Close Combat - Panthers in the Fog

Close Combat - Panthers in the Fog
N/A
Metacritic
74
Steam
56.971
xDR
Our rating is calculated based on the reviews and popularity of the game.
Price
$9.59
Release date
14 May 2015
Developers
Publishers
Steam reviews score
Total
74 (148 votes)

Close Combat: Panthers in the Fog details the desperate German counter-attack at Mortain, the last chance of the Wehrmacht to stave off defeat in Normandy. Can you match the tenacity of the American defenders of Hill 314? Or can you succeed where the Panzers failed, driving through to the sea and changing history?

Show detailed description

Close Combat - Panthers in the Fog system requirements

Minimum:

  • OS: Windows Vista / 7 / 8 / 10
  • Processor: 800 MHz CPU
  • Memory: 1 GB RAM
  • Graphics: 256MB Video RAM, DirectX 9 compatible and capable of 1024 x 768 resolution or higher.
  • DirectX: Version 9.0c
  • Storage: 3 GB available space
  • Sound Card: 16-bit DirectX 9 compatible sound card
  • Additional Notes: An Internet connection is required for 2-player head to head play.
Updated
App type
Steam APP ID
368220
Platforms
Windows PC
Similar games
Popularity
Reviews
Write a new review
L'Ouverture
L'Ouverture

This and Gateway to Caen are my favourite CC games to date. This is the sort of improvement that The Bloody First simply failed to make. My only major quibble is there seems to be an error or two in the weapons file that makes sniper rifles useless, easily modded, but should be patched. There is also a lack of incentive to take company and Battalion level support units instead of just taking tanks, it might have been a good idea to have to separate support categories, one for the Battalion level assets and one for a platoon from the wider battle group. It would also be nice if, during the strategic phase, merged units preserved their kill data and if units could be split as well as merged. Explosion graphics are a little inferior to GtC and both could do with a less tinny sounding set of gun noises and the addition of vehicle engine sounds. Small details aside, this is classic Close Combat. I do find that with waypoints the movement has improved a bit and I find nice additions, like the being able to see prisoners as well as killed and wounded in the casualty set up, the new supply and unit mechanics, to be all good. I like the fog effects too and wish that an updated version of Wacht am Rhein with an expanded 'what if...' strat map was available in this standard. I might even pay Matrix prices for that! If you love CC and get this on sale then you won't regret it, nothing beats Close Combat.

Badgerspin
Badgerspin

We'll ignore the price. Enough has clearly been said about that by others. (Also, I agree with the others.)

I've been playing CC titles since the originals, so in terms of gameplay, this is a solid Close Combat title. No real complaints, nor are there any surprises. IMO it plays better than Gateway to Caen, so on that front I'd choose this one between the two. I appreciate the effects updates, as those were in need of some TLC after 20 years since CCV. Frankly, I couldn't care less if the graphics aren't drastically different overall. The viewpoint and aestetic are what make it a Close Combat title. The changes they put in with regards to that have been well-implemented without neutering what originally gave the series it's charm to begin with.

That AI is what it is, but it's always fared well with my playstyle which has always been more on the aggressive side. I wouldn't say it's gotten any dumber. If anything, it's about the same as it has been since 2000, though that can sometimes be dictated by terrain and how much area is available for deployment. I've tried some more passive gameplay, and if being exclusively in the defensive and holding out for an ambush from half way across the map is how you play, then be prepared to spend a lot of time waiting. Honestly, you're better off setting up traps through sectors of fire, establishing an LP/OP or two to spot the enemy, and making proper use of AT guns and other resources anyway. That goes counter to how some feel about AT and AP guns in general, but they can be extremely effective when employed properly. (Since the AI does have a level of predictability to it, this makes setting up tank traps a bit easier than in multiplayer, though it can still be done in multiplayer.)

In its current form, the difficulty curve is in terms of just unit count and supply availability rather than any increased abilities of the AI. That said, I wouldn't complain if they were to add in a more aggressive, flexible, and smarter AI. (Especially smarter. The AI bonzai charges in Invasion Normandy often made things a bit... too easy.) Since basically all of these titles are running on the same game engine, I imagine that kind of change wouldn't be too difficult to apply across all of them, assuming they even attempt such a change. It's just a matter of getting Matrix Games to actually dedicate some meaningful resources to improving the AI. (Or creating tiers of AI skill levels that aren't just dependent on strategic resources.) FWIW though, if you can pimp-slap the AI with the odds stacked against you, then there's a good chance you might do alright in a multiplayer match against a competent opponent. Multiplayer will always present a greater challenge regardless, but that doesn't mean we still shouldn't have a more competent AI after 20 years.

How the force pool worked and why I was getting more units sometimes but not others took me a bit to figure out, but that's covered in the manual. I was just too stubborn to read the d*mn thing at first. The unit structuring is a bit different if you're coming from the original 5 games, so if you were hoping for an Invasion Normandy style force pool where you can individually select units for the battle, no dice. My condolences to the more cultured amongst you who enjoy Schweres MG42 spam in infantry battles.

I suppose unlike some of the complaints here, I have no problems with the mortars. They're where they should be in terms of effectiveness imo. Yes, they are powerful, but if your men are either standing upright or running, then of course they're going to catch shrapnel from greater distances from the impact point. It works that way in the other titles too, though there seem to have been some tweaks to %hit chance with shrapnel. (The actual effective range of mortars IRL is in the tens of meters, so if anything, they're still nerfed when compared to their real life counterparts.) The mortar threat has always been something to contend with in this series and isn't overly difficult to mitigate. The changes that were also made to how sighting works even makes them easier to avoid than in the previous titles. By a lot.

Overall, I recommend the game if you're already a CC fan. I have not been disappointed with my purchase. It delivered what I more or less expected and I am enjoying myself.

Imagination
Imagination

What a horrifically bad game design. I saw the guides section for the game was rather sparse; now I know why.

pruitt95
pruitt95

I like the older Close Combat play. The screen is bigger and the action is realistic. The newer versions started moving to an arcade-like experience.

marinesku13
marinesku13

This is very good game if you like Close Combat. BUT! its worth playing in Multiplayer only. Single Player is a waste of time as Artificial Intelligence is very stupid. MULTIPLAYER LOBBY IS NOT WORKING FOR YEARS!
And tech support (Matrix or Slirherine - I do not know) do not do anything about it. So either do not buy or buy - check lobby and if it crashes during the game - REQUEST YOUR MONEY BACK IMMEDIATELY! You will be able to connect to your opponent and play - but chances of game crash (and nothing saved) are very high!

meekmatt
meekmatt

good game saddly dont have the best computer to make this game shine

Arctic Circle Pit
Arctic Circle Pit

Close Combat has always been my favorite wargame series. I cut my teeth on the game with Close Combat 5: Invasion Normandy, went back and bought all of the previous ones, and even bought a few of the later entries into the series. For a while the series fell off of my radar, but I recently noticed this game on Steam and decided to purchase it.

I can safely say that Close Combat is still amazing. Panthers in the Fog feels like the better installments of the game, yet is upgraded, with more realistic reinforcement pools and better graphics. The game is still very detailed, with each soldier's mental state, health and supplies tracked, but never in a way that requires micromanagement of any kind. One of the things I always loved about Close Combat, thanks to these features, is how an unintentional narrative can unfold around squads of men under your command. The ability to rename squads allows you to give them nicknames based on this unintentional narrative.

The maps are not 3D, which may turn some newer gamers off, but really, they're beautifully painted maps with a ton of detail (remember that holding the right mouse button allows you to see the elevation and type of cover under the moused-over area, which is important for keeping squads alive).

The game is much slower-paced than more recent WWII wargames. I just did a battle that lasted a good 45 minutes because the AI and I were trying to outmaneuver one-another's tanks without really firing any shots. But that is part of the appeal of this game and other Close Combat games: the level of tactical depth is hard to find these days. Strategy will make or break your victory chances.

There are some things I wish they would move into 2015 though: why are tanks still silent? We should be hearing them echoing across the battlefield. And where are my weather effects? Still, these are all such minor details compared to the things that make Panthers In The Fog and other Close Combat games so good. This game is a worthy entry into the franchise.

10/10.

HaZZarD
HaZZarD

Same engine of CC Caen , not yet the 3D CC we waiting for (The Bloody First ... HYPE), BUT this CC, like all the other, it's awesome to play!.

CC Caen was with British, now you control American forces so the gameplay is also pretty different ( no more 17 pdr :( )

Considering the average steam game, the price is high, but this is a very niche series where you "play" with real history. The units, the maps, the battle order, the unit composition, everything is historical accurate so you are not only playing but also learning WWII military history.

It's like opening an Interactive Osprey book, and one Osprey book cost around £12, so as one enjoying Osprey books is not a problem to pay the price and support this series.

Obviously not a game for all, if you think to play this in a superficial way, without paying attention to the details put in to the game and you don't care about real history, then for you it may be just an old school overpriced 2D RTS.

cheers

Sharky
Sharky

Im not recomending this game/standalone DLC, from 2012
based on game engine from 2000, for 27 euro or 36 euro.
You wanna know why? Read this review.

Close Combat series was my favorite strategy/tactical games series from 90's.
Thats right, first game was made in '96, and last one from main 5 game series was done in 2000.
Then there were others, remakes and etc.. But main game series was from 96-2000.

It was remade at least once from what I remember after that. But no major changes were made, just basic bug fixes and tiny other improvments that time.

Now we have 2015, and Matrix games..who cant make proper game by themselves, made this game. Which was actually made in 2012 and its currently on sale. 2015 - 27 euro. o_O

Is it new game comparing to old ones from series? Yes and no. Mostly NO.
It uses new campaing/scenario thats true. But it uses same graphics engine (apparently improved to 32 bit) same gameplay engine with slight changes.

You have new campaign map here, where you can move your units from sector/region to sector according to your strategy. Which was done in 2 games from old series too 4 and 5th. So nothing original here either.
After which it comes to deployment and fight on tactical level.
Still fun after 15 years..

And after 15 years there is nothing much new in here.
They added cool features , they added some nice units. And that's it.
But I would call it small fixes rather than creating new game.
If you played CC 15 -20 years ago like me you would be surprised how little has changed!

Remember Matrix games didnt had to create engine or gameplay.
They didnt had to start from scratch.
Its not their idea.
They just bough rights for this Close Combat series and they improved it tiny bit.

Now my question to you, fellow gamer: Is it fair to charge 36 euro for "game" like this?
15 year old game, which should be 4,99 -9.99 at most. Cause its not new game its not even from this year, its 2012 game, it should be called standalone DLC.
New game offers you everything new . Not slightly changed old game with new campaign.

This "game" came out in 2012, and whole this time it was for 36 euro.. . How greedy matrix/slitherine are is nothing new to me. Go to their websites and see what sort of games they sell for 30-40 euro prices. Mostly turn based games that look like shit straight from 90's. So thats not first time they did it. This is their normal practice.. Go check their website for yourself.

I loved close combat series, i played from game 1 to 5 in 90's and early 2000.
But after 15 years they could do more, add bigger campaign map or couple, change it so it would actually be new game, do something to justify their price!
For now its just poor cash grab attempt by using Classic game title.

NOT recomending for 36 euro.
NOT recomending for 27 euro.
14.99 euro is really pushing it.
4.99 its about right price for 3 year old game that is remake of 15 year old game.

TO compare this price .. Wargame Red Dragon which is year old game, have 3d engine, have more units , countries and everything.. costs 39 euro.. and this was released in 2012 , and now is for 36euro/27euro? If you even forget about other games from CC series. Then its 3 year old game for 27 euro!!! REALLLY? REALLY?

Other CC title, that is "year old" Close Combat - Gateway to Caen is still for full price 36 euro. LOL.

Why I bought it then? Sentiment.. And to warn others.
DONT FEED GREEDY SCAM DEVELOPERS.
Help me to teach them respect for players!
DONT BUY IT THIS DLC FOR PRICE OF FULL GAME!

REMEMBER This game is from 2012 using game engine from 2000!
And it still costs more than many games relased TODAY ! O_O

Zac
Zac

This is a seriously expensive and yet poor game. No option to alter view from top down so getting a feel for line of sight is difficult, very slow moving, poor interface, iffy graphics, I like both strategy and wargames but only played this twice. No wonder they dont have a demo, if they did you would never buy it, and of course no refunds from Valve. Very disappointing all round.

tridentre
tridentre

need more of close combat games big fan

DarkMyth
DarkMyth

Horribly slow game play, not worth $30 this is a cheap poor graphics game don't waste your money on it.

davevat
davevat

I bought this game a week ago and must say I think the price is a bit steep for what it is. I paid £22 (with a 29% discount) for a game that is 20 years old.
Someone has thoughtfully reworked explosion and smoke graphics a little bit since Battle of the Bulge and Invasion: Normandy but its nice to see they have retained the inexplicable crash to windows for which windows will seek a solution, but never find one. Is that part of the retro feel?
Nobody can drive in this game and will turn any part of a vehicle, except the most armored bit, to an aggressor. AI has generally improved over the years but I didn't find I had to change my tactics picking up where I left off 15 years ago.

Like I said £22 is a lot for a game that was on PC Worlds shelves as a white label for £1.99 10 years ago. For this price I kind of expected a significant reworking, but didn't get one.
Disappointed with the game, disappointed with steam.

DragonKP
DragonKP

Another classic "Close Combat" game. Absolutely worth a buy. The majority of the negative reviews for this game are simply due to the price. Such reviews should not be considered, as they don't address the gameplay itself. Simply put, Close Combat games are the epitome of tactical war based simulation.

ACG_Grunt
ACG_Grunt

Another Close Combat game, another wave of haters. Get over it. Will contiune to buy every last one of these games as they hit steam. The King of WW2 strategy is returning!

Donald J Treason
Donald J Treason

Extremely slow pace with no speed controls, clunky controls for unit movement. I was expecting a modern close combat game, all I got was this lousy old thing.

critic
critic

Wonderful game, a true Close Combat experience, it's actually better that they didn't make a new engine, it just wouldn't be the same experience. Battle after battle, strategic to tactical, this is a good game that I would reccomend to anyone.

LuminGhost
LuminGhost

Having played every single title of the series I can not give you a unbiased review quite frankly. There is no denying however that the real beauty in these games are in the MP experience and having played through perhaps 10 battles in the first MP Campaign I've tried in Panthers in the Fog, I can only say that the netcode leaves some things to wish for. It is playable, but tends to lose connection easily.

As has already been pointed out by others, if you are new to the series it might not be your cup of tea. If you are already a Close Combat fan it will not disappoint. However if you are looking for a good CC Multiplayer experience I have to recommend Gateway to Caen before this title. Let's hope PitF gets the updates it needs and deserves in a future patch.

Alpharius
Alpharius

I finally beat my dad at this game, he finally loves me.

SkattCat
SkattCat

It's like we're still in 1994 and there's been no improvements in gameplay, audio or graphics. Even If your a die hard close combat fan you'll want to wait until this is on sale for at least 75% off.

dsullivan01
dsullivan01

Always liked close combat games--------as a vietnam vet-------I have some knowledge of combat tactics. For example
you never send in tanks without infantry support. or air support. Also----use the smoke. The game works well. Try it-----------you will like it.

[D-D] Napalm
[D-D] Napalm

I have play these for years and love they are back on steam which they have more of them miss playing the other ones as well..

Person of Interest
Person of Interest

Despite the cost of this game, if you cut teeth on close combat like i did, this is great. I got it on sale for $20 and for me it is worth it. It feels like the AI is slightly improved but the game really shines with a friend. What is sweeter than setting up an AT gun waiting for your rival, brother in my case, to drive his tank through your arc of fire and it blows sky-high? OTOH, the agony of hearing a hand to hand fight, the body blows, the screams of your broken team as the enemy finishes them off is at the other end of the scale.

If you enjoy small unit tactics with each round of the soldiers weapons accounted for, in-game vehicle breakdowns, and moment by moment morale effects, give this a try. Long standing community mod support at closecombatseries.net.

Deus⭕Wolf
Deus⭕Wolf

~ ~ 𝕻𝖆𝖓𝖙𝖍𝖊𝖗𝖘 𝖎𝖓 𝖙𝖍𝖊 𝖋𝖔𝖌 is a good episode in the CCombat series.
The same weaknesses than others, yes, but gameplay, maps and campaigns are very entertaining.
One black spot remains though : as all CC games, price is too high, simply because they NEVER bother to fix game elements once it is released, and these weak spots could be EASILY fixed, which makes the requested prices irrelevant...and game special week(ends) price-drop operations are very very rare.

Pirate
Pirate

Close Combat - Panthers in the Fog is worth the $20 on sale. I have played, I think, all of the Close Combat series and I was overjoyed to see it on steam. I was not disappointed as it was as enjoyably frustrating as I remember. As I was screamed at my tank to reload while outflanking a Panther, or the anger I feel when an entire rifle team screams their dying breaths under a mortar barrage as I watch the team fall apart and men run and cower in fear. Command has its burdens and you can feel the weight of your decisions in both victory and defeat.

My only real gripe with this game is when playing as the Germans I really have no idea what type unit they are by their name compared with the American side. Most people aren’t gonna know what a Zugtrupp is or even understand Panzerabwehrkanone Zug ← (I had to write that one down because...well look at it, I can’t even say it. I put it in google translate and it spit out Panzerabwehrkanone Train. Which then I spent another 20mins or so making Google Translate beatbox. So yeah, long story short, worth the $20.

Sharky
Sharky

This franchise I'm playing for years (1997 Close Combat - A bridge to far) and you can say, I'm a big fan of it. This game is not drawn off course except in a some small additions. Some of them are better and some of them are worser.
I do not like how (panzer or tank) can kill a platoon is such a easy way. This is a problem that keeps repeating from the "CC 4". In the "CC 2" was regarding me much better solved. You could have a tank without an ammunition to run over the soldiers. These days it's not possible.
The destroyed tanks simply disappear from the map. Not the everyone but it happens.
You can not count on a roadblock with the destroyed tanks 100%.
I love the way that every soldier is especially conducive to statistics and medals, but this medal simply disappear after the battle?! But I got a knigh cross, yeah.
The backgrounds have a little elevation. They are too flat.

The everybody who are like this kind of strategy games should play this game. Because the franchise "Close combat" it's the best war strategy game in the real time ever. The fans gonna play it anyway... I'm gonna play it agian :)

John Holmes
John Holmes

Dont buy this if you like old cc games.

Comfosa
Comfosa

A waiting simulator.

I've played all of the Close Combat games. Most of them are great games, with the notable exception of this title. The problem is the AI. Here's the usual scenario. You are almost always the defender against a larger, better equipped force. Sounds exciting. Love a challenge. Then the map starts and nothing happens, ever. The attacking force just sits in ambush forever waiting for YOU to attack THEM with your puny out gunned defending forces. You either sit and wait forever or you directly assault the attacker and get destroyed. It's just lazy programming.

dw.leung
dw.leung

Nice graphics, interesting roster of units with high level of historical correctness, gameplay map is significantly larger than previous cc series.

but the gameplay somehow sucks:

1.) I see A.I. positioning an AT gun at a barn, or at an abbey, three sides are blocked by the building, with the only side facing the forest. I suppose nobody would use AT guns this way.

2.) As many others have mentioned, the A.I tends to disperse its units everywhere, or putting them at a corner of the map.

3.) I tried to assault an American AT gun hidden inside a building with 2 teams, both teams took casualties from small arms fire but eventually entered the building and stand face to face with the gun crew, then the game glitched. Both teams and the gun crew just stood there, looked at each other, and did nothing, they do not respond to commands anymore. I have to move a 3rd team in to kill the gun crew before those 2 teams become responsive again.

4.) I positiond a German 75mm AT gun on the side of the road, with clear sight 300m down the road. When the game starts there is a Sherman around 250m away on the road, and somehow the gun crew became "cowered" and did not fire the gun, which was then taken out by the Sherman within 5 seconds. I suppose even the Sherman has eagle's eyes and could spot that AT gun immediately, it is funny to see the gun crew became panicked immediately after the game began.

5.) I understand that the German Pzgr squads in the game are down to 2 or 3 men out of the original 7 or more due to earlier fighting in Normandy, but how would it guarantee that each squad still retains a MG? This is a wrong assumption.

6.) Sometimes the A.I. just moves their infantry across the street for no reason at all and they got mowed down by my MGs.

Corwin86
Corwin86

What can I add? This series have survived so many years and similar games, that is quite useless to add more words!

Simply enough, this is the funniest (to plya) strategy/WW2 game around.
It's not perfect and is not the best anymore, but the funniest, yes.

Also, there are still a good amount of mods and scenarios around, also for the others entries of the series.

If you haven't never played it, I really suggest to try it!

K.B_Martinsen
K.B_Martinsen

Nothing new, still using same old look as the serie did in the 90s but whit over all worser game play, If you want a good close combat game get "Close Combat V: Invasion Normandy" its 15years older and run better and is alot more fun, as a bonus it can be easy modded to any of the CC games included this one.

liberty44
liberty44

It's an ol' school classic. I've loved this game for a long time. This is an excellent strategy game.

Fall Further
Fall Further

Sadly unenjoyable and unplayable as a single-player game. I say this with regret as I wanted to like this game. CC2 "A Bridge Too Far" was a great favourite of mine back in the day. So I wanted this game to recapture the pleasure that game brought. No chance, watching paint dry is more fun.

The AI and the pace make it unplayable as a single-player game. The one thing it seems to lack most is a 'speed up' option. The fastest the game will play-out is 'real time'. The AI, as the attacking Axis, can be VERY cautious so as it inches troops forwards towards defending US position nothing happens for very long periods. And if the AI decides the attack is not going well it becomes even more cautious then nothing happens and the battles just stop, unless you make the US forces start to counterattack the German forces and suffer needless losses. Then moving squads from defensive positions to the end of the map where the German forces are hiding takes a while, so the whole game is just a long, slow, exercise in boredom, interspersed with bouts of violence. Just like real war, but not what I want in a game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1YmS_VDvMY

Freight_Train
Freight_Train

Have to say I am pretty disappointed.

I gave it as pass on how the graphics are old and the sound is pretty ho-hum, that it costs so much for a very poor presentation, ugly UI and sections of the game(like strategic layer) that the tutorial completely ignore and no sane person could figure out on their own. It had all those flaws but I bought it and really tried to get into it anyway, for the tight tactical gameplay.

I really wanted to play exactly this kind of game. I have put some hours on it, I have done the tutorials, I have watched a couple hours of YouTube videos. I learned and agree with how smoke cover and troop movements(in leapfrog fashion) works and I was digging it.

I invested to get decent at it. And it wasn't worth it.

This is unfortunately one of those cases where a few technical flaws and glitches can just ruin a game.

There's no getting past a game that requires you to do so many things right or your guys get slaughtered, yet Slitherine was fine with leaving the pathfinding so bad that it just screws you OVER AND OVER AND OVER.

I have watched 100 troops and tanks die now because they couldn't move somewhere thats wide open, or they wont reverse the damn tank, they turn their weak side to the enemy and get slaughtered - something a tanker WOULD NEVER EVER DO. ITS INEXCUSABLE.

Slitherine, you CAN NOT make a tight tactical game that requires a lot of the gamer if you don't even require of yourself that the GOD DAMN units can move halfway decently.

You should be embarrassed you sell this in its broken fashion. You should be sued for selling it at a premium price.

Bigtime regretting my purchase. I should have just kept playing Wargame: Red Dragon. It's better in every possible way than this is.

THRILLHO
THRILLHO

I have over 1000+ multiplayer hours logged in CCII through CCV, and I've dabbled in the Maxis remakes. The franchise has some chronic problems: broken vehicle pathfinding, mysteriously slow and un-atheltic soldiers, occult line of sight mechanics, and of course: AI so braindead that the game basically doesn't have a functional singleplayer mode. Despite all this, I love Close Combat. Nothing really comes close to it in the RTS/RTT realm. It has simple but nuanced controls, attractive visuals, and extraordinary tactical depth.

Panthers in the Fog attempts to recreate Operation Luttich, the last major German counter-attack against the allied breakthrough in Normandy. The setting doesn't really add or take anything away from the game, but this is still worth noting as so many previous CC titles were defined by their compelling settings or interesting campaign meta-strategy. Here the German player is just grinding down the board with their tanks and seeing how much easy ground they can pick up before the American tank reinforcements arrive. Whatever, it's fine.

The real heart of Close Combat is that actual battles, and this is where Panthers in the Fog suffers the most. There are some really puzzling game design changes that were made in PitF, and they make the game almost unplayable. I'll break them out in order of importance:

1) Extremely large maps - the size of the average map has doubled or tripled compared to classic CC titles.
2) The number of teams a battlegroup can have has been cut from 15 to 12.
3) The number of men in a typical infantry team has been cut. Allied squads have gone from always having 7 men to having 4-6 and German squads have gone from always having 7 men to having 3-5.
4) Mortars are now 10x deadlier than in previous CC titles.

So why is this bad? In short, you have way more ground to cover and not enough teams to cover it with. Classic CC is balanced around a relatively dense engagement occuring between 2 company-sized forces. The slow speed of running infantry, the ponderous set up times most weapons have, and the squad seperation mechanics all work on small boards with obvious objectives and avenues of attack. Trying to advance on a very large board is just frustrating because you're no longer hopping between hedgerows you're trying to jog across kilometers of fields or forest. Infantry squads take forever to cross an appreciable portion of the board. Squads given easy move orders will often end up seperated for no reason at all. And where previously you only had to babysit a tank up 100m of roadway while convincing it to not immobilize itself in a hedge or flash it's rear armor to the enemy, now you're now nursemaiding it across miles of terrain.

All this wouldn't be so bad if the teams weren't so fragile. It's expected that you're going to advance into ambushes and lose men in order to detect where your opponent's machine positions are located. However, these ambushes are now so much more costly to a squad in terms of their overall combat effectiveness that the defenders advantage has become huge. Similarly, this makes teams far more vulnerable to indirect fire weapons.

Finally, mortars are now super deadly, even against units lying prone in heavy cover. Traditionally, CC mortar teams serve 3 purposes: temporarily suppress dug-in enemy squads, smoke off enemy machine guns, and punish any attempt to advance a large mass of men across open ground. They were really useful teams, and the only thing balancing them out was their relatively limited ammo supply. For some reason Panthers of the Fog (and Gateway to Caen) has decided to make mortar teams extremely effective at killing infantry hiding in cover. Yeah, occasionally classic CC mortars would get lucky and dig one or two soldiers out, but now a light mortar can kill entire squads. It could be argued that this is to encourage you to abandon positions that have been spotted rather than continue to strongpoint them, but unit movement is so ponderous squads really can't withdraw once they come under fire.

So regardless of whether you're a CC veteran or someone who's never played the franchise before, don't buy Panthers in the Fog. You can find modern ports of the classic CC games on gee-oh-gee dot com and I'd reccomend those if you're looking to try the franchise out.

SHARKE BYTE
SHARKE BYTE

Really easy to mod as the previous ones (check out CC net for guides etc) and always great to have it on steam if you're like me and lose your game CDs lol

LordHH |LMC|
LordHH |LMC|

Multiplayer just doesn't work. and why the hell would I play this game if not for multiplayer.

Fastbikkel
Fastbikkel

Such a nice addition again to the close combat series. Now i have only played briefly, but what i see and hear so far is very nice again.
I bought this latest CC game on a discount. I have played all the games in the CC series and although i love it, i am not prepared to pay full price anymore.

The sounds and graphics are good i feel. When i hear the guns and explosions, it's good from the start.
New addition is the option to light the battlefield with flares on a dark map. It can get quite hair raising when an enemy flare lights up your sneaky action.
Even the flares make a nice sound when they start to burn, adding to the battle atmosphere.

For the remaining part its quite a typical CC game to me, great combat with ever changing situations you have to deal with.
No you can't change the outcome of the war, but you can at least put up a good show.

Sapper
Sapper

This is a great game. I find that it has a good setting, operation Luttich, the german drive to cut through western Normandy to cut off patton as he is now in brittany. In real life the germans didn't fare so well, they lost horribly and the losses they took here only quickened the losing of france. Now you take the helm either as the US, or as the germans. The latter I find to be the more intriguing of the game as you are desperately trying to hold off the enemy's superior forces and achieve your goal.

Gameplay is next. Panthers in the Fog (PitF) has a lot of the standard body of close combat games, realistic morale and armour penetration, but here is almost a hearkening back to the days of Clost combat 3 the russian front. PitF has large maps and many tanks, which is good because everybody loves tanks. Also added are mortar and artillery barrages, as well as strafing from planes. My only complaint is the same as any close combat game, artillery is an AI cheat weapon. Speaking of AI, it honestly isnt as good as previous installment's, while fantastic on defense the AI rarely attacks and often forces you to make the first move even when you are vastly outnumbered.

Here lies the campaign map. It's a big part of the game, lots of the grand strategy of the game comes from choosing which units to give artillery and choosing where to move your units. I can't say anything particularly bad about it, but good neither. It's servicable.

So overall it's a great game and the poor parts are massively overwhelmed by the good, I heartily encourage a buy. Enjoy!

Bee Unpoisoner
Bee Unpoisoner

I really want to like Panthers in the Fog but honestly this game feels almost identical to the 1990s Close Combat titles. It lacks a large number of essential quality of life features that makes playing the game almost feel like groping around in the dark. There is no elevation mapmode, forcing you to guess whether your vehicle can effectively engage another or if your machineguns can hit an enemy unit. There is no line of sight indicator, again, forcing you to guess and check whether a tree is a line of sight blocking tree or just visual decoration. There are virtually no tooltips in the game, forcing you to guess, which is especially frustrating when you're trying to figure out things like which of the air support icons is used to bring support in the battles and which bombs your own troops on the campaign map (that's not a joke, I never actually had the air support hit the enemy." As well, non-combat capabilities of vehicles and weapons are poorly explained, such as what a vehicle is capable of towing. As well, there are no terrain indicators. This was huge as it's perfectly possibly to deploy a vehicle in what looks like a shallow wall or thin hedge and discover it's now stuck for the entire battle.

I've been playing Close Combat since the second game. It's honestly a great series. It's just frustrating that key issues that have plagued it for over two decades are left out in an era where that can be easily patched.

Worth it on a 75% off sale. Otherwise save your money.

TheMidnightRider
TheMidnightRider

A standard episode of the Close Combat series, no more, no less. Germans counter-attack around Mortain to stall the US advance out of Normandy. Lots of shooting, tanks, mortars and machine guns, scenic countryside, tactical back-and-forth.

UnderUsed
UnderUsed

A return to the classic. This game has been around since before most gamers. Still relevant still great, pay special attention to the morale. pPayed only a few hours since back in the day, but I must highly recommend.

Ghost Maker
Ghost Maker

Great game if you loved the bridge too far series youll love this. I do hate the price point though. Getting it on sale is worth it though.

angriff
angriff

You know it has been along time since i played one of these and now I know why I liked them. Yes it is bit tactically difficult to maneuver your units and hope they face the right way but if you get to position first then it does not matter. Fun all around and once you are used to the movements you can make the right orders. Thumbs Up.

Bingo Bango Bongo
Bingo Bango Bongo

I first started off this series with a bridge too far and fell in love with the strategic gameplay. If you love tactical WWII games then this is for you.

453=Yarra
453=Yarra

Played since the first release of CC but it is amazing that so many years later this one can be so bad. I keep trying to give it a go, but find it is buggy and unbalanced play. When clicking on Begin Battle I had three of my tank destroyers stuck in a hedge telling me no clear path. Couldn't go anyway. Then I tell a HMC to move, and drives off and then gets stuck in a hedge. I've lost most of my main weapons. Then I watch a Panther move away from a road, so I rush my Sherman up and wait for it to return. Very close range, Sherman fires and round bounces of the side of the panther. Panther fires, Sherman dead. Meanwhile, in another part of the battlefield, a smaller German Tank - not sure what it was, has turned away so again I move my Sherman to engage. As my Sherman emerges from the side of the building the German tank magically seems to know it is there, I get off one round which misses, German tank fires and my tank is dead. Pretty consistent. AI seems to magically know what is going on everywhere.

Demolaye
Demolaye

Review CC: PITF
As with all games in the CC Series lot's of fun can be had using real (historical) tactics, or making up your own.
The AI at times may challenge or confound by waivering between way too passive and too aggressive, but in general expect that you can use real tactics and they will work mostly the way they would in the real world:
-Terrain will affect line of site, view / cover from view and protection.
-Dismounted Infantry and Scouts, wheeled or tracked Recce Vehicles / APCs (Sdkfz 234/# armoured cars, Sdkfz 251/# half-tracks, Greyhounds and more) are used to peel back the fog of war, and find the soft targets that cannot otherwise be not seen until they fire upon you.
-Light, Medium and Heavy Armour options exist along-side SPAT and SPAGs, (M5s, Shermans, Fireflys, PNzr IVs, Panthers, Tigers, King-Tigers, Jagdpanthers, Grille, Marder, and more) to soften up Infantry or take out opposition vehicles.
-Infantry of several types (Scouts / Engineers / Pioneers / Waffen SS / Paratroops / Commandos / Rangers / Flamethrowers etc) may attack against a wide variety of ATs / MGs and other Inf.
-Many scenarios will include off-board mortars, artillery, or even an airstrike to supplement your on board indirect fire and punish the enemy for using routes without concealment or opening fire without proper cover.

My scores;
-Fun: 8.5/10 (Multiplayer), 7.5/10 (Single-player),
-Play-ability (does it run reliably and well): 8/10 (Multiplayer), 9.5 (Single-player),
-Tactical Depth: 7.5/10 Vs. AI mileage may vary with humans,
-Historical Flavour/ Historical Value: 8.5/10, (Grand Campaign), 7.5 (Single Scenario Players),
-Graphics and Sound: 7.5/10 (Grognards, Wargame only types), 5.5 (Regular Gamers),
-Replay value: 8.5/10 (Multiplayer), 7.5/10 (Singleplayer),

Overall:
-8.5/10, if your're a Wargamer who enjoys multiplayer,
-8/10, for solo wargamers,
-7.0/10, for RTS or general strategy gamers.

Definately not North
Definately not North

They should put more love into these remakes.

SniperDoctor
SniperDoctor

It is a great game. You must be patient and search buildings and land areas for the enemy. It is a mix of weapons and tanks for the enemy and yourself. You must decide how best to utilize each unit.

OZBOY
OZBOY

reminds me of Battle of the Bulge, tight buildings, lots of armour

sharpas
sharpas

i like it the good old day's game's. played em all just about. all way's come back even with all the new games out'. i still like this one. ./

gsherwill
gsherwill

OK, but not quite up to the standard of the original Close Combat games from the early-2000s.

The Skadian
The Skadian

You're outnumbered, outgunned, and the enemy won't attack., Boring.

The Close Combat AI was better thirty years ago.

lasttimedamnit84
lasttimedamnit84

First of the 3rd generation of CC games

Nats
Nats

I love the CC games of old and the CC3 remake, Cross of Iron, is possibly the best example of the game where you can play the Germans and Russians on the Eastern Front. But this game is probably the next best. Lovely looking maps and graphics for a CC game, nice sounds, and good UI make it the most modern CC game to play if you want hand drawn maps as opposed to the most recent 3d ones (which I personally dont like)

When I first started the game my mouse was scrolling the window far too fast. But someone recommended I change the Windows 10 mouse precision in the mouse settings to 'on' and that seems to have sorted the map scrolling to a reasonable speed. Still shoots off occasionally but most of the time is fine now.

You get lovely French maps in this game with lots of good US units and tanks against an outnumbered German army so its similar to other CC games in that you either play defensively or offensively depending on which side and game you like to play.

Now that I have my mouse issue sorted I would say this game and Cross of Iron are the two best Close combats games you can get today. And they are both superb, suspenseful, intensive, and immersive games to play.

Fisher (CDN)
Fisher (CDN)

Still one of my 'Go to' genre games. Can edit armoury, men and artillery, so you make many, many different scenarios within the same game.

Walkinshaw
Walkinshaw

excellent company level strategy game, AI is a bit easy to beat, in multiplayer get your squads working as platoons with vehicle and mortar support to make a static enemy pay dearly!

The Crescent Hawk
The Crescent Hawk

It' a Classic Close Combat game, there all great. Nothing but good things to say about the older games....

Anonymous
Anonymous

Excellent game coming from an avid WW2 buff and amateur historian.

Stylint
Stylint

Its just like all the other games in the series I have loved an enjoyed, Just wait till its on sale to buy

Robert
Robert

This is the greatest!
For WWII combat tactical games, I've found nothing better. I haven't played the other close combat games, so I can't compare it to them. Compared to Steel Division, I like it more because you don't have this odd points system for reinforcements and you're not constantly getting tons of stuff. It's really great for tank and infantry combat, I wish I discovered it years sooner.

stywsr
stywsr

Great Game - Reminds me of CC5

PHake GameR
PHake GameR

It's Close Combat. I played the first two hundreds of times, they still seem like the best but whichever one you play first is probably the best lol

Sir. Monkey Butt
Sir. Monkey Butt

Ecxellent strategy game and sound effects, only thing there is no running tank sounds but you get used to it.

Homocidalnutloaf
Homocidalnutloaf

Great game, wish they would continue the series with newer graphics and scenerios

leowild
leowild

Panthers in the Fog is a good upgrade to CC2, and generally plays better.

de Bois-Guilbert
de Bois-Guilbert

Went out on a limb and got this on sale. As a fan of the Close Combat series, I thought it might be worth $10.

It isn't. The issues in all other DNR (do not recommend) reviews all hold. The worst, though, is the AI just... sitting... forever, when it should be attacking.

Bradford
Bradford

Great Game! Good combat operation game.

FogofWar
FogofWar

Aside from the sleepy AI and generally too large maps, the "Fog" looks like split milk across the screen. I go back to the Atomic Games first iteration of CC and the magic is lacking from the recent attempts at a squad level game.