Matrix Games Forums

New information and screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Pride of NationsTo End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 >> RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/10/2013 11:15:07 AM   
Erik Nygaard

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 11/2/2000
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
I was on the beta-team for PzC (the expansions).
My comments were mostly directed at the lack of historical formations and wrong Equipment types.
But I think it is fair to say that the devs prioritized fun and play balance above historcal correctness.
An example: I have designed a company-level scenario on Crete-1941 for TOAW and Decisive Battles. Very detailed and probably as correct OOB and equipment-wise as you can get it. The PzC versions have very little resemblance to the actual campaign, I pointed this out while the Wehrmacht Campaign version, but the Allied Corps Version published a year or so later hade the same design flaws.
I think this is a pity, since it is not that hard to get the facts straight first, then you alter stuff slightly to create a good play Balance and keep the scenario interesting.

To sum it up, I think GAW is going in the right direction and it will be interesting to see where it is headed after the eastern front.

Erik

(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 31
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/10/2013 11:47:01 AM   
colberki

 

Posts: 153
Joined: 6/16/2007
Status: offline
Excuse me!. Lets stick with the Eastern Front a bit longer. Maybe a1942-44 campaign with a grand encirclement in the Caucasus and Middle East would be very nice. Thanks!

(in reply to Erik Nygaard)
Post #: 32
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/10/2013 12:06:44 PM   
Erik Nygaard

 

Posts: 565
Joined: 11/2/2000
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
I was thinking more along a new game in a series which should shift to another front.

But I have got no objections to more eastern front.
If the editor is updated to a more friendly version like Ronald have suggested, I would like to create a scenario on the German attempt to launch a Kirkenes-Murmansk operation.

(in reply to colberki)
Post #: 33
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/11/2013 3:11:56 AM   
Jakse

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 6/18/2013
Status: offline
My vote may not count for much, but compared with PzC I have two thoughts. This game is horrendously ugly compared to Panzer Corps. This game is way more fun than Panzer Corps. Part of it is that I have the same horrid Intel Chipset that Alchenar who posted in the tech area does. That said, it is all the mechanics or PzC but with historical set ups and objectives that are SO MUCH more fun. I am only 7 or 8 maps into the main campaign, but having to kill some units, capture some towns, and occupy some hexes is a fresh addition. I also don't get the puzzle feeling that I have to play a scenario three times for a victory that I do in certain PzC maps. The graphics bother me, but it is so much fun that I hope any lurker that isn't ready for WitE or DC will try this out.

(in reply to Erik Nygaard)
Post #: 34
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/12/2013 2:56:58 AM   
Jakse

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 6/18/2013
Status: offline
Rarely would I double post, but I just did the public beta update and holy **** this looks so much better. The text is a thousand times more clear. Thank you for this update and please continue to do awesome stuff like this.

(in reply to Jakse)
Post #: 35
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/19/2013 9:53:32 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7934
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Me too..sorry rogo..PC is no a game I'd put the words historical and realistic...it's a fun puzzle\strat game with a WW2 theme.


quote:

ORIGINAL: GrumpyMel


quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Again with this... Guess Warsaw is located in France then? Nonsense !
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alchenar

There is literally nothing about PC that can be described as 'realistic' or 'historically accurate'.

These are not 'simulation' wargames and it's absurd to try to hold them to a standard that they have no interest in meeting. PC, like UoC and similar titles, are puzzle games with a theme of WW2 set on their rules. It's ridiculous to talk about unit designations and map historicity when really we're playing with counters on a map board in a computer. The only thing that matters is if the puzzle is interesting or not.




I have to agree with Alchenar on this. Don't get me wrong, PC is a fun beer n' pretzels game but as far as historical accuracy, it really doesn't enter in to the equation. Some of the maps are better then others but mostly it's not even trying for historical accuracy. Compare that to some of the more Grognard games like WitE or Decisive Campaigns or TOAW or even some of the Advanced Tactics scenario's and that starts to become evident.

I've played a bit of GaW so far and you can definately feel it's a bit better in that regard but it's still pretty beer n' pretzels which is perfectly enjoyable when you are in the mood for that.






_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 36
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 8/22/2013 11:22:05 PM   
rosseau

 

Posts: 1036
Joined: 9/13/2009
Status: offline
Over the years, PC/AC series has been polished to a high shine. GaW does not have this advantage. I actually find the interaction of inf/armor/arty/AA/AT/Air much more fun/challenging than in GaW. Also, while the names and maps are more historical in GaW, I have yet to find the game play feeling that much more historical. Admittedly, I have only played AGN so far and the MP experience is better. I like the fact you have to defend your objectives so some crafty human doesn't sneak behind and win the game in one blow.

GaW does have that "one more turn" feeling, but there is also a bit of that "grind" feeling in some scenarios. However, GaW has more varied and realistic "skills" that units receive based on experience. So far, GaW has frustrated me at times with units that do not progress (albeit, following history) or having units to deploy but not hexes to deploy them on.

And, to make matters worse for my budget, I see EUIV on sale for $32 The temptation is great.

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 37
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 12/13/2013 2:50:11 PM   
Templer


Posts: 946
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: online
In the short time I am a Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 owner, I find enough differences that do not make me regret this purchase (And I was really skeptical here. Just a interesting review gave me courage).

Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 is a "tic" more demanding than Panzer Corps (the right "tic" I say).
And I confirm, Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 is set between Panzer Corps and the Decisive Campaigns series.
The whole "Thing" is fun, really fun.

It's a shame that so many be deterred of the graphics (which I find practical - but of course, it could be improved).
In Operation Barbarossa - The Struggle for Russia the unit grafics were a bit better.

< Message edited by Templer -- 12/14/2013 12:01:32 AM >

(in reply to rosseau)
Post #: 38
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 12/17/2013 4:43:05 AM   
Templer


Posts: 946
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

Me too..sorry rogo..PC is no a game I'd put the words historical and realistic...it's a fun puzzle\strat game with a WW2 theme.


quote:

ORIGINAL: GrumpyMel


quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

Again with this... Guess Warsaw is located in France then? Nonsense !
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alchenar

There is literally nothing about PC that can be described as 'realistic' or 'historically accurate'.

These are not 'simulation' wargames and it's absurd to try to hold them to a standard that they have no interest in meeting. PC, like UoC and similar titles, are puzzle games with a theme of WW2 set on their rules. It's ridiculous to talk about unit designations and map historicity when really we're playing with counters on a map board in a computer. The only thing that matters is if the puzzle is interesting or not.




I have to agree with Alchenar on this. Don't get me wrong, PC is a fun beer n' pretzels game but as far as historical accuracy, it really doesn't enter in to the equation. Some of the maps are better then others but mostly it's not even trying for historical accuracy. Compare that to some of the more Grognard games like WitE or Decisive Campaigns or TOAW or even some of the Advanced Tactics scenario's and that starts to become evident.

I've played a bit of GaW so far and you can definately feel it's a bit better in that regard but it's still pretty beer n' pretzels which is perfectly enjoyable when you are in the mood for that.






Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 is not a historical Simulation, but a well-made game with which you can spend many happy hours.
There is no reason to discuss whether, if ever, Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 is accurately oriented to historical facts.

< Message edited by Templer -- 12/17/2013 11:45:28 AM >

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 39
RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps - 4/22/2014 5:54:11 PM   
AceDuceTrey

 

Posts: 68
Joined: 8/14/2011
Status: offline
First, it's certainly good enough to purchase! It is a more realistic wargame than PC at the operational level primarily due to its "improved" handling of logistics (which was the Germans principle failure of Barbarossa). Also (unlike PC) infantry are given far more appropriate combat values (i.e., it's not just another tank war game). Whereas PG and PC were primarily wargames of attrition; GAW abstractly implements "Blitzkrieg" by designating key logistics junctions as objectives to isolate the soviet forces. Thus rapid thrusts by mobile forces can achieve victory without destroying the bulk of the enemy; and, the soviets are given key German logistics sites as well to interdict their operations. Sadly, there are still aspects of attrition in GAW because it still allows units to be instantly rebuilt to full strength if you don't finish them off.




(in reply to GrumpyMel)
Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941 >> RE: Differences between this and Panzer Corps Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.094