From: Melbourne Australia
I was able to win the first five scenarios of the German Campaign on my first try, but am stuck on the 6th (deep in the Caucasus) because it's over so quickly that I can't capture all of the objectives quickly enough.
So the system that 2 x 2 has here is very robust, but the decision to make it 'like Panzer Corps/ Panzer General' may have been a bit off. Like many gamers who will enjoy this system, I would rather have control of my own decision-making about how aggressive to be in capturing objectives. As the system is today, it forces the player to attack and move quite fast and focus on getting to the objectives as quickly as possible, even if it means by-passing enemy troops in your rear. While this may be very do-able in Panzer Corps, it is severely punished in UoC when the enemy units move to cut yoour supply lines.
My suggested fix is to:
1) Rebalance the scenarios to allow the player to accomplish the mission in a longer timeframe, albiet gaining fewer prestige points.
2) If a player is defeated, don't force them to replay the scenario...this gets old and frustrating, and breaks the flow of the campaign. Rather have the next scenario be a logical next step based on the outcome (i.e. The Russians have larger reserves for the next battle, etc.)
3) Offer players a long scenario that allows them to fight a larger/ longer battle (say 60 turns); (For Example: Armee Group South for 1942). This option allows the players to make decisions about husbanding their forces vs. driving forward aggressively. Grabbing objectives in a timely fashion then becomes more about gaining prestige than about winning or losing.
Just got the game but I understand exactly what you mean. I have to get that far personally myself but yes, I like games where you fight the battle rather than the puzzle. It makes sense to move on after losing in a strategic level game, rather than having to refight exacly the same battle - but I have to see how it goes first to contribute in any meaningful way with my own ideas.