How's it compare to Call to Arms?

[The Male/Man]

Love how you can enter buildings and take up windows in that game.

[Buborn]

The only similarity I'd say is that they are military themed games. CM:SF2 is far more realistic than Call to Arms (In general its very hard to compare these vastly different games in one short post) and I'd recommend you check out youtube videos and download the demos off the battlefront website.

And to answer your other question yes your troops can enter and take over buildings. If you have any other specific questions I'll do my best to answer them.

[Saavedra]

They are quite different games.

Call to Arms is about micromanaging troops to insane degrees, in a very unrealistic fashion, in a very realistic physical environment. You can make a single soldier do literally everything because you can manage even their inventory, down to what helmet they are wearing, but said inventory and the game environment are very reasonably realistic, since you can blow up buildings and pierce cover with weapons that are powerful enough. The game´s visuals and its mechanics are very well put together, with what you see in screen being exactly what´s happening (remember this for the next paragraph).

Combat Mission is about controlling troops. The environment is far less detailed and your options when managing troops are far more limited, but that´s because Combat Mission is about simulating a very deadly battlefield where troop vulnerability, morale and suppression play the main role. The challenge lies in thinking two steps ahead, not in controlling your soldiers and vehicles better than the opponent. Unfortunately, the game is really old and it shows: the simulation is amazing, but the visuals are not 100% photo-realistic, meaning that what you see in screen does not necessarily represent what´s actually going on. There is hidden terrain, buildings are difficult to navigate, stairs are nowhere to be seen but still there, etc...

Basically:
- Call to Arms rewards being clever in unorthodox ways with impressive explosions. It is loud, exciting, and just fun in a more casual way.
- Combat Mission is about applying tactics by the book while tracers fly and vehicles break down. It is demanding and frustrating, but rewards sticking with it and seeing your final score after grueling battles.

[Sunbather]

Not to forget that in CtA tanks can shoot like 200 meters, in Combat Mission they can shoot +1500 meters just like IRL.

[Noblesse Oblige [KG] ⳩]

This games animations, explosions and other effects are nowhere near as good as call to arms. But it has much better and more realistic game mechanics. I love both and owned the original CMSF1 - considering upgrading to this one but multiplayer is only versus 1v1 and I like coop which none of the combat missions have unless you want to swap PBEM turns and make sure one player only moves some units (iirc).
In CMSF you start in with your entire force on the field with a historically correct force make up and have to carefully plan your mission. This includes realistic wait times for artillery etc
The WEGO style of play is best in this game but you can play real time if you wish.
I would say it is closer to Steel Division 2 in that respect where you can plan waypoints with different orders.
In general I think combat mission cmx2 games are far superior for realism than almost anything else out their at this level. A hell of a lot is modelled.
The AI is dumb as a brick though unfortunately. But it gives you a good beating unless you know what you are about.

[Sunbather]

Just two additions to HMS:
1. Your force is not entirely deployed in the beginning. Sometimes you have backup in 10 or 20 or even 30 minutes. But unlike skirmish mode in CtA you can't call in troops.
2. I did not play Steel Division 2 but I did play Wargame: Red Dragon and I have to say that I hate that game since it forces you to just spam units. It feels more like strategy than tactics. Whereas in both CtA and CM you are forced to actually think beyond the rock-paper-shotgun principle and be aware of terrain height, weather, cover, ammunition etc. etc. etc. In that sense I do think that CM is way closer to CtA or Mowas2 than to games like Wargame or Steel Division 2.

[[PBS] Kafka Rambo]

Originally posted by HMS Imperieuse (Destraex\Norska):

The AI is dumb as a brick though unfortunately. But it gives you a good beating unless you know what you are about.

Last CM game I played was Red Thunder. The AI back then was heavily scripted, and for that it was sort of unresponsive. I take it hasn't changed much from that?

[TJXXX]

IMO, Shock Force has more realistic character animations. Have you seen soldiers in CTA run? They look like WW2 infantry with their rifle in one hand while they run.

[burning.phoneix]

Originally posted by Saavedra:

Snip

Hi Saav!

[Saavedra]

Originally posted by TJXXX:

They look like WW2 infantry with their rifle in one hand while they run.

Recycled animations, I suppose.