy force, there will actually be an engagement.

RyanE

That is the one video makes the rounds when talking about SB infantry.  But I can find the same types of issues with CM.  Put a couple CM infantry squads 10 ft from each other and watch the theatrics, especially with modern weapons.  Again they each have their pros and cons.  CM vs SB enjoyment depends on what you are trying to get out of it.  I am looking for a modern or semi-modern sandbox to build out tactical problems.  AI scripting flexibility is paramount.  Combined arms is second.  Engineering capabilities is third.

The other big frustration I have with CM is the super crappy performance on modern computers.  I have had a progression of three laptops in the last three years.  Each one more powerful than the last.  CM performance has barely improved while SB performance is close to 20% better than it was three years ago.  In fact, the size of the engagements I can run decently for CM pales in comparison to SB.

Apocalypse 31

Quote from: RyanE on April 22, 2017, 11:06:11 AMAI scripting flexibility is paramount. Combined arms is second.  Engineering capabilities is third.

Sounds like SB is your best bet then.

Quote from: RyanE on April 22, 2017, 11:06:11 AM
The other big frustration I have with CM is the super crappy performance on modern computers.  I have had a progression of three laptops in the last three years.  Each one more powerful than the last.  CM performance has barely improved while SB performance is close to 20% better than it was three years ago.  In fact, the size of the engagements I can run decently for CM pales in comparison to SB.

Same boat. Extremely frustrating, and a deal breaker in some cases. I'll take performance over graphics, any day of the week.

mikeck

This has always frustrated me as well: performance. I understand that there are a lot of calculations which occur but that is a RAM and processor thing. I play Graviteam games and they have the same calculations except the graphics are light years better AND it runs far more smoothly.

I like CM but over time I stopped with it because I can get games as detailed and realistic but with better graphics and performance.
"A government large enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have."--Thomas Jefferson

RyanE

The one thing that has always kept me coming back to CM is the WEGO system and turn recorder.  I am at a point now its less important and SB has improved their recorder and AAR system to the point, I miss it less.  I really like Graviteam's AAR system, I just wish you could access it during play.