Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy Image
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 4 Critics What's this?

User Score
6.5

Mixed or average reviews- based on 37 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Combat Mission - Battle for Normandy (CM:BN) faithfully recreates the experience of tactical land warfare in Western France during World War Two. Using the unique Turn-Based (WeGo)/Real-Time hybrid game system of our proprietary CMx2 battle engine, the first installment in this new series covers the three months after the Allied D-Day landings in Normandy in June 1944, from Operation Overlord in June through the Cobra Breakout in August. Expand
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 3 out of 4
  2. Negative: 0 out of 4
  1. Jul 18, 2011
    90
    Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy is a game for history buffs and war game enthusiasts. If this is your bent, you will not find a more enthralling and historically accurate game.
  2. Oct 19, 2011
    84
    Return of the premier tactical wargame series to World War II is marred a bit by clunky camera and some big UI issues (no grand unit list after ten years, really?). But the game beneath is solid steel, and the additions of new Combat Mission engine good. If only the game would cover more than three months of combat. [June 2011]
  3. Aug 6, 2011
    80
    Too fiddly and unforgiving for the popular palate, but those after reality-rooted WWII challenges should clearly investigate. [Aug 2011, p.94]
  4. Oct 12, 2011
    73
    CMBfN is a very good tactical wargame saddled with pre-alpha looks and controls. [Dec 2011, p.74]
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 27
  2. Negative: 7 out of 27
  1. Oct 29, 2013
    10
    Never before have i played a WW2 game with so much attention to detail or that was so intense, and unforgiving. The game has a steep learning curve, but once you learn it you will be rewarded. I have CMbn and both its modules (expansions) and there is no other ww2 game like them in the world. Expand
  2. Sep 25, 2014
    10
    Best ww2 simmulator out there, its has its problems but it doesent compare, takes time to learn though. Theres more on the series that came out and the turned bases style can make you play masive battles. Expand
  3. Oct 2, 2012
    9
    There is simply no better tactical wargame available. This is as close to a simulation that a game can be without losing focus on gameplay.

    The demo is free. Try it yourself. If you have any interest in tactical WWII gaming, you'll be hooked.
    Expand
  4. Nov 4, 2013
    8
    Its not perfect but it is an excellent, high fidelity game that attempts to simulate WW2 combat in the European Theater. I could not expect more from a small, niche gaming company who's developers have a passion for this time and place in history. And it's only getting better.

    Try not to be too swayed by the grumpy old farts that want 100% of everything and will never be happy because they were born that way.
    Expand
  5. Oct 7, 2013
    6
    I played the first Combat Mission games up till 'Barbarossa to Berlin', and I was very impressed at that time by the attention to detail and the effort that went into making the game as realistic as possible. It was truly revolutionary. I still buy Combat Mission games and modules, despite the VERY stiff price. However, what strikes me after playing this series for so long is that there hasn't really been any real progress in terms of the game's(or simulation's) ability to produce realistic results that are comparable to real life scenarios. The FIDELITY of Combat Mission is unprecedented, but there is more to war than ballistics. Take the casualty rates, for example. They are still hilariously out of range. There are probably good design related reasons for that, but again: where is the next wargaming revolution?

    Sorry, Battlefront, you kept me entertained for 13 years, but now it is time for something new.
    Expand
  6. Sep 13, 2011
    3
    Though the game is a nice upgrade over the old version of this game, the game still lacked a playability of friends that would make this game really good. The small battles done with my friend always seemed to go one way, really quick, and half the time felt like little of the enemy was seen but a lot killed. Now giving you a total feel of the battle at hand. Larger battles that might give this much needed feeling, are impossibly to play, as was hinted by the smaller battles with occasional pauses to let the data pass through, but with the bigger ones, larger play with a friend is nearly if not impossible. With such problems as these, I'd think this game falls short of what it could and should be. Expand
  7. Oct 31, 2013
    0
    A recent posting on the official forums has caused a flood of high-value reviews to be deposited on Metacritic this week, throwing the overall rating out of whack. This rating is for not only on the original but also the two modules released to date, CW and MG. The title is a bit of a misnomer, as it covers the ETO campaign from June 6 to September 30 not just Normandy.

    I suppose this game is a bit of a misnomer no matter how you slice it as major bits of equipment are missing despite the game engine making its debut in 2007, and WWII coming back down the pipe 2 years ago. Flame weapons for example, multiple AA weapons in a ground role, engineering equipment, funnies. This may seem like trivia, but anyone using the mission builder and trying to recreate a historical battle from a text book or personal account will as often or not have to close the book in frustration when they come upon some type of equipment, procedure, terrain type, etc. that was present in the battle but isn't included in the game. Canuck units have strange mixes of Brit vehicles that historically they never used, and the MG module makes you purchase SS and Brit stuff twice. You can recreate a fraction of what happened in any given portion of the campaign, and the limited interface means you have a very generic way of doing it. TacOps, for example, at least gave a broad palette of SOPs for forces under command that broadened the interface and opened up the player's decision tree. Just about every palette here is very narrow forces mostly feel the same, terrain is limited to a handful of types, victory conditions are vague and unfulfilling (marketed as "realistic"). CM now has so many patches and versions some of which you have to pay for good luck figuring out which.

    The devs are all over the map with what they're trying to accomplish here. The original games had a clarity of purpose, with cleanly laid out interface, a complete order of battle, and logical unit actions that at least made up for the lack of SOPs, especially in the heavily abstracted environment. The move to a directly representational three-dimensional world resulted in a fragmented interface with many missing pieces. Too frustrating, and way too costly, buying module after module as the devs slowly claw their way back to a state of the art, using paying customers as alpha testers for their experiment. After 13 years, it's time to move on to at least beta.
    Expand

See all 27 User Reviews