What do Panzer Corps veterans feel about PzC2?

[Mordan]

One of the things I didn't like about PC1 (and now PC2) is the entire "elite replacement" mechanic. My argument, short version, is that no matter how great your unit is you WILL get diluted with "green" replacements. If you get a lot of casualties, that experience is NOT replaceable and has to be earned again. Sure, maybe 1 or 2 points (minor wounded returning, etc.) but not half-unit lots of "elite" replacements, I don't care how much prestige you have. It just didn't/couldn't happen. Anywho, after years of playing PC1 I wound up playing with a house rule of using only green replacements. But since the later scenarios seemed to be designed assuming you had all 5-star uber-units, I notched AI experience down a couple of notches (as it was inflated to match)-- something you can't do in PC2. So I would like to see the option to adjust experience difficulty like PC1 had.

the rational for elite replacements is that if you have enough prestige, you can request high command to send your way elite units that gained experience elsewhere in another dimension.. that's all there is to it.

Its not supposed to be a simulation.

[o_t_d_x]

Checking my YouTube watch history, I think it the player's channel is Robbie Plays Strategy games:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ6zIGOW_ZE

I can't find the bit where he says he has a photographic memory or is an engineer, but think this is the one. I think he said something like he could recall where all the AI units were from an earlier playthrough. He does lose points, I exaggerated, but he plays very carefully and is very efficient. He says he learnt from watching Deducter's videos.

I wonder how players like this feel about scenario design like Defenders of the Reich, where the enemy is not pre-determined and potentially changes on each playthrough.
It's relevant, because that sort of design is going to be in the next generation of Panzer Corps 2 content. Not exclusively, but it will exist.

Sounds great, i will have to check "Defenders of the Reich".

[RandomAttack]

One of the things I didn't like about PC1 (and now PC2) is the entire "elite replacement" mechanic. My argument, short version, is that no matter how great your unit is you WILL get diluted with "green" replacements. If you get a lot of casualties, that experience is NOT replaceable and has to be earned again. Sure, maybe 1 or 2 points (minor wounded returning, etc.) but not half-unit lots of "elite" replacements, I don't care how much prestige you have. It just didn't/couldn't happen. Anywho, after years of playing PC1 I wound up playing with a house rule of using only green replacements. But since the later scenarios seemed to be designed assuming you had all 5-star uber-units, I notched AI experience down a couple of notches (as it was inflated to match)-- something you can't do in PC2. So I would like to see the option to adjust experience difficulty like PC1 had.

the rational for elite replacements is that if you have enough prestige, you can request high command to send your way elite units that gained experience elsewhere in another dimension.. that's all there is to it.

Its not supposed to be a simulation.

Another "dimension"-- I like it!

[Pill]

Vetran here; still playing but to add to my last post:

Map GUI: Needs improving.

1. I would like to see Strategic Mode expanded to the point it where it can be used as the main interface for those players unhappy with the 3D layout.

b Strategic Mode in current form is redundant for a few reasons, mainly (imho) unit icons aren't detailed enough; also, overlay is unhelpful because all features on the map look the same. Colours blend together too.

******Additionally, I would love to see an editable popup map used for planning maneuvers (example below) which can be referred to & updated as required. It's not always easy to remember what the initial strategy was many hours into the game.



I particularly wished for this feature in the excellent Barbarossa Mod due to the map size.

Thanks Devs

Map borrowed from Wikipedia, Lightshot for the arrows & text.

[Demetrios_of_Messene]

I was wondering whether to buy the bundled Panzer Corps (which I did not previously play) or buy PC2. I waited a bit after release of PC2 to allow some time for reviews to kick in.

I read Steam reviews and was particularly interested in this thread. The old PG series was a favourite of mine and I played PG, PG2 and the infamous PG 3D.

I was largely undecided until I managed to play Panzer Corps on a friend's computer. I browsed through the tutorial just to get a feeling. The familiar PG feeling was there all right, but the graphics were below tolerable levels for me. I don't prioritise the graphics in any way, but they seem outdated when the game was released, let alone now. That was the deciding factor that led me to purchase PC2.

After about 50 hours playing the game, I am glad I made that choice. To me PC2 is 9/10. The PG feeling is prevalent with updated graphics (I play in low detail on my laptop) and interesting additional mechanics (encirclement is great, suppression mechanics are great, random heroes are interesting allowing for various combinations, customization of the game is above great!).

The game does need some improvement in terms of pc performance, clarity of units, briefing and debriefing (very bad german-american accent for my taste, not enough immersion - how I loved the small black& white videos from PG1 by the way) and various other minor (in my opinion) matters. It also suffers from the usual drawbacks of the genre:
1. The more successful you are, the easier the game gets. I would like more viable options after pyrrhic victories or defeats.
2. The AI is in general well functional (except for attacking first and bombarding second...), but does not feel much improved over previous or similar games. I guess AI is what AI is.

Overall though, I am very pleased with the game and look forward to continuing my campaign.

[ErissN6]

Map GUI: Needs improving.
1. I would like to see Strategic Mode expanded to the point it where it can be used as the main interface for those players unhappy with the 3D layout.
b Strategic Mode in current form is redundant for a few reasons, mainly (imho) unit icons aren't detailed enough; also, overlay is unhelpful because all features on the map look the same. Colours blend together too.
******Additionally, I would love to see an editable popup map used for planning maneuvers (example below) which can be referred to & updated as required. It's not always easy to remember what the initial strategy was many hours into the game.

Yes to all, priority for me. I might like 3D if it were as easily readable than 2D.

[PRUSSIAN TOM]

EXTREMELY good value for your blitzing $. There is enough that is similar to allow veterans to pick it up quickly (I've been around since PG1), and the new rules (Aircraft, heroes, artillery, et al) expand the scope of the game, making it a sheer delight. I even like the new naval rules, even though Germany wasn't much of a naval power. (But it will come in handy when they crank out 'Allied Corps')! It is a sheer delight to play, and the YouTube videos were enough to get me going.

Kudos to whoever wrote the manual...it is clear and comprehensive, without being 300+ pages.

[Pill]

2. Graphics - ugh, its Panzer General 3D again. The units look blurry and are hard to even spot at times. Terrain is paradoxically a little too visible (relative to units) but still a bit of a struggle to get used to. I profess a bias: I am old school - played PG1 on release and have always found those graphics fine. Panzer General 2 may be sweet spot for graphics for me. Lowered the scroll right now, but still finding it jarring and disorienting looking over the PzC2 map: I guess I will get used to it, but on first play, it conveys information much less clearly than PzC1 did. I put hex grids up to max, as I value info over graphics for this kind of game. If there was a button I could press to make it 2D like PzC.

Agreed. The PzG 3D look has almost put me off the game for the same reasons.
2D was perfect.

especially the Grand Campaign, which is probably the best WW2 gaming experience I have had. (The PG2 blitzkrieg+ mod comes close, but can't match the sheer volume of content and historical detail of the GC).

+1 Loved GC. My all time favorite WW2 game.

[Retributarr]

The game does need some improvement in terms of pc performance, clarity of units, briefing and debriefing (very bad german-american accent for my taste, not enough immersion - how I loved the small black& white videos from PG1 by the way) and various other minor (in my opinion) matters. It also suffers from the usual drawbacks of the genre:

1. The more successful you are, the easier the game gets. I would like more viable options after pyrrhic victories or defeats.
2. The AI is in general well functional (except for attacking first and bombarding second...), but does not feel much improved over previous or similar games. I guess AI is what AI is.

Overall though, I am very pleased with the game and look forward to continuing my campaign.

Some cannot be inconvenienced by watching 'Introduction-Videos' at the outset or initialized start of a Campaign or Scenario. Fine!... let there be a 'Skip-Video-Button' for these "disgruntled-dissenters". Otherwise!!!... I personally would 'very-much prefer' to have short opening video sequences for almost everything!.

I too... as well... loved the 'Videos' from PG1!... will we ever see them resurface again???... even if it means taking in desperation... the drastic measure of re-using past videos from PG1.

[trengilly]

Map GUI: Needs improving.
1. I would like to see Strategic Mode expanded to the point it where it can be used as the main interface for those players unhappy with the 3D layout.
b Strategic Mode in current form is redundant for a few reasons, mainly (imho) unit icons aren't detailed enough; also, overlay is unhelpful because all features on the map look the same. Colours blend together too.
******Additionally, I would love to see an editable popup map used for planning maneuvers (example below) which can be referred to & updated as required. It's not always easy to remember what the initial strategy was many hours into the game.

Yes to all, priority for me. I might like 3D if it were as easily readable than 2D.

I found that using Strategic Mode with the Display/UI setting "2D Units In Strategic Mode" turned OFF really helps. The 3D unit icons displayed on the strategic map look pretty clean. The map is clear and almost 2D. But you have to adjust the default settings. Altering where the direction of the sun can effectively make the 3D unit icons look 2D (again in Display/UI settings). But yes the menu UI could stand some improvement

[PoorOldSpike]

What do Panzer Corps veterans feel about PzC2?

I bought PC2 on its release day 5 weeks ago and for the first 3 weeks thought it was nothing to write home about, but over the last couple of weeks I've grown to like it more and more and it'll be staying on my hard drive for many years to come..
My main beef early on was that enemy units were too hard to kill, usually retreating their way out of trouble, but I've learnt the trick is to batter them to a pulp with insanely overwhelming firepower (lashings of tanks, infantry, artillery) to hopefully kill them in one turn, or at least reduce them to cowering whipped pups ripe to be finished off next turn.
So because I've always been an "insanely overwhelming firepower" nut in all my 40 years of board and computer wargaming, PC2 is right up my street..

Gen.Patton- "Inflict the maximum amount of wound, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
Gen. Guderian- "Punch with your fist and not with spread fingers"
Gen. Rommel- "The day goes to the side that is the first to plaster its opponent with fire."
Hitler- "Panzers are what I need! That's what I want to have!"
Archilocus (Greek mercenary) 650 BC- "I have a high art, I hurt with cruelty those who would hurt me"
Gen William Sherman- "War is cruelty. There's no use trying to reform it, the crueller it is the sooner it will be over"

T-28 (left) and T-26-

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php? ... orum&f=134

[ErissN6]

edit: I removed (can't delete)

[Retributarr]

What do Panzer Corps veterans feel about PzC2?

So because I've always been an "insanely overwhelming firepower" nut in all my 40 years of board and computer wargaming, PC2 is right up my street..

Gen.Patton- "Inflict the maximum amount of wound, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
Gen. Guderian- "Punch with your fist and not with spread fingers"
Gen. Rommel- "The day goes to the side that is the first to plaster its opponent with fire."
Hitler- "Panzers are what I need! That's what I want to have!"
Archilocus (Greek mercenary) 650 BC- "I have a high art, I hurt with cruelty those who would hurt me"
Gen William Sherman- "War is cruelty. There's no use trying to reform it, the crueller it is the sooner it will be over"

I've always been an "insanely overwhelming firepower" nut :
Napoleon Bonaparte- "Artillery is the 'God' of the battlefield!". &
"Morale is to Numbers... as three is to one!."

[Gwaylare]

Sun Tzu said: "Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting."

[PoorOldSpike]

Napoleon Bonaparte- "Artillery is the 'God' of the battlefield!"

Yes Stalin said much the same thing- "Artillery is the god of war".
And Patton- "I do not have to tell you who won the war, the artillery did"
I play mostly in the Random mission generator and usually buy 3 German 210 mm ball-busters to soften up the enemy, then send in the tanks and infantry to mop up..

Below-Russki arty duffing up Berlin, 1945-

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php? ... orum&f=134

[o_t_d_x]

Napoleon Bonaparte- "Artillery is the 'God' of the battlefield!"

Yes Stalin said much the same thing- "Artillery is the god of war".
And Patton- "I do not have to tell you who won the war, the artillery did"
I play mostly in the Random mission generator and usually buy 3 German 210 mm ball-busters to soften up the enemy, then send in the tanks and infantry to mop up..

Below-Russki arty duffing up Berlin, 1945-

http://www.mission4today.com/index.php? ... orum&f=134

Arty won the war ?

The nazis werent such big fans of lighting warfare, they just didnt have other options. They knew, that they had oil for 4 month, at the start of barbarossa. And they knew, that their logistics wouldnt work if they push more then 400 km. And they knew of course, that the americans have all the oil and a strong industry. So it was clear from the beginning, that nazi germany could never win a war of attrition. And thats the reason why the allies forced them into exactly that kind of war.

The nazis had their highest output of tanks planes etc. in 1944 - they called it the "Rüstungswunder". (Speer) But with not enough oil that didnt help much.
Theres that sentence i like: beginners talk about tactics and strategy and weapons. Pros talk about logistics and war critical ressources. And no, that doesnt mean that i am a pro. (I just watched a pentagon guy explain why nazi germany really failed.)

[RandomAttack]

"IN BERLIN on 28 November [1941], a conference of industrialists chaired by armaments supremo Fritz Todt reached a devastating conclusion: the war against Russia was no longer winnable. Having failed to achieve a quick victory, Germany lacked resources to prevail in a sustained struggle. Next day, Todt and tank-production chief Walter Rohland met Hitler. Rohland argued that, once the United States became a belligerent, it would be impossible to match Allied industrial strength. Todt, though an ardent Nazi, said, “This war can no longer be won by military means.” Hitler demanded, “How then shall I end this war?” Todt replied that only a political outcome was feasible. Hitler dismissed such logic. He chose to convince himself that the imminent accession of Japan to the Axis would transform the balance of strength in Germany’s favour. But the November diary of army chief of staff Franz Halder records other remarks by Hitler that acknowledged the implausibility of absolute triumph. For the rest of the war, those responsible for Germany’s economic and industrial planning fulfilled their roles in the knowledge that strategic success was unattainable."

Max Hastings. Inferno (Kindle Locations 3508-3516). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Look, I like me some WWII. But it's a simple fact that the GERMANS at the time (not academic opinions after the fact) knew they couldn't win outright. They just played out the string because the only other option was to surrender (not happenin'). It's POSSIBLE a miracle could have happened: Stalin assassinated, Churchill bitten by a rabid bulldog, Roosevelt falls out of his wheelchair and breaks his neck, Superman lands in a cornfield outside Darmstadt instead of Kansas, etc. The future is not preordained. But barring a miracle the Germans just didn't have the strategic horsepower (no pun intended) to pull it off. Hitler rolled the dice for a quick win, and they came up Snake Eyes. So while I truly enjoy the minutiae of which arty/tank/fighter is better, let's not lose sight of the fact that post-Nov 41 Hitler was extremely likely to ultimately get his a** whupped (again, barring a miracle)-- and he KNEW it.

[Retributarr]

"IN BERLIN on 28 November [1941], a conference of industrialists chaired by armaments supremo Fritz Todt reached a devastating conclusion: the war against Russia was no longer winnable. Having failed to achieve a quick victory, Germany lacked resources to prevail in a sustained struggle. Next day, Todt and tank-production chief Walter Rohland met Hitler. Rohland argued that, once the United States became a belligerent, it would be impossible to match Allied industrial strength.

Barring a miracle the Germans just didn't have the strategic horsepower (no pun intended) to pull it off. Hitler rolled the dice for a quick win, and they came up Snake Eyes. So while I truly enjoy the minutiae of which arty/tank/fighter is better, let's not lose sight of the fact that post-Nov 41 Hitler was extremely likely to ultimately get his a** whupped (again, barring a miracle)-- and he KNEW it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your presentation is quite logical... overall... it does make good sense. Personally.. i'm glad that the 'Axis' lost, however... putting my personal opinion aside... there is just a little more to this story than what seems blatantly obvious!.

Yes!... "The writing was on the wall"... indeed... as it was for 'Nebuchadnezzar'... the ruler of Babylon before 'Cyrus' conquered the 'Great-City'.

Hitler was constantly blabbering about 'WunderWaffen"? IE: 'Wonder-Weapons'... and as seemingly crazy as he seemed, not all of his pretentions were as crazy as he portrayed it to be.

I'm just only going to illustrate 'One-Example', there are several... but it's a great deal of effort to do sol

So lets carry-on for now with a... "For Instance"... "In Norway (Heavy Water Production was underway) as well as later on.... in Argentina" (Bariloche'(Spelling???)_Uranium Enrichment Facilities on a nearby island) in conjunction with the construction of a 'Huge' hydroelectric dam (Circa-1937) in 'Uruguay... and according to local sources... said that the Germans were developing huge quantities of heavy water... for the purpose of developing 'Atomic Weapons'.

This heavy-water was shipped down south to Argentina from Uruguay as well as from Norway by long range sea-planes that were refueled by Ocean going-located German submarines to then carry on flying to a small island just east of the city of Bariloche' where an Atomic-Weapons industrial complex was constructed... for the purpose of enriching the Uranium into weapons grade materiale'.

At the same time... developments for the 'Sanger Orbital Bomber' (https://www.bing.com/search?q=%27Sanger ... RS=CHECKED) were well underway for the purpose of transporting this atomic payload to such targets as Washington, D.C. as well as New York and what-ever other targets the Germans had in mind... for the purpose of getting the Americans and as well possibly the rest of the western allies out of the European War to start with. You can find Videos on the Sanger Orbital Bomber on U-Tube.

[PoorOldSpike]

Guest- "Well mein fuhrer you've conquered Europe and your troops have reached the gates of Moscow, what are you going to do now?"
Adolf- "I'm going to declare war on America, what could possibly go wrong?"


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ErissN6]

It's POSSIBLE a miracle could have happened: Stalin assassinated,

It would not help the germans, contrary, the Communist Party would still rule, and USSR may even work better in the war without Stalin, like germans without Hitler.