Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

546 Excellent

About danielprates

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1324 profile views
  1. Great that the C47 is described as AI-only ... "for now". .... SHOOOON (in Sean Connery's voice)
  2. I have this one. For my taste, it feels a little too "abstract". Feels more like a learning too than a proper game.
  3. Anyone here played the old "destryer command", contemporary of SH3? I did. Sub hunting was interesting, if a bit arcadish. It had those "feeling in the dark" tactics which sub hunting is supposed to be. The game was marred by little replayability value tho, because of the static campaigns. I would welcome another more modern iterarion.
  4. Thanks both of you. I do actually have a trackIr device, I just never really got the hang of configuring it to feel comfortable and natural - maybe I could trouble you for your config specs?
  5. If I could give some suggestios to the dev teams, those would be about the view modes. I hope they are not too hardcoded into the game; Tobruk got me all worked up to like this new version of Clod but the clunky view modes are still the same and boy, are they aggravating! I have a feel beefs with it but for now I will invoke only one: why there is no option to configure buttons (the hatswitch for instance) to GRADUAL pan view? I can only pan 45 degrees at a time, whereas with the mouse I have full gradual view as I wish. It seems logical that the game allows for gradual free view, why only with the mouse and not with the joystick hatswitch? is that so hardcoded that it cannot be improved?
  6. Unlike CloD, here we don't have interactive gyros. Only compasses, and iirc, in airplanes that had both instruments they will just be constantly synchronized. There are more expert people here to explain this, but as I understand it, gyros only make sense to help you deal with the effects of magnetic deviation, but as discussed before in this forum, there is no such thing in this game and all maps point to a coinciding magnetic and geographic north.
  7. I love how those skinless 3D models resemble a freshly built, unpainted plastic model.
  8. I think 1.5 or 2 years ago we had a discussion here about the historical accuracy of these money prizes, it was pretty interesting. Anyone can find it?
  9. You are just the guy I imagined would jump right into designing a campaing for the Hurricane.
  10. I did play Steel Fury and can confirm it was AWESOME. When TC was in development I brought this up here several times: a successful TC needed only try to emulate steel fury somewhat. AI infantry allowing for combined arms situations is 90% of the reason. Maybe TC will get there someday. This is more or less what I had in mind when I said a few pages ago that I rather have playable scout cars than flak. But I got "flak" for that comment; it was shot out of the sky; it was... ach, I cant think of another pun.
  11. If in the future other elements are added, such as AI infantry that we could support/oppose with our player-controlled tanks, we should need other types of vehicles to reach a more "combined arms" type of sim. Anyway, it was just a thought. Maybe I am thinking too far ahead.
  12. This would have been a more interesting use of the partner devs' time. I am glad TC is getting more variety, but for the sake of TC becoming a more complete and varied experience, there are other things we could have gotten first. Scout vehicles for instance.
  13. Looks like a "combat mission" type of game. If so, huzzah!
  • Create New...