Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
25 Posts

Tide of Iron» Forums » General

Subject: Comparison of TOI with Combat Commander? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mark Buetow
United States
McHenry
Illinois
flag msg tools
Combat Commander Archivist
badge
Move! Advance! Fire! Rout! Recover! Artillery Denied! Artillery Request! Command Confusion...say what?!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Just curious if anyone is going to put the two side by side. I'd be interested especially in a review of the "feel" of the two games and how they play out. (Yes, I realize TOI has tanks but that really isn't a concern to me).

I'd do it myself, but I don't have $80 to shell out. blush
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
eryn roston
United States
San Diego
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'd be curious too...although TOI is more intriguing to me given the presence of tanks and stuff
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Fassio
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hopefully I will be able to accommodate this request soon as my ThoughtHammer order finally has shipped and will be arriving this week with both Tide of Iron and Combat Commander: Europe. Stay tuned.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
From my rules reading only:

CC: Card-driven. If you want to do something specific (eg move, shoot), you must have a card that allows you to do it. This is similar to the M44 system, but does allow many more types of actions. Cards also have events on them, and are the mechanism by which randomness is produced: each card has 2d6 results on them which produces a more forced bell curve.

Each map board is self-contained and is used alone in a given scenario. Units are cardboard counters.

ToI: Allows you to do just about any action with any unit, 3 at a time, back and forth. Special actions are also done with cards, but at the discretion of the players. You must use your command points to buy them. Each side may only use the deck(s) allowed by the scenario.

There are 12 double-sided clipboard-thick isometric map boards. They are used is various combinations and orientations along with a large number of overlay hex tiles. Units are plastic figures.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Appleton
Australia
Canberra
ACT
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I have both and they're both great games.

The major difference is probably the way the cards are utilised in the game. In CC the cards drive almost everything in game - movement, firing, random events, dice rolls etc. In ToI the cards are generally limited use "power-ups" and a way to spawn in reinforcements. They do not control movement or limit your fire options in any way.

Both games have combined fire which revolves around a base piece. However the implementation is different - for example in CC all pieces firing must be adjacent to each other and have LOS to the target and add 1 Fire Power each to the base firing piece's FP, whereas in ToI all firing pieces only require LOS and each additional firing piece adds 1/2 it's FP to the base piece's FP.

You can Op fire in both games, although in ToI you can only op fire at a particular unit once no matter how many spaces it moves whereas in CC a unit in Op fire mode can fire every time a unit moves into a new space.

ToI has 2 types of firing options - normal and suppressive. In CC units can become pinned but only as a result of normal attacks.

Also ToI has vehicles which are not present in CC, although CC has a wider variety of small arms and more options with regards to laying smoke and covering an advance than ToI.

Hope that helps.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I wrote this on Consimworld:

Quote:
CC:E is moderately more complex than TOI. E.g., the CC:E line of sight rules are somewhat more complex (and more realistic) than TOI. Both CC:E and TOI have effects where one unit in a hex can affect another friendly unit in the same hex, but only CC:E has rules for moving such units together, so they get this benefit even while moving (but this then introduces some additional complexity). CC:E has more "interrupt" options where one player can act during the opponent's turn. And so on.

The difference in complexity is not great, and so I doubt too many people would like TOI but find CC:E too complex. It might be an issue for younger children (e.g., I think many 8-9 year olds could play TOI but would find CC:E a bit much).

A bigger difference between the two games is that, in TOI, players have more control over how their units move, while in CC:E, you can only do what your cards permit. In this sense, CC:E might seem like a "souped up" version of C&C:A, while TOI is more like a traditional boardgame. The CC:E system creates more of a feel of the chaos and unpredictability of combat (the same scenario will go very differently if replayed several times), while TOI allows the player to follow more of a calculated plan.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colin Hunter
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I...
badge
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well I've played both of them now. I don't know if I am in an authoritative position on either, but I'll do my best to give you a run down. Both are pretty good games

Tide of Iron:

The Bits- Nice plastic minis,Good Quality board, not mounted, but nice thick carboard, good quality cards and Nice Counters. The board is made up of several double sided pieces of cardboard that combine to make an entire board. This means there is a lot of versatility.

Scale: More abstracted than CC:E and at a slightly higher scale, maybe?

Mechanics: This is the main difference for me. ToI is reasonably abstract, similar to Memoir 44 (ok not that similar, but it is closer to that than say ASL ). There are some really cool mechanics in the game. By far my favourite is that each side generates command and spends this on various things (cards and initiative). Cards can be used for reinforcements, ground support, artillery and command decisions, as well as other things.
ToI is not really about modelling anything on a small level. While I haven't actually played memoir 44, I've played plenty of C&C:A and Battlelore and it shares the same feel of these games. It represents the overal situation quite well, but doesn't simulate this, by modeling realism in anyway (whatever realism mean).

Now that I actually have to compare the two I find it very hard to crystalize the essence of the two games and compare, but generally ToI is strategically, much more about resource management and combined arms. This was one of quite cool things. Infantry were nearly incapable of knocking out a machinegun post, but combined with artillery and armour they could quite easily clean out machineguns.

Overall: Basically its cool having armour, cammand points are really neat and so it the initiative. Overall the game is more abstract than CC:E. To me this game feels like many FF games, an amalgamation of some Eurogame mechanics with a cool theme and some dice thrown in to spice things up. It seems well produced and is quick and easy to play (although the rules are rather long).

CC:E
The Bits
Cardboard counters and paper map, the usual GMT fare. Nothing exciting here. Each scenario is played on a different maps and there are lots of maps.

The Mechanics: CC:E on its surface is a much more traditional wargame, like a very simplified ASL. However the strongest thing about this game is the cards. This surprised me as I thought this would be really straight forward. Basically you have a hand of cards and can use the cards for various things. The main thing you do is order your troops with them, but you can also use them to do special actions. This is the heart of the game. Each power has its own decks and they all have special emphasis. Knowing what is left in your deck is really important, also planning based on what is left is crucial. While I'm sure no game is realistic, it certainly feels a bit more authentic (regardless of the actuality). Troops are a bit tougher and you seem to have less troops. The rules seem a bit more complex than ToI, but they are still easy to play and you can easily play a couple games in an evening.

Overall: CC:E is a really cool game. It has a really neat strategy with all the card play and the feel is more "authenic" (not that this means anything ). In general it feels more like a wargame. There are no tanks it is about infantry combat.

Conclusion:
Both are good games. ToI is a well produced game with nice bits and clever mechanics. If you really liked Memoir 44 and are into euros, but want to try a light wargame this game is for you. If you want to play a game a bit closer to a traditional wargame, but don't want something too complex or long go for CC:E. Personally I like CC:E better, as the card play is more interesting and I like the fact it is slightly more of a simulation, however i would guess the majority of people would prefer ToI.
Good luck
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike zebrowski
United States
Unspecified
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
TeufelHund wrote:
You can Op fire in both games, although in ToI you can only op fire at a particular unit once no matter how many spaces it moves whereas in CC a unit in Op fire mode can fire every time a unit moves into a new space.


Incorrect. You can Op-Fire at a unit once per hex it enters as long as the attackers are different.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mike Zebrowski wrote:
TeufelHund wrote:
You can Op fire in both games, although in ToI you can only op fire at a particular unit once no matter how many spaces it moves whereas in CC a unit in Op fire mode can fire every time a unit moves into a new space.


Incorrect. You can Op-Fire at a unit once per hex it enters as long as the attackers are different.


It's correct if "you" refers to a unit, and not a player.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ibn_ul_khattab wrote:
ToI is reasonably abstract, similar to Memoir 44


ibn_ul_khattab wrote:
CC:E on its surface is a much more traditional wargame, like a very simplified ASL.


I'll have to disagree with you 100% on both these statements. I think you have the games reversed. You seem to be basing your opinion solely on plastic minis vs cardboard counters.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
ibn_ul_khattab wrote:
CC:E on its surface is a much more traditional wargame, like a very simplified ASL.


You seem to be basing your opinion solely on plastic minis vs cardboard counters.


Isn't that what you would expect for a quote that says "on its surface"? Colin then goes on to say (in the next 13 sentences, which you didn't quote) that the actual game (CC:E) is quite different from this surface appearance.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ya ya. I just thought it was misleading enough to warrant a comment. I wasn't trying to take his words out of context.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Buetow
United States
McHenry
Illinois
flag msg tools
Combat Commander Archivist
badge
Move! Advance! Fire! Rout! Recover! Artillery Denied! Artillery Request! Command Confusion...say what?!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the replies. They are quite helpful, especially Calvin's.

I really enjoy CC and I like the "feel" of it. Not that I'd never get TOI if I could afford it, but I searched long and hard for a squad type game that combines the right feel with relatively simple play. (M44 bores me; LnL is too much thinking; CC....Just right).

Not to disparage TOI, either. It looks like a really cool game.



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colin Hunter
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I...
badge
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
Ya ya. I just thought it was misleading enough to warrant a comment. I wasn't trying to take his words out of context.

I completely understand why CC:E seems similar to C&C:E, but if actually play the game, it doesn't feel particularly similar. Having actually played both games you could easily point to parts of both games that are like C&C:A or like various other games (even ASL), the impression I was giving was what I felt having played both of them.

Jim has obviously played both and disagrees, I accept this, I'm not refering in anyway to the rules derivation of either, only the impression I get from playing them.

edit: spelling
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ibn_ul_khattab wrote:
Jim has obviously played both and disagrees, I accept this, I'm not refering in anyway to the rules derivation of either, only the impression I get from playing them.


Fair enough. I haven't played either; I've just read the rules. I guess I was only commenting on the mechanics of play, rather than the feel of play. I have played M44 and ASL.

My impression of how CC:E feels is the same as M44: I have these cards. What can I best do with them? If I don't have the cards that I want, then I can't do what I want.

My impression of how ToI feels is the same as ASL: Here's the current situation. What do I want to do, and with which units? Do it.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ekted wrote:
My impression of how CC:E feels is the same as M44: I have these cards. What can I best do with them? If I don't have the cards that I want, then I can't do what I want.


I think this is pretty misleading about CC:E. First, cards in CC:E have multiple uses, and are played in various combinations, so there are a lot more ways to use the same hand of cards. Secondly, the variable rate of play (from one card per turn, to your whole hand) and the ability to discard in order to redraw more cards, mean that much of the game is about managing the flow of cards through your hand, in order to get what you want. Not just doing what you can with what you have.

Is it more like M44 than like ASL? I dunno. Is a peach more like a chair than like a flute?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I formed my opinion long before I had listened to Jason and Scott's show about it (http://point2pointsource.com/xoops/modules/news/article.php?...). Scott feels the same way, and so do some of the responders. Perhaps it's not as severe as in M44, but if you don't have a move card, you cannot move. That really turned me off of M44 and every other game using a similar system.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt R
United States
Keller
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ibn_ul_khattab wrote:

I completely understand why CC:E seems similar to C&C:E, but if actually play the game, it doesn't feel particularly similar. Having actually played both games you could easily point to parts of both games that are like C&C:A or like various other games (even ASL), the impression I was giving was what I felt having played both of them.


Translation for BoardGameGeek rookies:
"I completely understand why Combat Commander: Europe seems similar to Commands & Colors: Ancients, but if actually play the game, it doesn't feel particularly similar. Having actually played both games you could easily point to parts of both games that are like Commands & Colors: Ancients or like various other games (even Advanced Squad Leader), the impression I was giving was what I felt having played both of them."

Sorry for being cheeky Colin. I was simply amused at the thought of what a "non gamer" would have regarding all of the those game acronyms - especially the ones that are so similar (CC:E and C&C:A).

[EDIT: M44 = Memoir '44 ]

Carry on... arrrh
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Brugato
United States
Federal Way
Washington
flag msg tools
Nullum gratuitum prandium.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've played a lot of Combat Commander: Europe (CC:E), and Borg's C&C system games [Commands & Colors: Ancients (C&C:A), Memoir '44 (M44) with its expansions, and Battlore].

As for CC:E...

Quote:
...much of the game is about managing the flow of cards through your hand, in order to get what you want.


Bingo! This is a point some people new to CC:E don't catch at first. The idea is to 'churn' through the cards to put together a plan (a good hand). I like to think this simulates an overall commander trying to coordinate with subordinate units to execute a plan. This can take time (turns)--sometimes more than you like, and on the battlefield time is a precious commodity. Your opponent may have better luck at 'coordinating' his units (he's getting luckier card draws).

Unlike Borg's games using the C&C system, CC:E players aren't limited to flushing their hand one card at a time. This is a major difference between these two games.

As for TOI...well, I'll let you know when my pre-order (from January--yes, I'm dyin' here) arrives.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Colin Hunter
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I...
badge
To approach the Other in conversation is to welcome his expression, in which at each instant he overflows the idea a thought would carry away from it. It is therefore to receive from the Other beyond the capacity of the I...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Unlike Borg's games using the C&C system, CC:E players aren't limited to flushing their hand one card at a time. This is a major difference between these two games.


Exactly the card play is much more like Age of Napoleon or Paths of Glory where there is trade off between playing cards or holding them.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter Appleton
Australia
Canberra
ACT
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Mike Zebrowski wrote:
TeufelHund wrote:
You can Op fire in both games, although in ToI you can only op fire at a particular unit once no matter how many spaces it moves whereas in CC a unit in Op fire mode can fire every time a unit moves into a new space.


Incorrect. You can Op-Fire at a unit once per hex it enters as long as the attackers are different.


Pedantry, thy name is...shake

Sorry if it wasn't *100%* clear but of course you can Op Fire with a *different* unit in ToI as outlined above...sorry if it wasn't obvious I was referring to one unit Op firing.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Cutthroat Cardboard (Barry)
Scotland
Edinburgh
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mbrugato wrote:
As for CC:E...

Quote:
...much of the game is about managing the flow of cards through your hand, in order to get what you want.


Bingo! This is a point some people new to CC:E don't catch at first. The idea is to 'churn' through the cards to put together a plan (a good hand). I like to think this simulates an overall commander trying to coordinate with subordinate units to execute a plan. This can take time (turns)--sometimes more than you like, and on the battlefield time is a precious commodity. Your opponent may have better luck at 'coordinating' his units (he's getting luckier card draws).

Unlike Borg's games using the C&C system, CC:E players aren't limited to flushing their hand one card at a time. This is a major difference between these two games.



People keep comparing Combat Commander and M44 because of the use of cards for activation but there is a major diference. The card part of Combat Commander is a real card game all about hand manipulation with options to control the speed at which you move through yor deck, where card combos, card counting etc can play there part. In M44 the cards are simply a mechanism to give you an limited orderset in any given turn. Pick the best option from five knowing that next turn you'll still have four of those options plus one new one. For me the feel of these two games in play is very different.

Tide of Iron looks good, (If only it would arrive in the UK I might be able to say more than that ) but it does seem to me to be much more the heir to the M44 throne than Combat Commander. Again the card use in TOI is completely different from M44 and the game is firmly based on squad level actions rather than M44's amorphos scale. Tide does however seem to carry the flag for slick, simple, board game implimentations of WWII infantry combat with dice pool based mechanics. It almost feels like how Memoir woud have had to evolve to become a tactical game, though it appears to include some nice new mechanisms all of it's own.

I don't expect Tide to feel like Combat Commander much more than Memoir does. Given that they're both WWII tactical combat games this might just be how my warped brain relates to the game mechanics involved. In simple terms however it seems to me that one is a cagey card game at heart whilst the other a dice fest and I am rather hoping to get a chance to like each on it's own merits.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Barry Ingram
Spain
Barcelona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Peach = Combat Commander: Europe
Chair = Tide of Iron
Flute = Memoir '44
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Captain Spaulding
United States
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm a fan of Battlelore, although I find it a tad light for the time that goes into setting it up.

I spent days reading all about Advanced Squad Leader, a notoriously realistic and complex game, and ultimately backed away from it, mostly due to the many people who refer to it as a way of life. Although it sounds like the ultimate tactical game, I decided I should probably settle for something that can be understood and played without needing to consult an actual WWII veteran every time you role the dice. [Edit] Is that mean? I didn't mean it to sound mean. Veterans rock. And I'm sure ASL is a blast once you learn it.

Combat Commander seemed more reasonable. Also, Tide of Iron wasn't out yet. I bought CC, read the manual, and returned the game before ever playing it based on two things:

1. No way in hell could I ever get my wife to play CC (although she loves Battlelore.) The rules were just too complex, and with the deluge of cryptic cardboard counters, I knew I wouldn't be able to convince her.

2. I have one other friend who would put the effort into playing such a game, but I just decided I would rather wait for Tide Of Iron, since I didn't see us playing both, and Tide Of Iron just seemed friendlier but comparable in terms of complexity. I was also concerned about the heavy use of card management in Combat Commander. People have said that the card driven system of CC makes it more of a simulation, but I decided I was more interested in TOI's system of being able to activate all of your units during every round.

So I returned Combat Commander: Europe (paid a 10% restocking fee) and finally picked up Tide of Iron the other day.

And I LOVE Tide Of Iron! It's more complex and deeper than Battlelore, but the rules didn't seem quite as heavy as Combat Commander. So far I seem to be the only person who finds CC too complex yet can cope with TOI. I guess CC is just above the limit of what I want to deal with. Could you imagine if I had tried Advanced Squad Leader? Can you say Advanced Brain Aneurysm?

I know this isn't a totally fair comparison, since I never actually sat down and played CC (although I did set it up.) But I figured I'd chime in about my own limited experience with both.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Cote
United States
Maine
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
...much of the game is about managing the flow of cards through your hand, in order to get what you want.

mbrugato wrote:
Bingo! This is a point some people new to CC:E don't catch at first. The idea is to 'churn' through the cards to put together a plan (a good hand). I like to think this simulates an overall commander trying to coordinate with subordinate units to execute a plan. This can take time (turns)--sometimes more than you like, and on the battlefield time is a precious commodity. Your opponent may have better luck at 'coordinating' his units (he's getting luckier card draws).

Unlike Borg's games using the C&C system, CC:E players aren't limited to flushing their hand one card at a time. This is a major difference between these two games.

Skipp wrote:
People keep comparing Combat Commander and M44 because of the use of cards for activation but there is a major diference. The card part of Combat Commander is a real card game all about hand manipulation with options to control the speed at which you move through yor deck, where card combos, card counting etc can play there part. In M44 the cards are simply a mechanism to give you an limited orderset in any given turn. Pick the best option from five knowing that next turn you'll still have four of those options plus one new one. For me the feel of these two games in play is very different.

Tide of Iron looks good, (If only it would arrive in the UK I might be able to say more than that ) but it does seem to me to be much more the heir to the M44 throne than Combat Commander. Again the card use in TOI is completely different from M44 and the game is firmly based on squad level actions rather than M44's amorphos scale. Tide does however seem to carry the flag for slick, simple, board game implimentations of WWII infantry combat with dice pool based mechanics. It almost feels like how Memoir woud have had to evolve to become a tactical game, though it appears to include some nice new mechanisms all of it's own.

I don't expect Tide to feel like Combat Commander much more than Memoir does. Given that they're both WWII tactical combat games this might just be how my warped brain relates to the game mechanics involved. In simple terms however it seems to me that one is a cagey card game at heart whilst the other a dice fest and I am rather hoping to get a chance to like each on it's own merits.

I'm glad this discussion occurred. I'm going to revisit the CC:E rules again with a new perspective.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.