Panzer Corps 2 - Dev Diary #9

[Teku]

The German Amerikabomber program was scrapped when the person pushing for it died so it never made long range strategic bombers until it was far to late. The JU-88 was the only reliable bomber in the German Luftwaffa for the entire war. The only Multi-Engine bomber that could make long range bombings that germany ever developed was the Junkers 390, which was a 6 engine bomber which (if rumors are to be believed) Made a flight from Germany to New York, but only 2 were ever built.
Germanys air force developed as a tactical weapon, meant to assist the ground forces in the blitzkrieg, so the effort for long range like the B-17,24,29 were back burned for more direct ones. Its the same with Jet Fighters. Germany built and tested the first jet fighter in 1939, but the airforce didnt deem it worth their time until 1942 when they were losing the air war, which resulted in jets not being introduced until 1943.
(Ju-390)



(Heinkel He 178)

[maguro]

If anything like this were implemented in a scenario, I'm wondering how it would work. Fw 200s or Me 264s flying from Spain or France would require a pretty large map. I am still hoping the devs can get things streamlined enough so larger maps play at a reasonable rate, but as Rudankort mentioned in an earlier post, the game seems to not be there yet. Also, will the game mechanics allow for simulating that kind of range of movement on the map? From reading the dev diaries, it seems like the new air combat model might fit this concept better, but I'm just speculating at this point. I do like the idea, as I am a fan of "big-map" scenarios and I have always wanted to simulate strategic bombing in the current game so I hope this is possible!

On the similar topic, will it be possible in PzC 2 to script AI to prestige bomb cities/ports/airfields as an AI behavior option? If I am correct, this not something that can be done currently in PzC. Please, correct me if am wrong.

[proline]

Regarding atomic bombs, it only took two to make Japan surrender, but whether the USA would have surrendered if Germany used a couple against NY or DC we'll never know...

Japan surrendered partly because they were nuked, partly because they were under siege and running out of resources, partly because they had no allies left, partly because they had no super-weapons in development that could change the course of the war, and partly because they thought, incorrectly, that more nukes were inbound. So it's plausible that if a German invasion force had access to, for example, one nuke a month, that the Americans would have fought on. Especially if they believed their nuclear program was only 6 months behind.

Is this likely? Of course not. The Germans would never have beaten the US to the first nuke. They came nowhere near. Nevertheless, this is still a more believable scenario than USA East.

[maguro]

Enhancing the original PzC's more conventional strategic bombing aspects in PzC 2 would be more compelling for game play-ability IMHO, although I can't argue with the historical significance of the a-bomb.

[proline]

Enhancing the original PzC's more conventional strategic bombing aspects in PzC 2 would be more compelling for game play-ability IMHO, although I can't argue with the historical significance of the a-bomb.

I mentioned atomic bombs only in the context of how to make USA East a bit better. Whether the game really needs them I don't know.

Changing strategic bombing comes up a lot. The truth is, PzC really can't model that how it was. For one thing, strategic bombers travelled hundreds of kilometers to their targets. That means on a typical PzC map they should appear from off screen and go off screen for fuel. Second, the effect of level bombing was cumulative damage to the German economy over the course of the war from 1942 onwards, it didn't really affect PzC sized battles. Third, there was really no defense against level bombing. Buying lots of air defense helped only a bit. Fighters were only moderately successful. Fourth, not all factions had effective strategic bombers. Fifth, strategic bombers didn't need to follow anything like PzC's sight lines and they didn't need to respect weather the way it works in PzC (they cared more about the weather at their base than their target).

You put it all together and there isn't really a fun way to make it realistic. I believe one of the later iterations of SSI's Panzer General let you "call in" strategic air strikes that would be invulnerable and just basically hurt a given hex on the map. Not very fun as there isn't much strategic tension about it and the other player can't defend.

[Retributarr]

The Germans would never have beaten the US to the first nuke. They came nowhere near. Nevertheless, this is still a more believable scenario than USA East.

Actually...that isn't quite so!. In late April 1945 near a town in the Thuringian Forest... a small version of the German Atomic Bomb was detonated, the townsfolk's in the region saw white bright light...light up everything. They also suffered from Radiation poisoning with related side affects such as hair loss, inflammatory skin and such like.

Hitler was also developing large quantities of 'Heavy-Water' for his Atomic Programme'.

[Teku]

Japan surrendered partly because they were nuked, partly because they were under siege and running out of resources, partly because they had no allies left, partly because they had no super-weapons in development that could change the course of the war, and partly because they thought, incorrectly, that more nukes were inbound.

Not entirely correct. At the time when they surrendered, while all of that was true, the Russians went to war with them as well, and took Manchuria from them in only 2 weeks, And would not keep fighting a war on two fronts as thats how their allies the germans lost. And they did have a super weapon. The I400 submarines which were enlarged submarines fitted with internal hangers for 3 aircraft. These subs would later prove pivotal in putting cruise missiles in submarines during the cold war.

[Teku]

Actually...that isn't quite so!. In late April 1945 near a town in the Thuringian Forest... a small version of the German Atomic Bomb was detonated, the townsfolk's in the region saw white bright light...light up everything. They also suffered from Radiation poisoning with related side affects such as hair loss, inflammatory skin and such like.

Hitler was also developing large quantities of 'Heavy-Water' for his Atomic Programme'.

Not quite right. He had heavy water production in norway, but it never got the funding or attention of the Manhattan project. His focus was on the Vengeance Weapons program that results in the V1 buzz bomb and V2 cruise missile.

and that "bomb" in the forest wasnt a bomb, it was an experimental weapon that just fired pure ionizing radiation that a small division of german scientists tested, but it never went any farther than that since the allies were rushing in on the test area

[Teku]

if were talking theoretical weapons they designed/planned, let's see what happens if they had gone through with building The Landkreuzer P. 1000 Ratte. Ooooooh the possibilities

[proline]

His focus was on the Vengeance Weapons program that results in the V1 buzz bomb and V2 cruise missile

You mean V1 cruise missile (aka buzz bomb). The V2 was a ballistic missile.

[proline]

Japan surrendered partly because they were nuked, partly because they were under siege and running out of resources, partly because they had no allies left, partly because they had no super-weapons in development that could change the course of the war, and partly because they thought, incorrectly, that more nukes were inbound.

Not entirely correct. At the time when they surrendered, while all of that was true, the Russians went to war with them as well, and took Manchuria from them in only 2 weeks, And would not keep fighting a war on two fronts as thats how their allies the germans lost. And they did have a super weapon. The I400 submarines which were enlarged submarines fitted with internal hangers for 3 aircraft. These subs would later prove pivotal in putting cruise missiles in submarines during the cold war.

I'd file the USSR involvement under the heading of having "no allies left". Pretty much everyone was at war with Japan by the time of surrender. The I400 submarines were certainly interesting, but they had no hope whatsoever of changing the course of the war in the pacific. Japan wouldn't have even been able to fuel them by late 1945 because had the war continued they would have been completely under siege and all their cities / port / refineries would have been firebombed one by one.

[Teku]

His focus was on the Vengeance Weapons program that results in the V1 buzz bomb and V2 cruise missile

You mean V1 cruise missile (aka buzz bomb). The V2 was a ballistic missile.

yeah i misstyped that

[maguro]

Enhancing the original PzC's more conventional strategic bombing aspects in PzC 2 would be more compelling for game play-ability IMHO, although I can't argue with the historical significance of the a-bomb.

I mentioned atomic bombs only in the context of how to make USA East a bit better. Whether the game really needs them I don't know.

Changing strategic bombing comes up a lot. The truth is, PzC really can't model that how it was. For one thing, strategic bombers travelled hundreds of kilometers to their targets. That means on a typical PzC map they should appear from off screen and go off screen for fuel. Second, the effect of level bombing was cumulative damage to the German economy over the course of the war from 1942 onwards, it didn't really affect PzC sized battles. Third, there was really no defense against level bombing. Buying lots of air defense helped only a bit. Fighters were only moderately successful. Fourth, not all factions had effective strategic bombers. Fifth, strategic bombers didn't need to follow anything like PzC's sight lines and they didn't need to respect weather the way it works in PzC (they cared more about the weather at their base than their target).

You put it all together and there isn't really a fun way to make it realistic. I believe one of the later iterations of SSI's Panzer General let you "call in" strategic air strikes that would be invulnerable and just basically hurt a given hex on the map. Not very fun as there isn't much strategic tension about it and the other player can't defend.

The game probably doesn't need a-bombs. Historically important but I don't see their place in the PzC series.

Again, for the large, continental-sized map fans like myself, depending on how large the maps can become in PzC 2 before they become unplayable, I'd like to have something along the lines of "prestige bombing" as in Pz Gen 1 & 2 as a scripting option in the scenario editor. Agreed, it's obvious that in the avg scenario strategic bombing is beyond the scope of PzC but we've all got things we want to see in the new game. Not sure what the devs are planning to do content wise but I know what I'll be doing in the scenario editor.

[Teku]

(i like how this went from game improvement talk to discussions about the "what ifs of the german research")

[rubyjuno]

(i like how this went from game improvement talk to discussions about the "what ifs of the german research")

Every Dev diary ends up the same it starts as a discussion of whatever the Devs have revealed and ends up spinning off into a fascinating history lesson

[PanzerCro]

Enhancing the original PzC's more conventional strategic bombing aspects in PzC 2 would be more compelling for game play-ability IMHO, although I can't argue with the historical significance of the a-bomb.

I mentioned atomic bombs only in the context of how to make USA East a bit better. Whether the game really needs them I don't know.

Changing strategic bombing comes up a lot. The truth is, PzC really can't model that how it was. For one thing, strategic bombers travelled hundreds of kilometers to their targets. That means on a typical PzC map they should appear from off screen and go off screen for fuel. Second, the effect of level bombing was cumulative damage to the German economy over the course of the war from 1942 onwards, it didn't really affect PzC sized battles. Third, there was really no defense against level bombing. Buying lots of air defense helped only a bit. Fighters were only moderately successful. Fourth, not all factions had effective strategic bombers. Fifth, strategic bombers didn't need to follow anything like PzC's sight lines and they didn't need to respect weather the way it works in PzC (they cared more about the weather at their base than their target).

You put it all together and there isn't really a fun way to make it realistic. I believe one of the later iterations of SSI's Panzer General let you "call in" strategic air strikes that would be invulnerable and just basically hurt a given hex on the map. Not very fun as there isn't much strategic tension about it and the other player can't defend.

Again, for the large, continental-sized map fans like myself, depending on how large the maps can become in PzC 2 before they become unplayable, I'd like to have something along the lines of "prestige bombing" as in Pz Gen 1 & 2 as a scripting option in the scenario editor. Agr

Hmm...I do remember prestige bombing in PG 1, but I don't recall it in PG 2, and I played it a lot. AFAIK I think you couldn't even buy strategic bombers in PG 2, only tactical one's ?!

[PanzerCro]

One interesting thing would be, like in UoC. To get some special SS units that appears only as auxiliary unit. But of course should be stronger than regular units.

[loganfive]

On the note of going into fantasy and/or alternative what-ifs, the other thing that surprised me when I played the GC East (and I had mentioned it here on the forum previously already) is the following paradox phenomenon: so how does it work that you win DV after DV (in selected battles of a more or less single campaign path, not along the entire front of course) and then you still end up defending Berlin (in some way)… but then with an army full of Tiger IIs and Elefants? That’s also implausible for several reasons…

The game play itself is kind of nonsensical.

The whole idea of "elite reinforcements" is pure fantasy. I can lose 90% of a unit's strength and always be able to replace my losses with men and equipment that are at least as good? When was that true for any army in any modern war? And worse, there is no apparent impact on morale or support for the war in my home country.

My outlook on all this is that it is just a game and there is no point in worrying too much about historical accuracy.

I also think that part of the problem is that the original Panzer General came out in 1994, when the prevailing view among historians (especially in the English-speaking world) was based on the memoirs of German commanders like Halder and Manstein. So the PG series was somewhat premised on the myths of German tactical and technological superiority, the genius of their officer corps, and the possibility that Germany might have won if Hitler had listened to his generals. In the past couple of decades, as the German and Soviet war records have become available, a much different picture has emerged, and opinion among historians is shifting towards the view that Germany lost the war very early on.

[PeteMitchell]

One interesting thing would be, like in UoC. To get some special SS units that appears only as auxiliary unit. But of course should be stronger than regular units.

Just fyi (again), portraying and/or promoting Nazi ideology/symbols/insignia, etc. will most likely get PzC2 banned by law in some European countries (regardless whether intentionally or unintentionally)… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strafgese ... ection_86a

[PanzerCro]

One interesting thing would be, like in UoC. To get some special SS units that appears only as auxiliary unit. But of course should be stronger than regular units.

Just fyi (again), portraying and/or promoting Nazi ideology/symbols/insignia, etc. will most likely get PzC2 banned by law in some European countries (regardless whether intentionally or unintentionally)… https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strafgese ... ection_86a

But I would swear I saw units in PG 2 being named "SS Infanterie" and "SS PzGrenadier". Sure, they didn't have any insignia of Nazi, but still had that "SS" in their name.