OOB vs Panzer Corps

[Ichthyic]

I had actually tried OOB before I ever tried Panzer Corps, but with the new DLC I figured I would take a look at Panzer Corps.

I was a long time player of Panzer General back when it was new and shiny. many many hours I put into that.

Panzer corps is better than Panzer General was, by a good margin IMO.

but...

OOB is far better than either.

not just the graphics, mind, but the mechanics are better, and the AI is better. the maps are more interesting as well.

example of mechanics that are better: how attacking the same target with multiple aircraft works for example. I can attack the same target with up to 7 aircraft in OOB. which makes perfect sense, as it's not like they get in each other's way.

supply lines... a bit touchy in OOB, but they make sense and add a whole different layer of gameplay that really isn't in the Panzer games in the same way.

the AI in the panzer games was incredibly simple, rarely taking advantage of bad moves by the player, unless you ran your unit into a river. the AI in OOB has amazed me sometimes with the ability to try and outmaneuver the player.

OOB... it's just... better.

thanks for making it.

[Ichthyic]

...and...

the above was supposed to go in the general discussion section.

oh well.

[rich12545]

We've had Panzer Corps for quite a while now. Nice game. It covers all WW2 except the Pacific. Along comes OOB to fill that gap with the same basic engine only better. Fine.

Now OOB will take its better engine into PC territory. So what will become of PC? Will it be obsolete already?

Wouldn't it be nice if all the PC campaigns and DLC could be modified to work in OOB? This would be the perfect solution.

[VPaulus]

Wouldn't it be nice if all the PC campaigns and DLC could be modified to work in OOB? This would be the perfect solution.

That could never be possible. Completely different game engines....
The only thing both games have in common is the theme, WW2.

[simcc]

Mechanics OOB is better in terms of supply, deployment limitations etc but by far PzC scenario design is still stronger. I did mention before on both the game good point and bad points and by far PzC still better overall as the scenario design is just so solid.

I was wondering like what I will be getting for GC US corps as I have played all GC in PzC and all the other DLC so I was skeptical that it might grab my interest, for the anything name panzer corps I will purchase simply because it's like a collection to me but I am doubtful I will even finish the game. When I started GC US corps I was like boring in the first 2 scenario and after that the scenarios get so good that I can never stop playing on my free time. Almost complete GC43 so far.

What I have always highlight to the developers is that OOB is very solid in terms of mechanic, I think overall PzC is older hence the mechanic is not as great as OOB but still you will be suprise that older game still have a better mechanic in terms of soft cap rules, that's the creativity of PzC that I really respect and enjoy. In OOB the scenario design is just too weak compare to PzC, PzC have over 100 scenarios with all DLC yet you don't feel the drag or grinding effect but in OOB most scenario is just plain boring, highlighted that what I hate most is teleportation, single or limited approached to complete objective, para option is almost sure non workable due to efficiency lost, In terms of scenario design PzC being more experience hence far better scenarios created, I am not saying that they are perfect but very near perfect, I find in PzC I have to watch out for counter attack as the timing is very well place and usually I have to plan ahead where to stop and resupplg, would I be pushing too far? And many times I took the risk and i would be punish for it but in OOB I won't get punish as units intend to survive longer but the main thing is enemy will never punish you so you have all the time in the world and that's bad scenario design. Take example of midway you just need to hang back and let the planes to the job even when there is a sizable US naval as they will never push out of the destroyer line to punish you. Another example of bad scenario design Jawa land invasion, the Dutch simply flee to a corner and remain idle there even when I am just a few hex away and they won't even run out and finish me off. That scenario is like ok destroy part A then part B then part C and don't worry there is absolute no punishment from the AI just go and destroy them they won't fight back.

I do hope with time OOB developers will gain the experience of designing great scenario.

[Mojko]

I believe that the tragedy of Panzer Corps can be summed up in these few key aspects of the game:

Overstrength of units

This makes units too powerful and in some late game situations you can actually get the impression that you are playing Civilization 1 (I wonder how many people will get this reference )

Unit slots

Each unit takes up the same unit slot, which makes most of the units completely useless (or marginally used at best). If you look up some of the let's play videos on Soviet Corps, you can see that best players end up with an army of 20 tanks and 20 artillery because everything else is just weaker.

Artillery support fire

This makes artillery units broken in large groups, hence the unit composition in paragraph above.

Panzer Corps is a good remake of Panzer General, but OOB is what I like to call a spiritual successor. It takes the mechanics to whole new level and thus I think:

OOB > Panzer Corps > Panzer General

[simcc]

Overstrength have been counter by soft cap rules

Unit slots agreed it should be like OOB all have different value

Artillery group is not strong it's actually a noob trap, you can place 8 artillery together and I can smash it in 2 turns suffering minimal losses no matter the terrain.

PzC is a simple game that is really hard to master and so many different playstyle developed even by the most veterans players like me hahaha I have play entire GC over a dozen times yet I still find it very interesting.

OOB have solid mechanic as I have noted many times from supply to deployment to mix arms assault etc but the scenario is way below par compare to PzC. With that mechanic it should make players like me abandon PzC but sadly many vets still prefer PzC as the scenario is challenging and fun and so many of us use different approach to achieve the same results which is why PzC scenario is still one of the best.

Your statement above of summary on PzC is not accurate imo

[simcc]

Also note from steam achievement how low is the percentage of full GC completed on PzC, the reason is because you need to master it to complete it most players fall on GC 43-44 as they went bankrupt in game prestige because of overstrength. Overstrength battle is easy but replacent will kill you on the long run. Using none overstrength in late campaign makes a very hard tactical challenge.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Wouldn't it be nice if all the PC campaigns and DLC could be modified to work in OOB? This would be the perfect solution.

That could never be possible. Completely different game engines....
The only thing both games have in common is the theme, WW2.

With a massive mod and the addition of god-knows-how many units, it would be possible (if only in theory) to transfer the scenarios into OOB (although they would still have to be built from scratch in the editor).

Nikivdd converted the PG campaign (and IIRC PG2 as well) into PzC, so no-one says it is impossible.

- BNC

[VPaulus]

Wouldn't it be nice if all the PC campaigns and DLC could be modified to work in OOB? This would be the perfect solution.

That could never be possible. Completely different game engines....
The only thing both games have in common is the theme, WW2.

With a massive mod and the addition of god-knows-how many units, it would be possible (if only in theory) to transfer the scenarios into OOB (although they would still have to be built from scratch in the editor).

Nikivdd converted the PG campaign (and IIRC PG2 as well) into PzC, so no-one says it is impossible.

- BNC

There isn't any way to mod such a thing. Obviously you can create scenarios that look like the ones from PzC with the scenario editor, but no automated tool will be able to do it.

[simcc]

I think what BNC says it you can do it with hard work of reproducing it but not the simple convert or cut and paste style

[simcc]

I admit it would be nice to see PzC using OOB engine hehehe makes players give more loves to smaller unit like panzer IV and stugs instead of Tiger/Panther and elephant combo hahahaha

[WarHomer]

I´ve played PG/PC since both came out, and always found it fun, although less and less challenging as I got better. Loved the games, and as stated, have played it on and off for many, many years.

But OOB is many times better IMO. I even bought Soviet Corps, but after 2 missions I just shelved it, and went back to OOB even though I´ve played every campaign and DLC i OOB many times.

For the first time ever I´m considering not buying a PC product (US Corps) since I´m afraid I´ll just shelve it like Soviet Corps.

So even though I should hate OOB, since it ruined PC for me , I just love it, and would really love (AND PAY) for all the PC missions to be transferred to the OOB engine.

But I would love a Pacific Grand Corps even more, since I really like to have ships among my core units.

I hope when OOB really starts up with the European theater of war (which I suspect they will) that they dont neglect ships. Both OOB and PC have a high element of what if, and I would love controlling a strong German/Italian (surface) navy one day.

[Horst]

OOB clearly overshadows PzC in many aspects as long as you have a fast computer to play and don’t have a modder’s ambition to bring new models into the game. Listing all the improvements over the PG series would be too tiresome now.
Nevertheless, Panzer Corps offers high performance due 2D, external scenario editor for quick and simple map creations and changes, and the less complicated modding possibilities. It’s easy to learn as player, mapper and modder. Simplicity can also have its charm.

The only thing that clearly stops OOB from shelving PzC forever is the still missing European theatre. Hate them all you want, but you can’t get around the ol Nazis with their megalomaniac world conquest plans, heavy tanks, and jet fighters for a successful, challenging WW2 game, no matter if playing on Axis or Allied side.
Pacific is nice with naval battles and landing operations, but large European ground battles offer more unit type variety and strategies in uncountable historical scenarios. It’s also easier for players to handle if they don’t need to spend additional resource points on naval units. Not few players have already been disappointed so far that land-based aircrafts can hardly be used during the official OOB campaigns. The designers shouldn’t be blamed for that as it’s the naval nature of the Pacific War.

Panzer Corps has reached its maximum capacity now with so many campaigns and nations to play, may it official or custom-content. The time has also come to me that when I start playing PzC, I start missing this and that feature from OOB that I quickly abort playing again. I had my fun with PzC, but I’m rather looking forward to more OOB content now.
I can’t wait to start playing with the Finns later which normally offer challenging defensive scenarios, and hope we get to play the Germans sooner or later afterwards.

[Mojko]

Nevertheless, Panzer Corps offers high performance due 2D...

Actually, you can switch to 2D tactical map in OOB in the options. This speeds up load time and improves performance significantly. I play on 2D tactical map on my notebok.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

There isn't any way to mod such a thing. Obviously you can create scenarios that look like the ones from PzC with the scenario editor, but no automated tool will be able to do it.

Mod all the units,
Mod all their stats to be similar to PzC
Create scenarios with the same terrain in same place, same objectives etc. as PzC
Give similar PP rewards etc.

If you have access to models suitable for the units, you probably could make a PzC conversion that is at least 95% faithful to the original.

I never said a tool could do it, but that it would take a huge amount of intensive work, but such a thing is possible.

I think what BNC says it you can do it with hard work of reproducing it but not the simple convert or cut and paste style

Spot On!

About artillery, I think it is currently possible to give a support fire trait to units that could replicate this feature from PzC. Just remove it from AT and give it to all arty and you should be good to go .

- BNC

[BJGeary]

Panzer corps is better than Panzer General was, by a good margin IMO.

but...

OOB is far better than either.

not just the graphics, mind, but the mechanics are better, and the AI is better. the maps are more interesting as well.

There is one feature that both PG and PC have (as well as Civilization and almost every hex-based tactical game in existence) that is notably lacking in OOB: an undo move button.

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Civ doesn't have an undo option.

But in both Civ and OOB, there is always the save-then-attack/move strategy, if you really think the outcome of a battle is that vital.

- BNC

[Mojko]

After all the feedback on Panzer Corps in this thread I have decided to revisit the game and see what changes have been made. They decided to overprice the over-strength mechanic, which basically kills it. This is good for the game, but still I believe that it was a poor choice from the game design perspective. I think having extra strength point not participate in the combat would be a much better choice. This would make over-strength units only have something like "instant reserve" feature instead of being completely broken.

Reinforcing a unit in battle costs twice as much compared to the same thing done during deployment phase. I slightly dislike this one, but I think it's ok. The sad thing is that I have noticed this only after finishing the 42/43 west grand campaign.

I must praise the scenario design, but I also see that the game designers had to "bend" the game rules to its limit. When you see all the silly things like heroes that give negative stat bonuses only because the game designer clearly has no tools to change unit stats directly. Another example would be silly torpedo planes that have only 1 ammo and the game engine highlights that with yellow ammo mark. This is the reason why I believe OOB is much better, because the game engine supports lot of the stuff that had to be done in PzC in a very roundabout way.

I really like the addition to campaign options, so for example you can change the ridiculous random combat outcome to a much more moderate random that is present in OOB.

I also really like the the most recent change done to OOB, hopefully we will be able to introduce more new players to this great game.

[DirkW]

The worsest thing about PC is the movement of infantry in trucks or halftracks. Why any ordinary soldier could leave a halftrack in under 1 minute, he needs more than a day in PC!! Thats makes him an easy target and makes halftracks useless!!! PC was made for Panzer- Junkies and all firefights are displayed as one pure sort of unit versus another. OOB has at least the goal to create a functional game which combines the operational layer of discision making with animations and unit buying. It´s more like a modern GMT title by Mark Simonitch and so in my opinion clearly outclasses PC even in Scenario design which was often terrible in PC ( Normandie landing in the base game; defends of the Reich etc.).