AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

A new story begins...
The sequel to a real classic: Panzer Corps is back!

Moderator: Panzer Corps 2 Moderators

Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 7257
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by Kerensky » Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:45 am

Scrapulous wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:58 pm
I finally screwed up my patience and read through this thread. It started ugly and got much more civil. kondi, thanks for returning and giving your impressions after playing partway through the DLC - I didn't expect it based on your first few posts and I think it was a wise and somewhat gracious thing for you to do after the tense exchanges earlier in the thread.

Let me disclose my biases: I have enjoyed both DLCs and have no trouble with the contents of them. Indeed, I like that the franchise is experimenting with innovations to the formula. A total lack of innovation in a game series is a real problem. But innovation comes with the possibility of some disruptive changes and some new features that don't work out. I think that's healthy for a game franchise, and I welcome it.

A lot of the complaints about AO'39 seem to boil down to historicity, as "le lapin" put it, or to realism or immersion. I'm honestly a little surprised. Panzer Corps is not where I come for realism. There is no general who fought in all the battles represented by any Grand Campaign I have seen in either Panzer Corps game. Of course the campaign involves teleporting around and non-historical assumptions. I don't understand the demand for branching campaigns with general choice and a seamless, believable career experience for a general existing the SCW and entering the World War 2 in Europe. The franchise has never provided these things (well, branching campaigns in only the simplest of ways, still quite separate from history).

The other major complaint category seems to be about the partitioning of scenarios. For example, "Five Saar scenarios is too many." I haven't seen any of these folks address Kerensky's point: would it be too many if each Saar scenario was five turns? Isn't the amount of content more important than how many containers that content is divided into? It seems to me that there's more Poland content than there is Saar content, just based on the size of the maps and the amount of time it took to play through. I wouldn't say that they're proportional to the amount of effort expended by the countries involved in the conflicts at those times, but hexaboo clearly articulated my thoughts about that: Panzer Corps has always been very casual about the size and scale of the battles represented, and AO'39 is no different in that regard.

I never played the Panzer General games, so I might be the token noob here, but a lot of the complaints I see in this thread about the current DLCs are very similar to complaints I had about Panzer Corps 1 - but the gameplay was fun and the DLCs made it even better for me. Every time I tried to imagine a solution to the issues I felt, the solution I imagined would have the side effect of making the game less fun for me (either resulting in fewer scenarios to play or really narrowing the scope of battles). So I accepted the limits of the core game design in favor of enjoying some very fun gameplay. I think there are some elements of history that will never be well represented by this franchise, as with all historical games.
nono hard et heavy wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:01 pm
Good evening to all.
I rarely participate in discussions on PZC 1 PZC 2 and OoB. Maybe because I'm a little bit selfish and I have to translate the text into French (I should have worked more English at school!!!). But I read the different opinions and I allow myself to give my opinion. I agree with Kondi on one point because not everyone has an expandable budget and DLCs can surprise by their orientations. But I'm almost sure that within 6 months, 1 year, a person like Nikki (OoB) will create a mod like "big German campaign" that will enchant everyone with historical scenarios. This has been done for OoB and PZC 1, there is no reason (?) not to do it for PZC 2. Well, it won't be me because I don't know how to do it but there are some good guys on this forum.
I'm happy with the content of the game and the DLCs.
Everyone has the right to give his opinion, negative or positive, it's part of the "game". And everyone has his own vocabulary. I participated with Kondi and others in Skins for OoB and never, even if my work was not as good as his, he never criticized me.
Thank you for listening to me.
Greetings from France.
Bruno
Yea this thread is a behemoth, but there is a lot of thought and passionate opinion in it. Thanks for adding your thoughts.

I have a similar conclusion. Just looking at the scenario tree with no scenario context, people instantly were worried about what was in store. Because who knows, it could have been the Saar scenarios were actually gigantic, and the Polish ones were the teeny tiny ones.

Thankfully, the more people actually went hands on with the content, the more satisfied they felt with the distribution. So maybe we worried some people with the initial impression, but were able to satisfy them with the actual content. As problems go, it's better than the reverse of that. If people saw 12 Poland scenarios and were super hyped up for revisiting so much content from the original Grand Campaign, but then each of 12 scenarios was like 5 turns and only had CORE slot limit of 20... All that anticipation would be really let down once people went hands on.

So the lesson I'm taking from this is maybe be a little careful about presentation of the content, because people get concerned about it. But ultimately, the main thing that really matters is that the content itself has to be satisfying and not just a poor rush job to inflate a scenario count just to 'look good' on a store page. Not just 'more' content, but 'better' content matters. :idea:

nono hard et heavy
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:18 am
Location: France

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by nono hard et heavy » Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:38 am

Retributarr wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:37 pm
nono hard et heavy wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:01 pm
Good evening to all.
I rarely participate in discussions on PZC 1 PZC 2 and OoB. Maybe because I'm a little bit selfish and I have to translate the text into French (I should have worked more English at school!!!).

Everyone has the right to give his opinion, negative or positive, it's part of the "game". And everyone has his own vocabulary. I participated with Kondi and others in Skins for OoB and never, even if my work was not as good as his, he never criticized me.
Thank you for listening to me.
Greetings from France.
Bruno
"nono hard et heavy"… Welcome to the "Forum"!... it's great to have your presence here... to have you make a posting in "English",,, even though it's not your "Mother-Tongue"!.

How did you manage to put your post here in the English-Language???. That is some kind of miracle!.

We look forward to hearing much more from you... to help us steer the direction of this PzCr2-Game into the right direction.
Hello.
The miracle is possible thanks to deepl, revero and systran (online translators). I also have some "old" English basics.
The direction of the game is determined by the developers, which is very good, even if it doesn't satisfy everyone. For World War II, let's imagine for a moment that the developers take into account the opinion of all the players: one would like the theatre of Finland, another Poland, another China, ...
The "what if" scenarios are interesting. I played Operationnal Art of War. A "what if" scenario : World War II starts in April 44 with the German invasion of Russia through Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia ! The German army developed tanks and planes. Italy is alone and was defeated in Africa by the English. Japan attacked the USA at Pearl Harbor but the Germans did not declare war on the USA. Historically, nothing logical but the scenario is fun. In PZC 1 also there are "what if" mods (Dawn, Lov Redux, ...).
More personally, I am a little disappointed by PZC 2: the game's mechanisms are very interesting compared to PZC 1 but I find the campaigns "a little light". For the moment, the depth of PZC 1 is missing but I say for the moment. I always wait between 1 and 2 years to judge a game. For example, for Civ5 to be very good, I had to wait for the 2nd extension!
Greetings from France.
Bruno

nono hard et heavy
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 474
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:18 am
Location: France

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by nono hard et heavy » Sat Sep 05, 2020 10:55 am

Kerensky wrote:
Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:45 am
Scrapulous wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 9:58 pm
I finally screwed up my patience and read through this thread. It started ugly and got much more civil. kondi, thanks for returning and giving your impressions after playing partway through the DLC - I didn't expect it based on your first few posts and I think it was a wise and somewhat gracious thing for you to do after the tense exchanges earlier in the thread.

Let me disclose my biases: I have enjoyed both DLCs and have no trouble with the contents of them. Indeed, I like that the franchise is experimenting with innovations to the formula. A total lack of innovation in a game series is a real problem. But innovation comes with the possibility of some disruptive changes and some new features that don't work out. I think that's healthy for a game franchise, and I welcome it.

A lot of the complaints about AO'39 seem to boil down to historicity, as "le lapin" put it, or to realism or immersion. I'm honestly a little surprised. Panzer Corps is not where I come for realism. There is no general who fought in all the battles represented by any Grand Campaign I have seen in either Panzer Corps game. Of course the campaign involves teleporting around and non-historical assumptions. I don't understand the demand for branching campaigns with general choice and a seamless, believable career experience for a general existing the SCW and entering the World War 2 in Europe. The franchise has never provided these things (well, branching campaigns in only the simplest of ways, still quite separate from history).

The other major complaint category seems to be about the partitioning of scenarios. For example, "Five Saar scenarios is too many." I haven't seen any of these folks address Kerensky's point: would it be too many if each Saar scenario was five turns? Isn't the amount of content more important than how many containers that content is divided into? It seems to me that there's more Poland content than there is Saar content, just based on the size of the maps and the amount of time it took to play through. I wouldn't say that they're proportional to the amount of effort expended by the countries involved in the conflicts at those times, but hexaboo clearly articulated my thoughts about that: Panzer Corps has always been very casual about the size and scale of the battles represented, and AO'39 is no different in that regard.

I never played the Panzer General games, so I might be the token noob here, but a lot of the complaints I see in this thread about the current DLCs are very similar to complaints I had about Panzer Corps 1 - but the gameplay was fun and the DLCs made it even better for me. Every time I tried to imagine a solution to the issues I felt, the solution I imagined would have the side effect of making the game less fun for me (either resulting in fewer scenarios to play or really narrowing the scope of battles). So I accepted the limits of the core game design in favor of enjoying some very fun gameplay. I think there are some elements of history that will never be well represented by this franchise, as with all historical games.
nono hard et heavy wrote:
Fri Sep 04, 2020 11:01 pm
Good evening to all.
I rarely participate in discussions on PZC 1 PZC 2 and OoB. Maybe because I'm a little bit selfish and I have to translate the text into French (I should have worked more English at school!!!). But I read the different opinions and I allow myself to give my opinion. I agree with Kondi on one point because not everyone has an expandable budget and DLCs can surprise by their orientations. But I'm almost sure that within 6 months, 1 year, a person like Nikki (OoB) will create a mod like "big German campaign" that will enchant everyone with historical scenarios. This has been done for OoB and PZC 1, there is no reason (?) not to do it for PZC 2. Well, it won't be me because I don't know how to do it but there are some good guys on this forum.
I'm happy with the content of the game and the DLCs.
Everyone has the right to give his opinion, negative or positive, it's part of the "game". And everyone has his own vocabulary. I participated with Kondi and others in Skins for OoB and never, even if my work was not as good as his, he never criticized me.
Thank you for listening to me.
Greetings from France.
Bruno
Yea this thread is a behemoth, but there is a lot of thought and passionate opinion in it. Thanks for adding your thoughts.

I have a similar conclusion. Just looking at the scenario tree with no scenario context, people instantly were worried about what was in store. Because who knows, it could have been the Saar scenarios were actually gigantic, and the Polish ones were the teeny tiny ones.

Thankfully, the more people actually went hands on with the content, the more satisfied they felt with the distribution. So maybe we worried some people with the initial impression, but were able to satisfy them with the actual content. As problems go, it's better than the reverse of that. If people saw 12 Poland scenarios and were super hyped up for revisiting so much content from the original Grand Campaign, but then each of 12 scenarios was like 5 turns and only had CORE slot limit of 20... All that anticipation would be really let down once people went hands on.

So the lesson I'm taking from this is maybe be a little careful about presentation of the content, because people get concerned about it. But ultimately, the main thing that really matters is that the content itself has to be satisfying and not just a poor rush job to inflate a scenario count just to 'look good' on a store page. Not just 'more' content, but 'better' content matters. :idea:
Hello.Totally in agreement with you. Saarland is a succession of assaults for only 10 days, but it has had the merit of existing. Afterwards one can discuss the orders of the French staff for a long time !!!
Of course some players were surprised by the scenarios. I think many are former PZC 1 players and they were expecting a pasted copy of the campaign tree. All with new modifications: heroes, bonuses, battle rules, graphics, ...
But the interest of a game is also to surprise the players without distorting the principle. So, and this is only my opinion, I consider the Saarland scenarios as a bonus, a "what if". It's not as if the German army attacked France in 1939! No, just an answer to a French (historical) attempt. Did it take 5 scenarios for this? The debate remains open. In any case, I think the majority of the players have bought into the concept, haven't they?
Greetings from France.
Bruno

Lakel
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2018 7:04 am

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by Lakel » Sun Sep 06, 2020 4:51 am

Personally speaking, cant say i'd have any issue with the 5 scenarios of Saarland, if, they had the full polish campaign, give me the PC1 copy-paste campaign, and slap in the special operations in between. Still personal opinion, but give me a good long campaign, full of the battles, unknown, major, overplayed all.

brettwjohnson
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 4:20 pm

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is a disaster

Post by brettwjohnson » Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:05 pm

KesaAnna wrote:
Thu Aug 20, 2020 10:40 pm
<snip>

For example , I purchased the Field Marshal edition of this game back in March because I had really fond memories of Panzer General of 20 years ago ( ? ) , and so I had very high hopes of this game.

In point of fact , in my first go at playing this game I was ACUTELY , SAVAGELY , disappointed. :lol:

<snip>
I too am a veteran Panzer General fan (especially of PG2 and the ill-fated PG3 Scorched Earth).

I was not a huge fan of Panzer Corps 1, but I'm actually quite pleased and impressed with many of the design choices in PC2.
1) Huge like for the campaign customization options (especially the positive/negative choices)
2) The slot system has grown on me, much better implemented than in PG3 (3D assault).
3) I love the historical retrospective after each scenario (i.e., what really happened). I would actually like to see MORE of this in both the after-action and in the original briefings.

WRT - DLC battle choices, you can't please everyone... Personally, I'm enjoying both fighting and learning about some battles I had never seen before...

BTW - THANK YOU for getting rid of the voice over briefing in the DLC. The voice in the original campaign make me cringe...

One thing I do miss from the original PG - the short video clips of WW2 history...
Look forward to more DLC...

Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 7257
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by Kerensky » Sun Sep 20, 2020 3:32 am

I wonder if this is the most controversial DLC yet.

I remember DLC of old having their issues. The difficulty of original 1939 was a hot topic. Italians instead of Romanians showing up around Stalingrad got mentioned. And the just crazy hordes of Soviet armor from DLC 1944 East, because difficulty scaling was just spiraling out of control that late into the Grand Campaign.

But here, people struggle with Czechoslovakia being unusual. And people think there is too much Saar Offensive. And people think there's not enough Poland. And people expect Finland to be full Winter War with units and a beefy campaign not a 2 scenario optional visit... And that's all in a single DLC. :shock:

Or maybe we just have a larger audience now, with vastly different tastes and opinions on things. That's an awesome thought. :mrgreen:

Retributarr
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 7:44 pm

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by Retributarr » Sun Sep 20, 2020 4:16 am

Kerensky!... you're into it deep right-now!... it's called... "Rolling Around In the-'Mud'... the-'Blood'... and... the-'Beer'!.

kondi754
Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
Lieutenant-General - Karl-Gerat 040
Posts: 3709
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 8:52 am

Re: AO 1939 scn tree is VERY controversial

Post by kondi754 » Sun Sep 20, 2020 9:28 pm

Kerensky wrote:
Sat Sep 05, 2020 2:45 am

Yea this thread is a behemoth, but there is a lot of thought and passionate opinion in it.
And this thread made us all get to know each other better :wink:

I'm convinced that all the greatest PzC 2 enthusiasts have presented their thoughts about the AO1939 here

EDIT. I'm still dissatisfied with the scenario tree, but the game is very interesting and addictive
Thanks for all opinions and I want to thank all those who share my point of view at least partially, but I also thank those who have completely different views

Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps 2”