Panzer Corps 2: Frontlines - Bulge announcement

[Bee1976]

You can try to convince me - but it would be hard...

I agree to all of your points, i prefer long campaigns, a growing core force army, and so on. To be honest, the option to develop a coreforce over the course of many DLCs is one of the reason for my tons of diffrent playthroughs since release. But i like small scale missions aswell. For example the battle for stalingrad would have been great (for me) if it was a 4+ minicampaign in 42.

My reason to buy that DLC is, that maybe in the future there might be a combination of a big DLC series that contains "minicampaigns" on nice theatres of war foming a real huge! campain when its finished. So my approach to this is"let em tryout stuff"
But ofc that is my wish/hope for the future.
A more reasonable point for me is:
Its PC2 singleplayer campaign content in a nice and interesing theatre of war. Even its a little smaller, im pretty sure i will have a lot of fun with it and enjoy it while im waiting for the next DLC. So its a surebuy for me.

But just as a reminder, im the fanboy that would buy the "Landcruisers vs Godzilla" DLC aswell. Or a zombie-theme flavour DLC. (zombie tanks!!!)

It could be way worse, imagine being a Battlesector (great game !!) pve player...no story driven campaign content since release of the base game.

[adiekmann]

At the same time, try to align all the maps and units to the same scale, whatever that may be, even if that means adjusting the unit stats to make it work. That last one would be a huge endeavor, so I could let that one go if I could get the others. Maybe scale the hexes to be somewhat proportional to the range of the aircraft, and then the ground units will just have to fit in on that scale whether it still doesn't make total sense or not.

We did this, well actually wasn´t me who did the doing, but whatever, here´s the reason why this is sadly no good idea.

We set a hex as 4 square kms and adjusted all ranges, fuel and whatnot to accomodate that range.
Artillerie and all ground vehicles would go fine with this. Most artillerie would have a range of 2-4 hexes with some, namely the 17cm and the US 8inch going off at 7hexes. All fine, but planes break it. The A-26 eq would have a range of 575 hexes. If we still had the air-system from PC1, all fine, fuel adjusted and then looked at the top speed to set a range per turn. The system with planes bound to airfields forces a certain scale on the scenarios, zooming in is an issue that way.
I haven´t tried planes with that range since they fixed the lag issue when selecting planes, but before my computer froze for several seconds when selecting a plane with that range.

I finally decided to do a compromise and enhance the plane range by roughly 5 hexes and zoom in a little more, but going down to battalion sized units, which is what i would really like to do, is still out of the question. Currently 1939 and the intheworks 1940 of the PC1-remake mod has a unit size somewhere between division and regiment, which imo is still to huge to have the units devided into infantry/tank/anti-tank/artillerie...etc. since on that scale it is mostly mixxed units.

Maybe u should look into Headquarters:WW2, unit size goes down to squad for infantry and single vehicle for motorized units.

sers,
Thomas

Yeah, I suspected that the planes would be the problem. Their range compared to any ground unit would be too disproportionate. It would require huge maps that would kill the spirit of the game.

I think maybe the best solution is to set the scale of the hex to accommodate ground units, and then all air units would have unlimited range because even the shortest of them would easily cover the entire map. Or perhaps you combine the mechanics of PC1 aircraft, and "range" becomes the duration (i.e. number of turns) that the aircraft can remain in the air before returning to an airfield. Rather than range being the speed, have it become how long it can fly around. The real limitation would be ammo, as is in real life. The duration of U-Boat patrols was rarely dictated by fuel, but rather the number of torpedoes that they could carry. Same principle could be applied to aircraft. Aircraft in real life can conduct multiple sorties, or hit multiple targets, in each sortie. The real limiting factor would then be ammo and maybe that should be reduced instead of the need to return to an airfield for fuel. I already can see problems with this model too and fear that there is no perfect solution no mater what you do without creating another.

[Bee1976]

Oh and i completly disagree to this from the dev diary:

"There is less of an incentive to add large ahistorical campaign paths since the Allies won the war"

US might want to move "forward after the victory over germany and attack the soviet union. I mean the were plans to do this, some plans even included the use of german forces...
The soviet union might attack and conquer japan, china, africa, rest europa and/or even the USA
Im not sure what GB might do in an ahistorical path, but there is plenty of room for ahistorical content on the allied side of the war.

[bebro]

Allies may end in the late 40ies fighting on the dark side of the Moon using Roswell technology

Nah, but seriously if people like ahistorical stuff I don't have much of a prob with it either. But for something about the Battle of the Bulge I rather prefer to stay there

[robman]

Yeah, I suspected that the planes would be the problem. Their range compared to any ground unit would be too disproportionate. It would require huge maps that would kill the spirit of the game.

I think maybe the best solution is to set the scale of the hex to accommodate ground units, and then all air units would have unlimited range because even the shortest of them would easily cover the entire map. Or perhaps you combine the mechanics of PC1 aircraft, and "range" becomes the duration (i.e. number of turns) that the aircraft can remain in the air before returning to an airfield. Rather than range being the speed, have it become how long it can fly around. The real limitation would be ammo, as is in real life. The duration of U-Boat patrols was rarely dictated by fuel, but rather the number of torpedoes that they could carry. Same principle could be applied to aircraft. Aircraft in real life can conduct multiple sorties, or hit multiple targets, in each sortie. The real limiting factor would then be ammo and maybe that should be reduced instead of the need to return to an airfield for fuel. I already can see problems with this model too and fear that there is no perfect solution no mater what you do without creating another.

Another possibility that would not require changing basic game dynamics: Airfields could be located in a segregated corner of the map, across a border only they can cross. This might be depicted as a map inset. This solution would accurately reflect a situation in which aircraft are based outside the immediate theater of combat--a situation that becomes increasingly common as maps "zoom in."

[Bee1976]

Allies may end in the late 40ies fighting on the dark side of the Moon using Roswell technology

I would buy that!

But as mentioned staying historic in interesting theatres of war like battle of the bulge is completly ok for me. I will buy, play and enjoy this DLC. I can enjoy both, real historic based stuff and real wierd ahistorical stuff.

[Retributarr]

Allies may end in the late 40ies fighting on the dark side of the Moon using Roswell technology

I would buy that!

But as mentioned staying historic in interesting theatres of war like battle of the bulge is completly ok for me. I will buy, play and enjoy this DLC. I can enjoy both, real historic based stuff and real wierd ahistorical stuff.

I agree!!!.
I'm not really primarily interested in re-visiting exactly the same outcome that historically occurred... not-withstanding that i would still like to give it a go anywaay!... however!... what i would really preferentially prefer!... is my Feb-10 posting take on "The Battle of The Bulge"... which is...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Feb 10-2024 Posting:
"Hm - can`t imagine how this"... unexpected surprise assault could not be extremely exciting... especially when there could be an opportunity for the "German Panzer Force" to come across and find... then secure the "American Fuel Dump"... which would lead to making the mission to capture the port of Antwerp much more attainable. With Antwerp under German control... the British forces would now be cut-off from their supply-chain... forcing them at some near timetable to surrender.

If this premised event were to actually occur... the American and British forces would now be effectively "Cut In Two!"... thus making the allied effort as a combined whole... tenuous at best regarding holding onto their gains in Western-Europe. It could also mean the collapse of the American forces as well... as without Montgomery's British participation ... the invasion for the American's would also very-likely collapse.

Is that not worth playing for???... for either side to "Thwart The Other!".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would certainly very-much like to explore those alternative outcomes... for if it were to take place.,, the Allied Invasion would now be of no more consequence... thusly!... now those German Forces in Western Europe could now be diverted or redirected to the Eastern-Front to confront the Russians to try to make a difference. I don't know how much of a difference that would really make?... maybe someone else has idea's on that subject matter. I would like to hear it!.

[PanzerCro]

I like this concept. It would be cool to have Frontlines: Battle of Kursk and Dubno-Brody battle (1941.) which are considered as two greatest tank battles on eastern front.

[terminator]

The history of the US 1st Infantry Division:

1st_inf_p18_image001_centerfold.jpg (52.52 KiB) Viewed 3483 times

[NYPATRIOT]

Why not an Allied Campaign starting 1939

First English then US Campaign

Or an Axis Operation DLC Desert Fox.

Guess it will be the first DLC that i will ignore till the first reviews came in.

love those ideas