adiekmann wrote: ↑Sat Jun 14, 2025 7:07 pm
The new Westwall DLC could have been maybe somehow fit into it, but I don't know that yet.
I missed the initial call for beta testers so I have no idea how it'll fit. Even if Bulge and Westwall require a little bit of retooling, the opportunity for a US grand campaign that more or less follows Rick Atkinson's books (An Army at Dawn etc).
That would go something like:
1. Tunisia
2. Sicily/Italy
3. D-Day (yes, there is enough involved in the breakout for a full on campaign IMO).
4. Westwall
5. Into Germany
Plenty of drama, varied scenarios, and given how spectacularly the allies developed over time in terms of learning how to fight a war, the gaining of experience toward 5* units makes a lot of sense.
I, for one, would be fine with repurchasing the campaigns if they needed significant retooling to fit a grand campaign, but all they'd need is the ability to import/export the core (which may be there already).
{quote]It does require some additional long-term planning to make sure they are balanced with regards to heroes especially and not overpowered. Here is where I fear the recent Italian-British North African DLC missed out. It is still possible to continue those with follow up DLCs, but the heroes given in them would need to be sorted in some manner along with the experience. That's where the long term design is needed in conjunction with future, follow-up DLCs that continue your core's campaign. [/quote]
A couple of ideas regarding how to manage it with existing campaigns: just flat out downgrade experiences (divide by 4, or cap it at 2* for 2nd linked campaign, reducing experience across the board) this can be justified narratively by how rapidly technology and tactics evolved. The Brits, for example, got caught out by the Afrika Corps after Operation Compass partly because of lazy doctrine. In Compass they didn't need to coordinate air, or even tanks with infantry. They got away with lazy doctrine. So meeting the Afrika Korps was a real-life experience reset.
The allies, unlike the Germans and Japanese, tended to focus FAR more on using their best officers for training (and, for the Americans, war bonds tours). So there's a real life precedent for limiting how many heroes one can import.
Expanding on the Poland campaign, switching nationality of focus could do it. Many Polish fighters were absorbed into French forces, so the 2nd campaign could be from the French POV. The 3rd, and the rest onward, English/Commonwealth POV. That'd winnow down the heroes nicely, though I'd hope I get to pick who stays and goes.
Everyone has opinions with what they like and don't like regarding many aspects of this game, but the point I make above is one that has been ringing pretty consistently over and over again by most and yet still seems to get ignored. Why?
Having just finished the Poland campaign, my impression is that a lot of short DLC were rushed in to plug the gap left by the shelving of the Pacific campaign. Just an impression. I find the stand-aloneness of current campaigns, especially ones that could (should?) be linked like the US ones, frustrating.
ALL OF THAT SAID, I really like the idea of "Elite" standalone campaigns that focus on a specific unit. I think these ought to have more scenarios, but in the 15-25 range rather than linked campaigns focusing on a single unit. As I've said many times elsewhere,
PC2 needs an SAS/LRDG/SBS campaign.. "Elite" series would be the perfect home for it (oh yeah, uh, and Carthage must be destroyed[/Cato Mode].
If you get the Super Heavy Mortar unit use it! It is sooooo good in the last couple of games. 
, then I would bend history a bit by withdrawing from the African continent instead of reinforcing a defeat. Then I would continue the campaign and your core in Sicily and the Italian peninsula all the way until final capitulation in 1945.