Why do you still stick with the OG Panzer Corps?

[koopanique]

PzC1 has this "lightness" to it that I find more appealing than PzC2. It's lighter in size, less resource-intensive, easier to mod, and it just plays better. Just moving your units and attacking other units is more satisfying, it feels less "heavy" than PzC2. Also those explosion effects are simple but top-notch.

[faos333]

Any more players still stick with the Original Panzer Corps Game, are invited to share their views

[captainjack]

Nikkivdd's mods are one good reason. Plus the (admittedly very faint) possibility that I might finish off my half-started mods.

[ChristianC]

PzC1 has this "lightness" to it that I find more appealing than PzC2. It's lighter in size, less resource-intensive, easier to mod, and it just plays better. Just moving your units and attacking other units is more satisfying, it feels less "heavy" than PzC2. Also those explosion effects are simple but top-notch.

I agree with this in terms of sound, modding, size of maps, and aesthetics (I prefer the bare-bones darker feel of the first one). However, I also prefer PzC2 in general due to most of the new mechanics (ex. core slots, surrenders, encirclements, support unit and suppression mechanics), it's more complex in essence, and in many ways an improvement on the old game. Imo PzC1 style with PzC2 features would have been perfect.

[Erasermarek]

I still wait for some PanzerCorps 1 Pacific... even mod will be great. (Yes i know they make Pacific on PzC2)

[eddieballgame]

I own both PzC Gold & PzC II, Both are superb at what they offer.
My preference, if forced to choose, is PzC Gold.
Mainly because of how easy it runs on my laptops & a plethora of Campaigns & Scenarios.
Huge thank you to the community/modders/designers.
It is the full package for this genre. imho

[maguro]

I haven't played Panzer Corps 2 yet. Building up to the release, I was excited by a lot of the subtle features like unit splitting, variability in core cost per unit, train disembarking not taking the whole units movement, etc. I think it would've been nice (if possible) to add some of these less exciting features to original PzC.

The terrain graphics look nice, but like others have already said, I think the unit graphics are a step back. The large maps and ease of modding/available mods are really what keep me in OG Panzer Corps.

I think Panzer Corps 2 looks like a good game. Eventually I may give it a try, but for now original PzC is still one of my favorites.

[fgiannet]

It seems crazy to me that this game did not get more attention (now that I have a computer, instead of just an iPad, to fully explore it).

A simple change of a spreadsheet (even in Ubuntu) and you can radically change the game. The Editor is so easy to use, compared to my IT experiences in the distant past, that I was able to modify Akkula’s great Big Scenario in Soviet Storm to have historical orders of battle AND include Intensio-Style modifications in the equipment file. That is combining Akkula’s incredible history with Intensio’s in-depth equipment insights and throwing in a deep layer of historical knowledge as well (one of the reasons, along with oil, Hitler said they must be successful in the caucus or end the war, you can see this when you do the OOBs, was due to the amount of forces they threw at the operation while depriving the other fronts...if they didn’t win with that knockout punch, their 2nd because Barbarossa was the first, then they were not going to).

Even now, as I am starting to lose interest in games, there is still something new to investigate with this 10 year old game (I am curious about making the equipment file entirely historical and seeing what the outcomes are). This game provides a very solid base for historical investigation and that is unlike any other game I have played. I did not even like Panzer General. I might have spent a total of two weeks playing that game within a 5 year time span. On average I will play with a game for a couple of months and probably never return to it. I have been playing this steadily for more than 5 years now. Even I think it is crazy.

I am playing Bebro’s Soviet Inferno with “Intensio-Style” equipment file modifications. McGuba wrote about playing Nikvidds new Soviet Grand Campaign with the BE mod enabled. This game is like a Swiss Army knife. There are an unfathomable numbers of ways to play/structure the game. Someone can crash through it with an all tiger army (you will get no judgement from me, I have finally hit the age where I just want everyone to have a good time) and someone else can use it for historical simulations. It practically serves as a mainframe computer for me; different historical variables are plugged in and interesting historical facts are often spit out. I am sure you could model a great number of time periods with it (like Akkula’s Modern War which is very relevant today).

That flexibility should extend the customer base to more than just casual gamers. It could teach history, serve as a model for different strategies among military thinkers, explore the economics of warfare and ROI, etc. I certainly never knew how flexible this system could be and definitely think it should have been marketed to a broader audience. Marketing not just to casual war gamers but history professionals (people who want to understand the past better), chess/go players (people interested in games with interesting rules/strategy), people in the military (who want to analyze different situations), etc. It really is incomprehensible to me. Even the YouTube videos only focus on gamers. There could be so much more out there (educational videos explaining/commemorating certain battles/events, etc.). Such a solid system/rules and so easy to change...

[PeteMitchell]

+1

[Uhu]

I advise to play the Battlefront Europe mod. It feels like a whole new game. Playing the single player campaing is wonderful, but playing multiplayer is even more über-super!

It seems crazy to me that this game did not get more attention (now that I have a computer, instead of just an iPad, to fully explore it).

A simple change of a spreadsheet (even in Ubuntu) and you can radically change the game. The Editor is so easy to use, compared to my IT experiences in the distant past, that I was able to modify Akkula’s great Big Scenario in Soviet Storm to have historical orders of battle AND include Intensio-Style modifications in the equipment file. That is combining Akkula’s incredible history with Intensio’s in-depth equipment insights and throwing in a deep layer of historical knowledge as well (one of the reasons, along with oil, Hitler said they must be successful in the caucus or end the war, you can see this when you do the OOBs, was due to the amount of forces they threw at the operation while depriving the other fronts...if they didn’t win with that knockout punch, their 2nd because Barbarossa was the first, then they were not going to).

Even now, as I am starting to lose interest in games, there is still something new to investigate with this 10 year old game (I am curious about making the equipment file entirely historical and seeing what the outcomes are). This game provides a very solid base for historical investigation and that is unlike any other game I have played. I did not even like Panzer General. I might have spent a total of two weeks playing that game within a 5 year time span. On average I will play with a game for a couple of months and probably never return to it. I have been playing this steadily for more than 5 years now. Even I think it is crazy.

I am playing Bebro’s Soviet Inferno with “Intensio-Style” equipment file modifications. McGuba wrote about playing Nikvidds new Soviet Grand Campaign with the BE mod enabled. This game is like a Swiss Army knife. There are an unfathomable numbers of ways to play/structure the game. Someone can crash through it with an all tiger army (you will get no judgement from me, I have finally hit the age where I just want everyone to have a good time) and someone else can use it for historical simulations. It practically serves as a mainframe computer for me; different historical variables are plugged in and interesting historical facts are often spit out. I am sure you could model a great number of time periods with it (like Akkula’s Modern War which is very relevant today).

That flexibility should extend the customer base to more than just casual gamers. It could teach history, serve as a model for different strategies among military thinkers, explore the economics of warfare and ROI, etc. I certainly never knew how flexible this system could be and definitely think it should have been marketed to a broader audience. Marketing not just to casual war gamers but history professionals (people who want to understand the past better), chess/go players (people interested in games with interesting rules/strategy), people in the military (who want to analyze different situations), etc. It really is incomprehensible to me. Even the YouTube videos only focus on gamers. There could be so much more out there (educational videos explaining/commemorating certain battles/events, etc.). Such a solid system/rules and so easy to change...

[PeteMitchell]

I very much agree!

[Vano2004]

I very much agree!

Well , first of all , it 's better not yet ! It is also convenient and the video card does not burn from it )

[Der_Kuenstler]

PC2 overwhelms me with off map strategy choices that I would rather just make on the battlefield. PC is easier for me to understand and mod. PC also ties me sentimentally to the old SSI Panzer General game that was the first PC game that hooked me. Unfortunately the only 2 things I really like about PC2 are the "switch unit places" ability and the airplane crash animation.

[MaxDoge]

Because suffering from restartitis means I haven't completed the GC yet despite a dozen attempts

[goose_2]

This will always be the best game I have ever and will ever play. If they make one better I can't imagine how. I just want them to fix the bugs on this one and they have me for life.

[PeteMitchell]

I agree but I am not sure they will fix the bugs...

[fgiannet]

I do not want to be repetitive but I feel as though I am not providing the best examples and just want to give one more. Deductors mod is a very interesting improvement to make units more historical and make equipment usage more historical. A good example is the changes he made to the Panzer III. I thought it was intelligent but then I began to wonder about rate of fire. If you gave the early Pz III their historical rate of fire it becomes much more useful. Then you have to weaken its armor to about 2 because it has very weak armor in comparison to contemporary antitank guns (based on penetration tables). Higher initiative due to radios and 3 man turrets. Now you have an effective tank (with great shock value) but it must be used properly because it has weaknesses as well as strengths. I learn a lot as I play the game which allows me to make further changes and learn even more.

I remember reading about Deductors mod years ago, when I only had an iPad, and thinking it sounded like impressive coding. It is just editing a spreadsheet. In that sense it does not even seem like a mod (there is no scripting, map making, etc). I am not saying it is bad. I am saying it is intelligent/insightful AND anyone can do it. That is just so fascinating. I continue to refine historical elements and the game continues to teach me of nuanced aspects of history (e.g. why you would want to make 100,000 Zis-3s). So often history is taught in a “what were they thinking...” manner (“why so many Zis-3’s instead of 152mm”). The ability to easily change the game allows me to create models and see things for myself. It really can be more educational than a lot of history books.

Plenty of historical facts would not be fun for the majority of players (e.g. KV-1s that frequently must stop due to transmission problems). This is a game and should be fun/entertaining for the majority of players. I am just stunned by it’s range of applications (and the depth of potential players) that it was not used for more. It is a continuous source of amazement how such a simple game can provide such depth (even as I write this I am wondering if the aircraft could be reworked based on ROF, actual armaments, etc....would that reveal any interesting historical insights).

[PeteMitchell]

It could be that Slitherine hasn't marketed this game to its full potential yet... many more applications of it could be explored!

[fgiannet]

It could be that Slitherine hasn't marketed this game to its full potential yet... many more applications of it could be explored!

I agree! It is so flexible that I can not imagine it being very expensive to create new versions/mods of the game (War of 1812, etc.) if you had a paid/dedicated person who knew what they were doing (making new units, etc.). How much would they need to sell in order to make a profit with a game that already provides such a flexible and sound foundation?

A lot of the mods available now, made in peoples spare time purely for the love of the game, I would have spent good money to play and it would have been worth it. Maybe there should have been a tournament for mod building? I definitely did not know how easy it was to change/mod this game 10 years ago and would have bought a computer just to do so (I was stuck thinking people were using C++). Maybe have a historian do one of their YouTube episodes using Panzer Corps, discuss some changes that would be more historical, and show how easy it is to enact those changes. I do not know for certain but it seems the engagement could have been so much more compared to simply getting the standard reviews.

I think you are making an astute observation about marketing Pete Mitchell. There are a lot of great mods but I would think there should/could be triple or quadruple the number if more people knew just how flexible and easy to mod/play this system really is.

[eskuche]

Not to necro this thread, but I find myself coming back to this game, even from more hardcore wargames like War in the East and such. I think compared to those kinds of games (which I have played and analyzed to death), PzC 1 is unpretentious and doesn't aim to simulate something that shouldn't be/can't be simulated. When you dig deep into mechanics in other games, the mechanics 1) do not reflect the reality (see air war in WitE, no increased stacking limits for cities, artillery is basically useless, very little payback for intense analysis of mechanics, plus more), 2) devolve to playing the mechanics rather than the actual game (WarPlan has this problem for me), or 3) can have precipitous dropoffs in multiplayer that don't reward the time played (most games). Also, playing against the AI in the context of multiplayer scenarios just doesn't seem fun, and in most other games there is no personalization of units – everything is a generic wargame chit, whereas here each unit reflects an opportunity to take advantage of a range of statistics.

I would argue that PzC 2 adds too many bells and whistles, and it's hard for me to find the energy to launch it. IME splitting units is basically a power gaming option to force 100% prestige surrenders, which has always been broken, even at the highest difficulties. Further, there are ways to tune PzC 1 to effectively have unit slots. I think deducter's mod in terms of pricing and availability and upgrade penalties does it wonderfully (even though it is almost ten years old!).