Post by GiftzwergBut jeezum crow, guys, build something *new*. Enough of selling the old
wine in new bottles[1].
[1] Yeah, yeah, I know, it's all "built from scratch, and not a single
one or zero from the original binary is included in the current title."
Uh-huh. Gotcha. It'll just *look* - and play - suspiciously like the
last series.
Let me give you my take FWIW. LOL. The last time I did this you bought
War Over Vietnam. This time, read first.
1. I had nothing to do with this title.
2. I've already modded the 2d icons to something that I like.
3. The game can best be described IMO as operational war gaming
semi-lite. Not Panzer General by any means but definitely an imported
variety beer and pretzels. It's focus is on force utilization not C&C.
Supply is there but highly abstracted and to contradict that statement
of mine, with quite a complex supply line maths system viz PzC (all
under the hood). It is definitely a much faster play than PzC. No enemy
defensive fire here for example.
4. It's strength is teaching the art of Blitzkrieg. Of concentration
and exploitation. Land forces are either mech, inf, static or arty with
a wide variety of types in between and - with combat and rail engineers
thrown in. Amphib and naval landing operations are there. Rail is
there. Air is highly expanded over PzC in allowing for air superiority,
ground support, port and troop interdiction missions. Missions are
still conducted via a dialog box but I found its interface
counter-intuitive at first over PzC. After a while it does begin to
feel ok but it could be finessed in future titles. At the start of each
turn, a player is asked to assign squadrons based on core plane types
to air superiority or attack roles. The relative air superiority ratio
then results in a pre-turn match-up whose outcome determines each
side's ability to wage counter-air during the enemy's turn.
5. Combat occurs within each hex. Artillery joins this in-hex foray.
Whilst FOW denies knowledge of enemy strength, upon initiation of
combat, an indicator reflects the probability of overrun, superiority,
advantage or disadvantage. A player then proceeds or cancels the battle
at hand. Stacking limits both regulate the total strength of land and
air able to be brought into a hex for each combat type (ie: maneuver vs
air support). A fairly (to me) elongated math system then determines
outcomes (again under the hood).
6. Units (being divs or regts) if successful in overrun, may continue
overrunning ad nauseam up to the limit their movement allows. Mech
units on the other hand may exploit without further combat, again based
on movement allowance remaining. A successful attacker moves into an
hex retreated by the enemy. Artillery, remains in place.
7. Success is based on destruction of the enemy and the ownership of
objectives that generate points rewarding tenure of possession and or
the surrender of enemy nations.
8. The game therefore forces the player ot think strategically and
aggressively, in terms of air, suppression, schwerpunkt and
breakthrough.
9. The AI has shown smarts in using its air better than moi and
coordinating the 1-2-3 punch. On the offense it choses its objectives
and works a path of least resistance to them. Which objectives it
choses is another matter. On defense it is adequate, falling back and
protecting hexes of value but I easily out-defended the AI using my
nouce and interior lines - and on the attack - maybe due to the paucity
of the historical enemy in some scenarios, I easily won. But I've yet
to finish Poland or attempt the huger France or Sealion games. I
believe that with a stronger OOB, the AI should provide some steady
defensive entertainment. Having not spoken to the testers on this I
just can't confirm.
10. Awkward things that made me see the game as a little quirky? The
turn number sequence is very ummm "unique". Keep an eye on your dates
folks - there's no "turn 1 of 10" here for whatever reason. The air
mission dialog as I've mentioned is different to PzC's but I feel,
that's because it's in larger use and its benefit is that here, it may
remain on screen for as long as desired. Again, it does become
comfortable after a while. Then there's the question of the Panzer V on
the cover of a 1940's game...
I'd recommend this game to those looking for an introduction to war
gaming. For the experienced player, it's operations are huge and its
potential for more to come immense. Head to head it will be a
quick-playing blast. It's a much more comfortable play than unfurling a
map of Europe on the carpet. It's quickness of play makes for a
comfortable gaming session but without the graphical bells and whistles
of say GG's World at War (different game and level altogther - but
useful as a contemporary analogy). This game has been made with
attention to the eye but not to overt beauty imo. The interface is
straightforward, with its highlight movement spans and on-map labels
the equivalent of - and as obtrusive as PzC's. It's 2d icons
(especially rail heads) I found very bland. I think the modded 2d icon
set I made will soon at Glenn Saunder's Panzer Campaigns site
http://members.shaw.ca/gcsaunders/welcome.html
To basically attempt to answer your fair question, that's it Giftz.
Adam.