Welcome to The Few Good Men

Thanks for visiting our club and having a look around, there is a lot to see. Why not consider becoming a member?
Register

Call to Arms

H

hungry animals

Guest
Anyone check this game out? It's only $15, I'd like to hear some of your thoughts on it before I decide to try it out.

store.steampowered.com

Call to Arms on Steam

Call to Arms offers an innovative mix of real-time strategy and 3rd, as well as 1st person controls. Set in the time of modern warfare, the game offers realistically modeled vehicles and heavy weaponry. Command your troops to victory or fight by yourself in the 3rd or 1st person action mode.
store.steampowered.com store.steampowered.com

It's a RTS/FPS/TPS. I'm more interested in the RTS side of things, and it looks like it has smaller unit actions.

Also it says it has co-op, which I'm always up for.
 
Yeah, it's modern combat-oriented and plays somewhat like Syrian Warfare or the old Men of War series of games. I am interested because they are going to release Call of Arms-Gates of Hell Ostfront, which is going to be the spiritual successor to MOW and MOW: Assault Squad 2, all of which I own and have played. It will be WW2 Eastern Front action. The games are RTS but can be paused so you can think through tactics. It's primarily small unit tactic's stuff, you can "grab" people and order them as units or grab items to use and add to your inventory. They are kind of beer and pretzel stuff but I find them fun.
 
Last edited:
I had some time tonight so I watched a few videos of both games.

Aside from the setting and first person mode, are there any major differences? Maybe I haven't watched enough videos to find out yet. @holoween, what makes Call to Arms worse than MoW? I haven't played any of the MoW series, but the $15 price tag and modern setting appeal to me.

@HOA_KSOP I'm glad there's a pause mode. I can get overwhelmed with RTS and too many moving parts, especially when it looks like you can split squad up to every man.
 
hungry animals said:
I had some time tonight so I watched a few videos of both games.

Aside from the setting and first person mode, are there any major differences? Maybe I haven't watched enough videos to find out yet. @holoween, what makes Call to Arms worse than MoW? I haven't played any of the MoW series, but the $15 price tag and modern setting appeal to me.

@HOA_KSOP I'm glad there's a pause mode. I can get overwhelmed with RTS and too many moving parts, especially when it looks like you can split squad up to every man.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a pause key is an absolute necessity in most RTS games because let's face it, too much real-time (read just like reality/real life) tends to get real messy real fast. Then what's the fun of a game if it's as messy as real-life...LOL

I too am interested in hearing the shortcomings of Call to Arms as well. They have that upcoming WW2 game that is actually being developed by the original MoW developers but in the interests of "getting it out," they are bolting it onto the Call of Arms engine.
 
The damage model feel off.
Small arms have no real difference in how they behave and all of them barely damage enemy infantry at longer ranges and instant kill them at closer ranges with no noticable middleground.
Same thing goes for vehicles. They tend to either be immune or explode instantly with very little of the gradual damage MoW usually has.

Units abilities dont properly function.
Throwing grenades is quite hit and miss as sometimes your troops simply wont throw them and as a callback to the damage model they seem to either kill units outright or do no damage at all.
Firing at rockets when done automatically by troops works ok though they keep wasting rockets on KOd vehicles quite a bit but manually getting them so fire often simply doesnt work.
Reviving downed units with medics again sometimes works and sometimes doesnt.

The ai behaviour is inconsistent
infantry is often slow to react to other infantry
the pathfinding is quite terrible which is partly the issue of the next problem

Map design isnt good.
maps are quite often so overloaded with objects that vehicles and infantry have massive issues moving across.
there are practically no flanking opportunities because cover is everywhere

First person direct controll breaks the game
spotting ranges dont exist here so a first person controlled tank can see and fire across the entire map so mp battles can often be decided by who gets the first vehicle (or could be because the busy maps and strangely low damage at range seem to be a direct result of trying to make direct controlled vehicles less op)

Overall for singleplayer id recomend rather getting any of the older Men of War titles with proper campaigns and even the original Soldiers Heroes of WW2. For multiplayer Men of War Assault Squad 2 is simply far better.
 
That is good to know, @holoween, thanks for the breakdown.

Regarding the damage model, I saw some comments that say Call to Arms does have a hardcore mode where it sounds like units aren't as tanky. Is it possible to have first person mode disabled in multiplayer?
 
hungry animals said:
That is good to know, @holoween, thanks for the breakdown.

Regarding the damage model, I saw some comments that say Call to Arms does have a hardcore mode where it sounds like units aren't as tanky. Is it possible to have first person mode disabled in multiplayer?
Click to expand...

You can coose between first person, the normal direct controll or none at all.
I cant remember if ive tried hardcore mode so cant really comment on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top