AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

[monkspider]

Wow, this thread was sure an adventure. I LOVED the 1939 campaign for including the Saar Offensive. I LOVED that we saw new areas that were never seen before in a wargame. And for the record to Mr. History Knowledge, I have a Bachelor's Degree in History and specialized in the Eastern Front of World War II. More importantly than anything, this campaign was extremely fun to play, with a lot of different avenues of replay value (branching paths, importing a core vs unique bonuses for not importing a core).

[Retributarr]

Instead of a classic French campaign [Ret: Why-Not Have Both Options???], I propose an attack by Italian forces on France and battles in a very interesting landscape of the Maritime Alps and the French Riviera, it is so new and fresh [Ret: We need professional advice from someone with Military-Engineer-Experience to inform us as to how realistically practical this endeavor would be!... Otherwise... I really like the idea!. Maybe 'Slitherine' can call the Local Military-Establishment to get this vital information?]

Instead of Stalingrad, we will move to Norway to repel the British landing [Ret: Why-Not Have Both Options], and for the time of the Battle of Kursk,[Ret: I'm not in the Real-Know... but perhaps these could be two separate events?... if not!... then again... offer both Options as Choices!] I propose to transfer our general to Yugoslavia, let him fight Tito's partisans. Never was that either?

Instead of landing in Normandy, a landing in the Pas-de-Calais region [Ret: Again... I would offer both Opportunities as separate choices__Players like to have their own choice of what they will do!... instead of being forced into a situation.], and for the time of the Battle of the Bulge, let us lock our hero in one of the ports on the English Channel, let him command his defense. [Ret: This is Debateable!]

The thing is that you should look for new ideas and solutions, but the trick is not to lead to absurdity. [Ret: Translation:... the context of the presumed situation needs to be based on 'Actual-Reality'... the real current situational status of the forces involved.]

[Kerensky]

Hello all.

That is one heated discussion you created here . My simple opinion:

I really like the Saar offensive for pure challenge reasons. As much as I would like to see more maps from Poland invasion, I found the opposition strong in numbers but weak in force (as opposed to first DLC). Good old Pz. 38(t)s are just rampaging through Poland without a sweat and the only thing that can give them run for their money is a cavalry swarm. Almost every piece of equipment in Axis lineup is superior to Poland counterparts and unit experience together with Hero collection from the first DLC are just widening the gap. In several Saar scenarios I was more or less matched because French tanks and air force are no joke and I liked it that way. I understand that some people would prefer to see major conflict sites but I'm happy to leave this matter to modding community. Also I'm happy to be able to "collect" different enemy equipment from different sides and be able to choose what units will fit presented situation the best.

I'm currently starting Wlodawa scenario from AO 1939 and so far I really enjoyed a new content very much. Especially the plot behind the big commendation points gain decision - well played Devs! I just miss the Nemesis mechanic in this DLC - I suppose there is none, right?

Also I'm happy that Verdeja tank form the first DLC is still an incredible play maker in this DLC. It is the one single machine from the first DLC that I did not upgraded (or in this case downgraded).

Thanks for contributing to the discussion, it's always a nice morale boost to hear positive feedback to.

To address one point specifically:

There is no Nemesis in the 1939 DLC. We spread out a ton of new gameplay systems across the first two DLC, and we needed to see how they really felt in actual player hands. Some were totally successful (bonus objectives and CP rewards) some were more controversial (AI Allies).

The Nemesis requires many scenarios against the same opponent, and 1939 bounces around a lot with its campaign to cover as much stuff as was happening in 1939, not just in Poland either.
Plus we needed more time to review the Nemesis system, because we sort of hyped it up too much.... to the point that most players put extra focus on eliminating the Nemesis immediately, and then it was just gone from their campaign. So more 'lives' or better tools for the Nemesis to try and survive combat encounters are probably needed now.

So we'll see what happens to that particular system, but not it was not invoked in 1939.

[nexusno2000]

It was relatively easy to mod Commandante Vega to have variable lives.

I set the value to 5 and got to kill him five times.

It was great fun seeing him again and again.

[IttoOgami]

I have only finished the campaign to the end of Saar yet, but unfortunately I felt this is one of my lesser favorite campaigns both in PzC 1 and PzC 2. Spanish Civil War was decent I think, I also liked that it was quite difficult (at least for me, not a Braccada-Level player). But there are some things I hope that change a little in other campaigns. Was not too impressed by the Saar scenarios. I mostly liked Waardt forest. It was tough, but maybe a bit more fitting to the theatre... small scale fighting were you have to deal a lot with the terrain.

Then both DLCs had a bit of overkill feel for me so far. Yeah, I get it, Panzer Corps should be about Panzers and the system is simply not fitting for a battle that was mostly Infantry against infantry like in Spain. But what I certainly liked about the Grand Campaign, it was a slow build up. In GC 40, the Char B1 starts to appear after the first border battles... in Saar, the French swarm you with this tank. What will we get in AO 40 - early French shermans or tanks with 8.8 guns? I feel regarding the design those scenarios want to fire all shots at once while PzC 1 was slowly building up the things more.

Some detailed things about the scenarios. In the bonus scenario, which felt a little weird, occasionally red and blue french armies attacked each other - why? I didn't mind the Czechoslovakia scenario. While not hyperrealistic, at least it showcased what you can do with the system.
Saarbrücken felt a bit like the Ebro battle, but way easier. While we have Wagner, can't he bit a little more talky about what is going on? I lost the bonus objective on my first attempt - was thinking I cleared the red side, but a larger force turned up out of the blue in turn 20 and took those two airfields, while my forces left that side of the map. I'd like a bit more foreshadowing or that possible entry points are showcased more - I am glad there seems to exist nothing like the infamous "BT spam" anymore in PzC 2 but I feel the enemy reinforcements are harder to read. I mean, maybe I should use one of those scout planes more, but why not a little more input by story?

Fictional or not fictional... I feel its about the right balance. While I know it can't be 100 % accurate - and never was, from Panzer General to today - some of my favorite scenarios in Panzer Corps 1 like Gazala line decently mimick the situation, while a scenario like Saarbrücken which feels like a huge French offensive does not. I don't think the older games have ventured all ground and there are still countless opportunities. Small nations campaigns, or there are even some bigger battles that were not in Panzer Corps yet. German-Italian battles near Rome or at Dodekanes islands, Ethiopia, Allied Syria campaign, Courland, Dukla pass, Polar war (axis) and continuation war... there is still a lot of ground to cover aside the big battles which should be in naturally.

[Lakel]

Just to throw out my take on the '39 dlc

I do enjoy the exploration of other battles, but agree that 5 Saar scenarios was 2 too many. Honestly 1939 in full just felt short in comparison to PC1's poland campaign.
Fully loved the SCW, just to put that out.

One particular campaign from PC1 that was interesting was the '42 western campaign, which was similar in concept to AO as I understand, a highlight on smaller random battles and raids, didn't feel too short or too long before the real fighting began in earnest in Italy. Though having to give up most of my core did sting, I am hoping yall manage to bring that feeling back.

Oh, and I so did enjoy raining katyushas on the poor Danish defenses. glory of salvager plus trophies of war.

[monkspider]

Oh and one more thing, i have seen several comments saying the Saar was just some trivial, pointless thing. It seems that most people, if they even know about the Saar Offensive at all, think the French just stuck their toe over the border and then retreated. The scale and scope of it was actually quite impressive. This channel has a good video on it if you are not very familiar with it. So Kerensky's scenarios wasn't based in "fantasy" as some have sad. The Saar Offensive was real and it was a bigger deal than people generally give it credit for.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKTbhC0s5xg

[o_t_d_x]

So much useless talk, IF the editor would be, what it should be, everybody could change what he doesnt like. Personally i would include more poland maps and the choice if the player wants the saar off. or poland from the beginning.

Campaigns have already been created with the Editor: viewtopic.php?f=597&t=100785

Yeah and because the editor is exactly what it has been advertised: "easy to use and much more functions then the old editor" there are hundreds of campaigns made by different people out there: for example wookie davidson, and ... ähm wookie davidson.... and ???

Its so frustrating, i didnt buy pc2 to play the content of others. I want to play MY content, i want to see the hard work, that nearly cost me both hands, in the new engine.
The lua wall is the problem. Many pcone modders arent capable of using lua. Maybe i could learn lua, i was always very good in school, but i am lazy, when things arent fun for me. Programming always felt like it has to be paid very good, because its sooooooo boring and abstract. (the communication between human and machine should be english, not lua or c )

[o_t_d_x]

I disagree on multiple levels. I think that it was always UNLIKELY that the Axis would win the war, but hardly no chance.

Germany was leading in (theoretical) nuclear science in 1939. Wouldnt it be the easiest way to win the war for germany NOT to attack russia and invest the money, they stole from european jews and the money and ressources they plundered from beaten countrys, into development of V-waffen (a4), strategic long range bombers and nuclear warheads . And the std. military could have conquered the oil rich british colonys maybe ?

Imagine operation barbarossa starting later, with the annihilation of moscow and leningrad, or dropping an a-bomb on large soviet troop concentrations. Maybe the allies would have finished a nuclear warhead soon enough, then it could have been a cold war between nazi germany and the west, instead of the ussr. The survival of nazi germany as an empire would have been possible. But not the conquest of the whole world. Ok finally we have reached the parallel universe.

I dont say that that would have been a desirable alternative future. But it should have been easier, to win, then a worldwide conventional war, of attrition, against an enemy with much more ressources, that forces you into a downward spiral with no chance of winning. Of course this is highly speculative. They did have the scientists for that. And they had lots of ressources plundered, after the fall of france. (belgium, netherlands, france had to pay a lot...) And they have proven, that they are capable of beeing worlds leader in (some) technological aspects. (rockets, jets, submarines, first stealth fighter...)
Would that have been enough, for developing a n-warhead if they wouldnt have had to waste all their ressources for a conventional war ? Hard to answer. But if you see what they did in 45, regarding nuclear science, its sure they could have achieved much more, if they would have started much sooner and in times, when ressources havent been such a problem.

[o_t_d_x]

I don't see the need to talk to you
You write false things and insinuate...

What i did write? What false things? Where?

I haven't even started to insult you yet, but when I start, don't cry boy

Now im really scary.

EDIT. Anyway, the sales results will be the verification of the correctness of the policy chosen by the game developers and other creators. I don't like it and won't play it anymore.

Im going to use one sentence from one guy in first page:

"GaMe sucKs, MWahaHAA I wilL IgnOre yoU and go PlaY DiffeREnt GaMes, LOok at How P0werFUl I Am!

You just proved your posture/attitude

So this is my last post in the PzC2 forum, I'm going back to "my" games because it's not "my" game anymore

Just dont forget your promise, but if you do so- this going only to prove that you have only big empty talks. I will remember this to you with my pleasure.

Anyway, I just asked simple question. Oh well

Have a nice day and my wisdom ends here

Who are you to judge me?
With those 30 posts you wrote here, you are just a miserable troll in my eyes who wants to shine in the discussion but has nothing meaningful to say. Nevertheless, you and Retributar made me realize what kind of **** is going on here.
I don't want anything to do with you. BYE

The irony is, kondi, i felt about you like that. Your first posting hit me minutes after i lost my iron man savegame through a power shortage, so i was in an aggressive mood. I misjudged you as noobish troll, but the quality of your postings improved drastically. So i have to admit, even if i am not always the same opinion, its clear that you know a lot about our "hobby" and that your contribution might be missed. Seems we both have to develop thicker skin. It doesnt matter what you post in the web, there will always be millions that hate it and let you feel it. Sadly thats very human. At least we arent burned or tortured to death, for expressing our thoughts.

[o_t_d_x]

Am i the only one that thinks, that the new dlc is very easy, compared to spain ?

Especially because it gets even easier, when you progress through the campaign. Nearly won everything fst. try WITH bonus objectives AFTER france. I used only prototypes, but even that was too mighty. It helped ag. the french to have a PZIIIG and a PZIVF, but ag. the polish it was too strong. I suggest not to use positive traits at all, in the 39AO. Otherwise its a short, but entertaining journey. Ok i could play on generalissimus, but that level is an immersion killer for me. (germany fights like the italians) Will try more bad traits instead on my second play through. (btw.: since i didnt finish spain, i didnt have galand etc....)

The first finnish scenario is such a joke: just position your core at the right side at the bridge and wait for them to arrive one by one. Lost nearly nothing here. Next time i will try to kill everything and conquer the citys.

The second is easy too, if you have pioneers and enough arty.

Warshaw lacks end scripts, that activate the rest of the warshaw troops to attack vic hexes. I bypassed many polish, that just held their ground forever. In my mod such troops start to attack the vic hexes, in the last couple of turns. And they dont do it always exactly at the same time, if you play the map again. That alone would have increased the diff drastically for me.

Denmark: i have mixed feelings here. I like the scenario, but the danish would have been a more interesting enemy in the 8th century. Ask the british. This scenario is kinda wasted, for the danish. I really would love to try this map with american and soviet troops.

Best maps: Sigfried line, the french forest i dont remember the name, warshaw, burza.

It seems clear, that the original campaign path had the advantage of an slowly raising difficulty. Now its more like spain was hell and poland is relax time.
My conclusion: First i have to say, that i look on the dlc more out of the modder perspective, then the player. This dlc has great potential, for modding: make it harder, a big polish campaign, much better and more spread campaign tree, more story, war crimes, partisans...
As a player i would see some lost potential, its a little bit too short, and after the mucho problemo in spain, its seems to easy too. Ok you can raise difficulty, but then you might have probs in spain or future dlc. Nevertheless its worth buying. Because do you want a GC without poland ? And with the editor improved, its a good basis for modding.

[Kerensky]

Am i the only one that thinks, that the new dlc is very easy, compared to spain ?

Player feedback in action. Keep saying content is too hard, and devs don't have a choice but to tone it down.

[o_t_d_x]

Am i the only one that thinks, that the new dlc is very easy, compared to spain ?

Player feedback in action. Keep saying content is too hard, and devs don't have a choice but to tone it down.

Ironically there was a time, when i wanted to be a paid scenario designer, because i hoped it would help me to get out of the mess my life is. Now i see: no matter what you do, people are complaining. Besides i think i wouldnt like the time frame, the boss sets you. So many things i like, like many smart scripts for each map for ex., cant be done by pros, because they have not enough time. When i see how often i had to play every scenario i created, to optimize the masses of scripts, its just impossible to do that in a month for a whole dlc. Stalingrad alone took me a month ...ok the complete graphical optimization was horrible and ruined my hands. Not fully, i recover slowly, but it takes years of stretching to get my old agility and resilience back. I envy you, that you dont have to care much about graphics and just can focus on game design and story.

Is there anything known, when and how the editor will be changed, so even non programmers can mod again ? Because many modder campaigns dont exist now. And the lua wall is the reason. Of course i could analyze the campaign that is already there, copy the lua functions and play try and error for weeks to learn it. In combination with a lua for dummies book it might be enough. But it was so comfortable, drawing zones on the map, script pull down menu, entering script, a small random number and voila. Is there a chance to get that back or will modding be a copy paste of lua functions in the future ?

[Tassadar]

Am i the only one that thinks, that the new dlc is very easy, compared to spain ?

Player feedback in action. Keep saying content is too hard, and devs don't have a choice but to tone it down.

That actually makes sense from a historical standpoint and gameplay wise. While those early wars did results in larger losses than anticipated, TKS tankettes and P.11 fighters were really not up to 1939 standards anymore when the war started, so it makes sense that things would be a bit easier on the player - especially compared to SCW where we had Panzer I having to go against T-26... Same goes for the amount and type of artillery used or the organization of Polish forces. Same for Denmark - that's an easy scenario, but it fits the historical context. Plus, this lower difficulty is somewhat needed to accumulate some decent amounts of prestige. I fully expect Norway to require a LOT of infantry replacements despite best efforts and then France still presenting a challenge with the opposing side having access to a lot of decent tanks, artillery, fighters and fortifications. I'm sure the best players will be able to farm prestige regardless, but there might be points where that surplus accumulated in 1939 will be useful. So at least for me the balance was just right.

[Turtler]

Germany was leading in (theoretical) nuclear science in 1939.

From most of what I have seen, that was simply not true. Especially given their absolute hatred for "Jewish Physics" and the like. While they had far more of a material advantage than the West did at the time and began bumping around in it, they were ill-equipped to capitalize on it. As shown by their failure to detonate even a single test in spite of having all the resources available to them to make it. Except for arguably the most important: the brainpower.

Wouldnt it be the easiest way to win the war for germany NOT to attack russia and invest the money, they stole from european jews and the money and ressources they plundered from beaten countrys, into development of V-waffen (a4), strategic long range bombers and nuclear warheads . And the std. military could have conquered the oil rich british colonys maybe ?

The issue I see is simply that in addition to the Reich downplaying the importance of long range bombers for a long, long time (well beyond a realistic turnaround date for the war, even by my Devil's Advocate standards), A: even if you did see them drop a farqton of nukes on people, that's no guarantee it would actually end the war, in the same way I think that the Doolittle Raiders dropping a Fat Man stye nuke wouldn't have ended the Pacific War. I think it MIGHT be enough to push Metropolitan Britain over the edge into surrender, but that doesn't deal with the US (who could to one degree or another suffer through NYC getting deleted).

Furthermore, they Needed Russian resources, badly; especially after pursuing the mess that was the Battle of Britain. The only halfway realistic ways to get them were either full entry into the Axis for the Soviets (and even that is contingent on how much Stalin is willing to give) or conquest. And the former option fell through the table when Molotov overplayed his hand and led Hitler to freak out.

Conquering the oil-rich British colonies would be nice, but ultimately that oil isn't going to do much unless they can secure transport back to the Vaterland and its dependencies.

Imagine operation barbarossa starting later, with the annihilation of moscow and leningrad, or dropping an a-bomb on large soviet troop concentrations.

IIssue I'm seeing is that you can't really nuke partisans into oblivion, at least not unless you're willing to sacrifice the resources and real estate they're on (ie, the material reasons the Axis were invading in the first place). And while nukes on Moscow and Leningrad on 0 Hour would be one HELL of a blow that might screw the Soviets, it's probably not going to substitute for the work the infantry has to do crushing them down.

Maybe the allies would have finished a nuclear warhead soon enough, then it could have been a cold war between nazi germany and the west, instead of the ussr. The survival of nazi germany as an empire would have been possible. But not the conquest of the whole world. Ok finally we have reached the parallel universe.

Possible, but the big issue I see is that the Nazis in particular have this constant need for resources in order to prop up their economic system (as far as I can tell Hitler's plan was to wait for the conquest of the East before setting the economy on a more permanent footing) and its glorification of war. In the same way that the Soviets were willing to accept a "limited", "winnable" nuclear exchange in order to win WWIII but could never quite get the right parity of forces to be confident a first strike would work, I doubt the Reich would be too limited.

And ultimately, the Reich has a major problem with recruiting for the enemy, and nowhere is that more evident than with physicists and other scientists necessary to make the bomb possible. WHich is why they would most likely have been delayed.

I dont say that that would have been a desirable alternative future. But it should have been easier, to win, then a worldwide conventional war, of attrition, against an enemy with much more ressources, that forces you into a downward spiral with no chance of winning. Of course

It might be easier, but the issue I see is that they still need conventional warfare to win and consolidate. And I am one of those controversial MFs who argues that they came much closer to winning conventionally in the East than is usually given to them and in any case had a crushing need for oil and food that could only realistically be solved by either the Soviets or an end to the Western blockade allowing trade on the global market again.

this is highly speculative. They did have the scientists for that. And they had lots of ressources plundered, after the fall of france. (belgium, netherlands, france had to pay a lot...) And they have proven, that they are capable of beeing worlds leader in (some) technological aspects. (rockets, jets, submarines, first stealth fighter...)

Certainly. But the issue is a lot of those scientists weren't really doing the stuff they needed to do in order to be splitting the atom, in part due to ideological blinders.

Would that have been enough, for developing a n-warhead if they wouldnt have had to waste all their ressources for a conventional war ? Hard to answer. But if you see what they did in 45, regarding nuclear science, its sure they could have achieved much more, if they would have started much sooner and in times, when ressources havent been such a problem.

Oh certainly, they could have. The issue I see is basically how quickly they can A: remove the ideological blinders (suffice it to say, it would need to be a LOT earlier than before), and B: develop complimentary delivery systems.

[nexusno2000]

Maybe we can have aliens invade in the middle of WW2?

[Retributarr]

Maybe we can have aliens invade in the middle of WW2?

"nexusno2000" You live in that region of Europe where the Germans were preparing large quantities of 'Heavy-Water' at some 'Hydro-Electric' generating station that I have forgotten the name of. So!... that fact alone should alert you to danger that the Germans were well along in the process of developing 'Atomic-Weapons'. So... the use of 'Atomic-Weapons'... in WWII Europe or Russia is not a total fantasy!.

In-Fact... I have come to understand that New Atomic-Research-Complexes were built in south America to where this Norwegian produced heavy-water was being transported by both 'Submarine' as well as by large 'Amphibious Transport Aircraft' to those facilities. Some of my earlier... much earlier postings have more information on this matter.

So... all conquering 'Evil-Aliens' are what-ever they are?... but!... 'Atomic-Research' and developed weapons are another!l

[adiekmann]

Maybe we can have aliens invade in the middle of WW2?

Or Nazi Zombies to make up for the manpower shortages! (Just kidding. That's stupid.)

[Patrat]

Maybe we can have aliens invade in the middle of WW2?

Here you go.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000F ... bl_vppi_i5

"In the Balance (Worldwar, Book One) (Worldwar Series 1)

Suppose Roosevelt, Stalin, Churchill, Hitler, and Hirohito had united to conquer an even greater foe?

No one could top their power—not the Germans, not the Japanese, not the Russians, not the United States.

From Pearl Harbor to panzers rolling through Paris to the Siege of Leningrad and the Battle of Midway, war seethed across the planet as flames of destruction rose higher and hotter.

And then, suddenly, the real enemy came.

The invaders seemed unstoppable, their technology far beyond human reach. And never before had men been more divided. For Jew to unite with Nazi, American with Japanese, and Russian with German was unthinkable.

But the alternative was even worse.

As the fate of the world hung in the balance, slowly, painfully, humankind took up the shocking challenge"



I know it sounds terrible, but its actually an extremely well written series of books.

[Kerensky]

Or Nazi Zombies to make up for the manpower shortages! (Just kidding. That's stupid.)

You say it's stupid sarcastically... but how many video games of Nazi zombies has there been? There are more Nazi zombie games than there are Panzer General clones...