The difference between CS and Panzer Battles?

[CaptainFalcon]

Hello there

What's the main differences between Campaigns Series system and JTS' Panzer Battles system?

Since for a starter like me they look similar

[Jason Petho]

I haven't played the Panzer Battles, so I'm not sure of how the mechanics differ.

But, the biggest difference would be the inclusion of the 3D Battleview with the Campaign Series.

[Zovs]

In my opinion the JTS PB series is pretty cool, while you don’t have the 3D effects nor the amount of scenarios and the scope is the same I actually prefer PB over CS for a number of reasons, primarily the UI and functionality is the same as the JTS PzC series and in that the PB series (along with all the JTS games) plays more like a board war game then the CS series does. They each have their own strengths and weaknesses and I own both and enjoy both but just have little more preference to one over the other.

[Af1352pasha]

in Panzer Battle you have an accurate generation of specific historical campaigns in platoon or company level with detail huge historical 250m hex map and order of battle at that specific date. In campaign series you play in semi 3D or 2D environment but it is more general and there is no any sign of detail huge hand made maps and detail order of battle so you have option to choose time and date and that duration general order of battle in platoon level.

if you interest in specific battles there are 3 panzer battle title:

1-Kursk 1943 southern shoulder
2-Normandy (Biggest map)
3-North Africa

[Jason Petho]

no any sign of detail huge hand made maps

You looked at the exceptionally large master maps that are available in the game? That cover the northern Sinai for 1956, 1967 and 1973? The ones that are historical and 898 x 700 hexes in size, at 250 metres per hex?

detail order of battle

You noticed the order of battles that span from 1948 to 1985, for all nations included in the game?

accurate generation of specific historical campaigns

You noticed that the core scenarios are all historical battles?

Additionally, the games with full editors (org, map and scenario) so if we don't include a specific battle, you can make it yourself.

[Big Ivan]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

no any sign of detail huge hand made maps

You looked at the exceptionally large master maps that are available in the game? That cover the northern Sinai for 1956, 1967 and 1973? The ones that are historical and 898 x 700 hexes in size, at 250 metres per hex?

detail order of battle

You noticed the order of battles that span from 1948 to 1985, for all nations included in the game?

accurate generation of specific historical campaigns

You noticed that the core scenarios are all historical battles?

Additionally, the games with full editors (org, map and scenario) so if we don't include a specific battle, you can make it yourself.

Yeah Jason, the editors are a huge plus for the Campaign Series, hands down!!

I've played both systems and I tend to gravitate to the Campaign Series. IMHO the Campaign Series flows a lot easier!![:D]

[Rosseau]

I find that what Panzer Battles and Campaign Series have in common is that the new games in the series cannot come out quickly enough!

Patiently waiting for PB Moscow and CS Vietnam. They will release eventually.

As I've been around for a while, I feel both are must-buy products that don't (in most ways) compete with one another. Meaning, you need to have both!

If you are an HPS/John Tiller veteran, than PB series will have an advantage, as you will be used to the system. Then again, CS Vietnam and upcoming titles will contain significant "improvements" over the CSME system, which will also be patched.

Forgive my rant, but bottom line is to LOVE them both. [:)]

[Big Ivan]

Yeah Mike,

So going back to the 1st post, it was a loaded question. Lot of that here on Matrix and other forums beyond this site.

Both game systems have been around for a while and I have played them both.

But I prefer the Campaign Series. For me it's cleaner play.[:D]

Regards,
John[;)]

[Zovs]

I think in the first post he was asking about CS vs the PB series. In that way the only comparisons would be the old outdated version of CS which included EF II, WF and RS, since there is no PB series that cover the Middle East.

So my comments in post #3 were with that in mind.

Both are really completely different game designs although the original CS was designed by John Tiller (originally with the first and second EF, WF and RS games, and as far as I know with the Matrix CS for JT version as well). Jason Petho as far as I know, has only worked or modified the original CS of games to create the Middle East CS and the future Vietnam CS game.

The older CS which has not been updated in I am thinking over a decade is what I think the original poster was referring to in the comparison of CS to the JTS PB series. Why he posted this question in the CS ME folder is beyond me, since like I said, the PB has no Modern series to compare it with.

The PB series only contains three modules, Normandy, Kursk and North Africa. That is it. The original CS contained East Front II, West Front and Rising Sun. The newer CS Middle East is the successor to the original CS, but it only contains the 1948-1980(?) Middle East conflicts. I believe the intent is after CS Vietnam is released then Jason will circle back and redo the East Front (III) game, and then (hopefully) redo the West Front game series.

As confusing as all that is, all the CS games are generally the same in that they are both 3D and 2D platoon level games and only the CS Middle East (and possibly the Vietnam one) have historical maps (I don't think that the original CS, EF-WF-RS, had historical maps per se). Likewise all three games in the JTS series of platoon level games (Normandy, Kursk, and North Africa) are platoon level games as well, but they don't have a 3D aspect, are slightly more historic in my view and have historically recreated maps for all three games.

Lastly, I still own the original CS series (i.e. EF2, WF and RS) produced by Matrix (and I still have the original versions from TalonSoft) and the CS Middle East by Jason and the JTS PB games and I enjoy all of them but I tend to play the PB one over the Matrix CS one, and play the CS Middle East one (since there is no 'rival') and enjoy them all.

So we can really blame this all on John Tiller (RIP John), lol. He started the whole complicated mess while working at TalonSoft, continued the confusion at HPS, came back to Matrix and unleased the CS (EFII, WF, and RS) upon us and then created the 3 PB series for the JTS company and then we can blame Jason for continuing the utter madness by release CS Middle East and taunting us with Vietnam and dangling the carrot with East Front III!

LOL

[:D]

[Big Ivan]

Amen to that Zov's and the madness continues.

Being a play tester for Vietnam, I think your going to like it. Its an entirely different game than the previous 4. Lot's of new stuff.

Also I thought I saw something a while back where Tiller's group was working a new PB title, Moscow '41 or something like that.