Panzer Corps Grand Campaign '39 & '40

[Burning Bridges]

<strong>[ Announcement ]</strong>

<p>This should be good news to those who complained about lack of scenarios in Panzer Corps. Grand Campaign &rsquo;39 & Grand Campaign '40 are to open up the way for a new Grand Campaign with 70 scenarios. </p><blockquote><p> Slitherine (<a href="http://www.slitherine.com/">www.slitherine.com</a>), Matrix Games, and The Lordz Games Studio (<a href="http://www.thelordzgamesstudio.com/">www.thelordzgamesstudio.com</a>) are thrilled to announce that two new extra content packs are headed to their famed next generation strategy game, <em>Panzer Corps</em>. Selling as a download version only for $4.99 each, the extra content Grand Campaign &rsquo;39 and Grand Campaign &rsquo;40 brings loads of new scenarios and the ability to carry your armies from campaign to campaign. Ultimately, several other extra content packs will combine together to create a full Grand Campaign from 1939 to 1945 which will have around 70 scenarios!</p><p> Are you interested in getting an early look at the new content? Sign up to join our beta team and test out the new campaigns before anyone else! <a href="http://slitherine.com/beta_test/PzC_DLC_1">Sign up at the Slitherine website.</a></p></blockquote> <p>They also promise a few new features like "protecting vital units, destroying enemy supply trains, and securing vital bridges, .. ,capturing a French General and forcing the Dunkirk pocket to surrender".</p><p><a href="http://www.matrixgames.com/news/837/Extra.Content.for.Panzer.Corps.Announced!">Press release </a> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Spotted @ <a href="http://www.combatsim.com/index.php">Combatsim</a></p>

 

[commie]

This is promising though I think I'll just wait for all the planned dlc at once with a gold version.

 

[Korgan]

What this game really, really lacks is 1) infantry variety and 2) special abilities for units. If only it was exactly like PeG-WW2, but kept the good AI and the overall polish.

 

[MetalCraze]

Wait they will actually ask money for missions that all play the same?
In a superior Steel Panthers all of it is achieved using an in-game campaign generator.

next generation strategy game, Panzer Corps

 

[Korgan]

Brofist. Steel Panthers is a truly fun, deep, enormous and innovative game, while being easily accessible. They should've taken lessons from it instead of simplifying and polishing Panzer General I.

 

[Burning Bridges]

They should've taken lessons from it instead of simplifying and polishing Panzer General I.

Prove the simplifying part.

Hey assume someone will remake Steel Panthers, and people come and tell that the developer made a mistake of not taking lessons from Panzer General. Would you think these people really comprehend what a remake is?

Anyway, for me this is good news. I am looking forward to the campaigns (which are supposed to be released end of October). And think they will be a success, of course under the condition that the new the campaigns are better and more detailed than everything SSI ever made for PG. There will be no excuse if the campaigns suck though.

 

[MetalCraze]

Hey assume someone will remake Steel Panthers, and people come and tell that the developer made a mistake of not taking lessons from Panzer General.

These people would be quite dumb to say something like this as PG is much more simple than SP. And yet despite all the complex calculations going under its hood SP has an exceptionally smooth learning curve.

And even then SP suffers from certain repetitiveness (since it has no mandatory custom goals, just take control points and kill enemy), but less so than PG.

But SP has a very powerful editor and campaign generator that can do this stuff for free. I truly can't imagine what's the point in 70 missions for 5 bucks where all the point is to move your forces around, taking towns and wiping out enemy units and nothing else.

 

[Burning Bridges]

But Steel Panthers is another game. And by Panzer Corps relative success chances have increased that we will now see other remakes with the same commitment. It's then that you should raise your points again.

It's also clear you are criticizing the Panzer Corps developers for lack of originality, because they slavishly copied their blueprint. But I think on the contrary, it was a clever move and shows restraint. How many times did some inexperienced, over-enthused team think they could 'improve' a tried formula with great ideas of their own .. amounting to things like Panzerkleins and nonsensical realism features? And how many times afterwards there was consensus that For fuck's sake! they should have simply made a copy of the original formula with higher resolution graphics and better sounds?

It's ok that PG was just as you say "move your forces around, taking towns and wiping out enemy units and nothing else". But it can also not be denied that thousands of gamers got endlessly more out of this formula than from deeper and more complex games that lack PG's excellent flow and playability.

May I ask what is actually to criticize about Panzer Corps? The two major problems come directly from PG: The air combat mode is rubbish and the scale is wrong with units that are company sized on division size maps. That bugs me too and I already wrote in my review that I would like to see an enhancement of the original. But it's also important that this should be done with great care. SSI tried the same but couldn't deliver by the way.

No, there is little reason to criticize here. At the end of the day The Lordz is one of the most competent indie developers around, capable to deliver quality products with snappy engines, great visuals, and hardly any bugs. And the road they have taken - longer and more meaningful campaigns - is also a step in the right direction.

To be honest I am much more concerned that the talent they have now will wander off to make run-off-the-mill bullshit for larger companies. THAT is the real danger looming over their next projects, which could otherwise be fantastic for a dying genre.

 

[Korgan]

Frankly, PG1 and now Panzer Corps hardly meet the modern wargame's standard of complexity at all; some Flash strategy games have more depth then those neat, simple but - face it - fairly primitive entertainments. Just because a game is old and somewhat good doesn't mean it needs a close remake.

 

[Luigi]

Just because you are alive, doesnt mean you need to post.
The complexity discussion is older than you so shut the fuck up.

 

[MetalCraze]

But Steel Panthers is another game. And by Panzer Corps relative success chances have increased that we will now see other remakes with the same commitment. It's then that you should raise your points again.

The problem is nobody is going to remake anything but X-Com and PG. Because they are like casual games compared to superior brethren.

Nobody tried to remake JA2 thus far huh?
(ok but that upcoming piece of shit doesn't count)

But it can also not be denied that thousands of gamers got endlessly more out of this formula than from deeper and more complex games that lack PG's excellent flow and playability.

Because simple games attract more people more. It isn't a secret.

May I ask what is actually to criticize about Panzer Corps?

Nowadays it's way too tabletop-ish. Way too simple. You basically move virtual cardboard cutouts across the field and attack, there's no stuff like formations, hit angles, armor penetration, smoke screens with thermal sights defeating them and more that SP offers (I mean in SP you basically move, shoot and deploy smoke but at the same time there are 3 armor types with all sides including top having various armor valuies among many other cool things).
It's just bare stats + dice roll vs. bare stats.
Yes it's simple and fast paced, but it doesn't offer you the multitude of ways to play.

Even Paradox implemented more cool tactical stuff in HoI3 that PG should've had despite it not being positioned as a wargame.

 

[Korgan]

The complexity discussion is older than you so shut the fuck up.

Joined: 21 Jan 2011
Posts: 342

And why the fuck should I care for what you say, good sir?

 

[Korgan]

But Steel Panthers is another game. And by Panzer Corps relative success chances have increased that we will now see other remakes with the same commitment. It's then that you should raise your points again.

The problem is nobody is going to remake anything but X-Com and PG. Because they are like casual games compared to superior brethren.

Whoa, I wouldn't go there with X-Com. It has the whole RPG aspect, the base management, many worthwhile loadouts for many situations, reasonably believable tactics (covering in smoke, blasting through anything that might cover the enemy and advancing in small fireteams is something a real military would likely at least try) - in fact, if you made AP not so random and dependent on the angle, Steel Panthers wouldn't have more complexity over it in ANY aspect.

 

[commie]

It's also clear you are criticizing the Panzer Corps developers for lack of originality, because they slavishly copied their blueprint. But I think on the contrary, it was a clever move and shows restraint. How many times did some inexperienced, over-enthused team think they could 'improve' a tried formula with great ideas of their own .. amounting to things like Panzerkleins and nonsensical realism features? And how many times afterwards there was consensus that For fuck's sake! they should have simply made a copy of the original formula with higher resolution graphics and better sounds?

Yeah, just look at the new Jagged Alliance.

May I ask what is actually to criticize about Panzer Corps? The two major problems come directly from PG: The air combat mode is rubbish and the scale is wrong with units that are company sized on division size maps. That bugs me too and I already wrote in my review that I would like to see an enhancement of the original. But it's also important that this should be done with great care. SSI tried the same but couldn't deliver by the way.

There was also bad scale in PG. Remember Sevastopol? Your entire army fighting for one city then later the same army is covering hundreds of kilometers of front in another map.

No, there is little reason to criticize here. At the end of the day The Lordz is one of the most competent indie developers around, capable to deliver quality products with snappy engines, great visuals, and hardly any bugs. And the road they have taken - longer and more meaningful campaigns - is also a step in the right direction.

To be honest I am much more concerned that the talent they have now will wander off to make run-off-the-mill bullshit for larger companies. THAT is the real danger looming over their next projects, which could otherwise be fantastic for a dying genre.

Hear, hear.

 

[Lightknight]

What this game really, really lacks is

Is an interface update. They didnt even have the brains to put in something so obvious as a move indicator in unit list. A decent manual wouldnt hurt either, how am i supposed to know why exactly pioneers cost more than grenadeers, despite having worse stats ? I can ONLY see the difference between infantry and mountain troops if i hover on movement stat, then it tells me it has "Alpine" movement type. Thats it. No description, no anything, retarded is not too strong a word.

The Lordz is one of the most competent indie developers around, capable to deliver quality products with snappy engines, great visuals, and hardly any bugs.

I assume you didnt read the list of 1.01 bugfixes ? And considering what i just wrote above - competent they aint.

Even Paradox implemented more cool tactical stuff in HoI3 that PG should've had

Where is that facepalming pic when you need it...