Reviews and Impressions?

[blastpop]

Yes its the obligatory thread, but what is the feedback thus far? There have been some general comments, but I am looking for details, details! please... [&o]

[lparkh]

In general there is good attention to detail in the interface and the AI seems competent enough so far (or at least units are well placed in the scenario and the AI isn't doing obviously stupid things yet).

Challenge: playing at normal which is "Colonel" and the 1st scenario had me slightly worried things might be a bit too easy (I'm a veteran PG player) for experienced players at this level. But the Norwegian scenario has definitely reassured me it will be challenging (I am trying to play iron man where I accept my losses)./

Biggest issue so far: I like the whole air units can run out of fuel idea (PG1 had that) but I would like a toggle to have it popup and say "you are going to be unable to reach an airbase if you make this move". I know that the red dots mean this but it is so far very easy for me at least to forget this in heat of battle. I just had to restart my norwegian scenario because I flew my fighters out of supply range

[VPaulus]

just had to restart my norwegian scenario because I flew my fighters out of supply range

You'll get used to not forget it.[;)]

[dsawan]

one thing i noticed is where is the casualties and forces review. PGF had a casualties screen and the old windows 95 PG had a review forces screen. i think these shd be added in future updates.

[sabre1]

Good Point ^


The game is a blast, and brings back all the good old feelings of PG. So far no game stoppers. I am up to the last tutroial, and so far it has not hung or stopped once. Good Job Matrix/Slitherine.

[VPaulus]

ORIGINAL: dsawan

one thing i noticed is where is the casualties and forces review. PGF had a casualties screen and the old windows 95 PG had a review forces screen. i think these shd be added in future updates.

Use hotkey c for casualties.

[Greybriar]

In Panzer General, if a unit survived a battle it was automatically restored to full health with free elite replacements in order that its combat experience was not lost. Not so in Panzer Corps. On page 26 of the manual it states:

Note that in Panzer Corps losses are not replaced automatically between battles. This must be done manually. During the deployment phase green replacements are free, so you can always bring your core units to full strength, but they will lose some experience in the process. By giving your units Elite replacements you preserve their hard-earned experience but at the cost of prestige points.

This change has made the game less fun. It has added some unnecessary micromanagement to the game thereby increasing the time needed to prepare for the next battle. It reduces the amount of prestige points available to the player, thereby limiting his purchases of upgrades and units. I don't know whose idea it was to change one of the basic features of Panzer General, but I think it stinks.

[Krec]

This game brings me back to where it all began................PG[:D]

[Canuck_jp]

ORIGINAL: Greybriar

In Panzer General, if a unit survived a battle it was automatically restored to full health with free elite replacements in order that its combat experience was not lost. Not so in Panzer Corps. On page 26 of the manual it states:

Note that in Panzer Corps losses are not replaced automatically between battles. This must be done manually. During the deployment phase green replacements are free, so you can always bring your core units to full strength, but they will lose some experience in the process. By giving your units Elite replacements you preserve their hard-earned experience but at the cost of prestige points.

This change has made the game less fun. It has added some unnecessary micromanagement to the game thereby increasing the time needed to prepare for the next battle. It reduces the amount of prestige points available to the player, thereby limiting his purchases of upgrades and units. I don't know whose idea it was to change one of the basic features of Panzer General, but I think it stinks.

I haven't played enough to notice that but I also think it seems like a pretty silly idea. Sometimes it's hard enough to get your unit through a scenario and have it survive but now even if it does survive it's basically a shell of it's former self? I suppose that is more realistic. So it costs you prestige to replace the units but when you reinforce between scenarios do you still lose experience? That would really piss me off.

[Rosseau]

I don't have enough time in with the game yet to comment. But rare to see Bobbie Lee so irritated.

We'll have to see what the consensus is on this one.

[Rudankort]

ORIGINAL: Greybriar

In Panzer General, if a unit survived a battle it was automatically restored to full health with free elite replacements in order that its combat experience was not lost. Not so in Panzer Corps. On page 26 of the manual it states:

Note that in Panzer Corps losses are not replaced automatically between battles. This must be done manually. During the deployment phase green replacements are free, so you can always bring your core units to full strength, but they will lose some experience in the process. By giving your units Elite replacements you preserve their hard-earned experience but at the cost of prestige points.

This change has made the game less fun. It has added some unnecessary micromanagement to the game thereby increasing the time needed to prepare for the next battle. It reduces the amount of prestige points available to the player, thereby limiting his purchases of upgrades and units. I don't know whose idea it was to change one of the basic features of Panzer General, but I think it stinks.

If you don't like any gameplay changes in Panzer Corps, compared to the original game, I'm the right guy to throw rotten tomatoes at.

Free elite replacements in PG meant that there was no upkeep cost for your army. For this reason, building elite army was a no brainer. In Panzer Corps it is not so straightforward - elite army is better but is also more expensive to maintain.

As for UI, any suggestions how to make it easier to use and more user friendly are welcome.

[VPaulus]

ORIGINAL: Canuck35
I suppose that is more realistic. So it costs you prestige to replace the units but when you reinforce between scenarios do you still lose experience? That would really piss me off.

If you reinforce with elite/veteran troops you won't loose any experience.
If you reinforce with recruit troops, it won't cost prestige points but you'll loose experience.

A lot of people complain that with the original it was too easy to win experience.
You can't please Trojans and Greeks. Personally I prefer this way.

[Greybriar]

ORIGINAL: Rudankort

ORIGINAL: Greybriar

In Panzer General, if a unit survived a battle it was automatically restored to full health with free elite replacements in order that its combat experience was not lost. Not so in Panzer Corps. On page 26 of the manual it states:

Note that in Panzer Corps losses are not replaced automatically between battles. This must be done manually. During the deployment phase green replacements are free, so you can always bring your core units to full strength, but they will lose some experience in the process. By giving your units Elite replacements you preserve their hard-earned experience but at the cost of prestige points.

This change has made the game less fun. It has added some unnecessary micromanagement to the game thereby increasing the time needed to prepare for the next battle. It reduces the amount of prestige points available to the player, thereby limiting his purchases of upgrades and units. I don't know whose idea it was to change one of the basic features of Panzer General, but I think it stinks.

If you don't like any gameplay changes in Panzer Corps, compared to the original game, I'm the right guy to throw rotten tomatoes at.

Free elite replacements in PG meant that there was no upkeep cost for your army. For this reason, building elite army was a no brainer. In Panzer Corps it is not so straightforward - elite army is better but is also more expensive to maintain.

As for UI, any suggestions how to make it easier to use and more user friendly are welcome.

Panzer General was THE game that enticed gamers to become wargamers. It was not intended for grognards. You just blew off some of the possible attraction this game may have had for future wargamers.

[33Vyper]

I agree that this change will add some management to the game. But I think that it is a good add. I played the original PG to death and PG2. And in both you could expend your resources at will....using your elite forces and not having to worry about replacements after a scenario, so you could beat the snot out of them..knowing that they would be full strength your next battle and be of very high quality.

The reality of battle you would not replace battle hardened veterans with other battle hardened vets...normally there would be an influx of new blood. So from what I can see this looks like a good change, forcing you to decide which level of reinforcement you wish to have.

Just my 2 cents

Cheers

[Rudankort]

ORIGINAL: Greybriar
Panzer General was THE game that enticed gamers to become wargamers. It was not intended for grognards. You just blew off some of the possible attraction this game may have had for future wargamers.

Panzer General was easy enough to attract the non-wargaming crowd, but it was not so because it was trivial to win or avoided any serious decision making on player's part. In fact, it could be very punishing at times. "Easy to play - hard to master" was its formula. I seriously don't see how the decision I made regarding elite replacements between scenarios contradicts this formula. On the first difficulty levels you have so much prestige, it is hardly ever a problem to replace your units. But as you learn and proceed to higher difficulty levels, you will have to pay closer attention to your army management.

It is just as in the real world. We rarely care for things we get for free. Why take care and avoid high casualties if they will be replaced at no cost to you? This is especially true on the last turns of a scenario. In Panzer Corps you need to care about your units and your casualties at all times.

I do agree that having to press replace button for each unit could be tedious. Some UI improvements might be in order. Still it is not as bad as in PG where you could overstrength only at the end of the previos scenario, and this was a pretty tedious process.

[misesfan]

ORIGINAL: Rudankort

ORIGINAL: Greybriar
Panzer General was THE game that enticed gamers to become wargamers. It was not intended for grognards. You just blew off some of the possible attraction this game may have had for future wargamers.

Panzer General was easy enough to attract the non-wargaming crowd, but it was not so because it was trivial to win or avoided any serious decision making on player's part. In fact, it could be very punishing at times. "Easy to play - hard to master" was its formula. I seriously don't see how the decision I made regarding elite replacements between scenarios contradicts this formula. On the first difficulty levels you have so much prestige, it is hardly ever a problem to replace your units. But as you learn and proceed to higher difficulty levels, you will have to pay closer attention to your army management.

It is just as in the real world. We rarely care for things we get for free. Why take care and avoid high casualties if they will be replaced at no cost to you? This is especially true on the last turns of a scenario. In Panzer Corps you need to care about your units and your casualties at all times.

I do agree that having to press replace button for each unit could be tedious. Some UI improvements might be in order. Still it is not as bad as in PG where you could overstrength only at the end of the previos scenario, and this was a pretty tedious process.

I agree - the fact that you need to worry at the end of a scenario whether to rush to take that last objective for a decisive victory, but possibly suffer some serious casualties that will need to be fleshed out in the next scenario is a big improvement from the original PG. In my opinion it is an excellent new feature in the game.

[jomni]

The game looks well-polished.  No comment about scenarios and AI since I only played 1st mission of tutorial.

[IainMcNeil]

There was an exploit in PG where if you did not heal your troops up in the scenario you got them healed for free in between scenarios. This led to very silly situations where 1 strength units were cowering at the back because they were abotu to get a free upgrade if they survived the mission. Someone who healed up an expensive and experienced unit just before the end of a scenario was penalised because they were about to get that repair for free. This exploit and silly mechanic has been fixed, so its by design and I think a good change. The alternative just makes no sense to me!

[colberki]

I also concur this change not to give core units auto replacements is a BIG POSITIVE change. Together with the other change to allow overstrengthening between scenarios is very nice too. [:)]

All makes for better than PG replayability.

One minor gripe is graphics seems "washed out". Maybe its my "lousy" Samsung 27" TV monitor. Timeto get back to my Dell 24" PC screen! [:D]

[fsp]

I have to say that this is one of the changes I really like. So far I like them all I think. It makes a lot of sense, too: You can always have full-strength units, but they are just being replaced by conscripts. If you have had heavy losses, your units will suffer in experience. Unless you have a lot of prestige, than you can request elite replacements. Makes a lot of sense to me. Also, it forces me to take a more real life approach in the battles. No more: "Oh, I have two turns left, but I will get free elite replacements anyway, so let's just attack somewhere for fun and to pick up that extra experience. Let's attack that AA with my fighter, I will finish the scenario afterwards, the fighter will get lots of additional experience and free elite replacements." It adds to the depth of the game.