
Sorry, but its not fun nor challenging. It's pretty unenjoyable, in fact.
A massive blob of the enemy does NOT equal a challenge - it's just tedious and lazy mission design.
Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Design, Panzer Corps Moderators
Rosseau wrote:Hope that changes as campaign goes on...
I am repeating myself, but here is a wonderful mod. The broken English in the briefings just adds to the realism.
viewtopic.php?f=147&t=50342
I haven't played the US'42 yet, but if those Saharans were Italians, then that was no Kubelwagen but rather one of these bad boys:MikeAP wrote:Things like Kubelwagon or Motorcycle infantry destroying Sherman tanks is something that wouldn't happen. In the mission above, I lost at least one sherman to Saharan Infantry (Kubelwagon). That shouldnt be possible.
This is a good example why you usually avoid to translate proper names.BJGeary wrote:On a different issue, but still on the subject of mission design for US '42, I have to wonder if changes were made to the DLC after playtest, or did everyone testing it just not read the pre-mission briefings? After the Tebourba mission the briefing presents you with a choice of 'Operation Spring Wind" or "Operation Morning Air" (neither of which when Googled yield any results, so I'm curious as to whether these represent real WW2 ops), but gives you absolutely no clue what the difference is between these choices.
Oh, and one more major issue regarding these DLCs: the Library contains no information on the US Corps campaign, so players have absolutely no way to know without multiple playthroughs what the consequences of victory levels or branching choices are.
You have an awesome memory. Thank you for a very informative reply.Dragoon wrote:This is a good example why you usually avoid to translate proper names.BJGeary wrote:On a different issue, but still on the subject of mission design for US '42, I have to wonder if changes were made to the DLC after playtest, or did everyone testing it just not read the pre-mission briefings? After the Tebourba mission the briefing presents you with a choice of 'Operation Spring Wind" or "Operation Morning Air" (neither of which when Googled yield any results, so I'm curious as to whether these represent real WW2 ops), but gives you absolutely no clue what the difference is between these choices.
Oh, and one more major issue regarding these DLCs: the Library contains no information on the US Corps campaign, so players have absolutely no way to know without multiple playthroughs what the consequences of victory levels or branching choices are.
The person who wrote/translated the briefing should have avoid to translate German operations names.
I hope got all all fact straight as I write this out of my memory.
Spring Wind (Frühlingswind) was the German codename for the offensive of the 5th Panzer army (lead by General Arnim) aimed at the American 1. Army at Kasserine Pass towards the city of Tebessa in the North. Also know as the Battle of Kassarine Pass. Googling Frühlingswind along with the term WW2 should definitive have produced a result.
While Morgenluft (Morning Air) was the German operation conducted at the same time by the Africa Corps lead by Rommel aimed at the southern flank of the US 2nd Corps in support of operation Frühlingswind.
So to answer your question. So yeah they really happened and they are one of most important battles during the North Africa campaign, and quite a bloody lesson for the US forces as they lost around 200 tanks and 6000 soldiers.
But the whole case shows how little value the Internet or Wikipedia can have, when you are looking for serious or in-depth information. It can't replace to study and read a researched book written by a experienced and renowned historian.
While most of the vehicle mounted weapons are MGs and 20mm cannon they also had some 47mm guns (it looks there's at least one in the film in the link). Bear in mind the Russian front experience that a high volume of 14.7mm AT rifle rounds can cause a lot of damage to vision ports, gun barrels, radios, tracks etc and have potential to jam turrets, so you have a lot of damage that might not destroy a tank but which could require it pulling out of combat or scaring a rookie driver. Plus the 47mm AT guns were about as good as the Czech ones used on Panzerjager 1 and would have the ability to cause some real damage.BJGeary wrote:That still shouldn't be able to destroy a Sherman.
I didn't view the film. I was just going by what looks to be a 20mm Breda AA gun on the AS 42. If the AS 42 has LOS on a Sherman it is also very likely that Sherman also has LOS on the AS 42, and a single HE round from the Sherman would take care of such a nuisance quite nicely. In game terms, probably 2-3 points, at best, inflicted on the Sherman while the Sherman should get at least 7-8 on return fire. It would probably require inexperienced, stupid, and outright cowardly Sherman crews to succumb to Italian scout cars, even if those Italians are 'elites'. I agree with MikeAP: losing Shermans as he did shouldn't happen.captainjack wrote:While most of the vehicle mounted weapons are MGs and 20mm cannon they also had some 47mm guns (it looks there's at least one in the film in the link). Bear in mind the Russian front experience that a high volume of 14.7mm AT rifle rounds can cause a lot of damage to vision ports, gun barrels, radios, tracks etc and have potential to jam turrets, so you have a lot of damage that might not destroy a tank but which could require it pulling out of combat or scaring a rookie driver. Plus the 47mm AT guns were about as good as the Czech ones used on Panzerjager 1 and would have the ability to cause some real damage.BJGeary wrote:That still shouldn't be able to destroy a Sherman.
Used by special forces against relatively inexperienced crews and you can start to see how they could spoil the day for the Shermans, even if much of the damage could be fixed in a day or two.
I can't deploy anything else in the scenario. I'm limited to a few a units, but honestly, I dont see how artillery would make a difference with all the tanks/vehicles that get thrown at the player.kverdon wrote: I think your Core Corps is a bit lacking in Artillery and that could explain your difficulty.
I draw a line between 'Challenging' (fun, but difficult) and 'Tedious' (difficult, but boring). The giant blob of enemy units is lazy design, in my opinion.simcc wrote:MikeAP, I do hope you can give more specific details as why mission design is bad?
2. Scenario design is very challenging more like GC 44-45 west style as you are on defensive during the early war so it is very challenging. Sacrificing correct unit at a correct time get your job done without major lost