My PC beta impressions thread

[Razz1]

All the scenarios are bugged. You need to take the objectives one turn before the last else you loose.

Pretty cool huh?

[OmegaMan1]

Razz, thanks for the heads-up. Now I know not to wait until the last turn to take an objective!

Dave

[Obsolete]

Actually, it's only some of them.

[Obsolete]

The bonus would take the form of additional prestige points, or an increase in experience for the unit involved.

My least liked bonus was the free replacements.

My favourite, was capturing equipment, particularly if you were Allies and captured a Panzer early.

[OmegaMan1]

My favourite, was capturing equipment, particularly if you were Allies and captured a Panzer early.

That was one of my favorite PG3 bonuses as well. Like I said, it would be nice if something like that could be replicated in Panzer Corps.

[OmegaMan1]

I finished the Greece scenario with a decisive victory. At first I was a bit disappointed that the scenario didn't include the Yugoslavian invasion, but after playing I think the tighter focus makes for a better game. My observations:

1. Once again, the AI does not seem to know how to play a defensive game. The line of trenches in front of Salonika should be a pretty tough nut to crack, IF the AI actually kept its units in place. Yet again, it moves three out of the four units entrenched out to attack the Bulgarian forces, while the fourth unit retreats back toward Salonika. This is something that definitely needs to be addressed, as it seems pointless to have defensive positions for the AI if it keeps moving things around.

2. The hex next to Salonika (25,11) is a deep sea space, but there is an Allied anit-air unit positioned in the space. It attacks and defends as normal, but when finally destroyed Axis land units cannot move into the space (although naval units can). Appears to be a set-up bug.

As a general observation, the strategic map on the right side of the screen needs to be clearer. Right now it seems too busy with both units and cities highlighted. Perhaps an option could be implemented where a player can toggle the map between a unit-only view and a city-possession only view, which would help reduce the clutter in the map.

That's all for now... on to Barbarossa!

Dave

[OmegaMan1]

I finished the Barbarossa scenario last night. It was the last game I completed before installing the new beta build. This scenario definitely starts out tough -- for the first time I had to reload the scenario and start again (I lost seven core units by turn 3). I managed a decisive victory. Here are the issues I found:

1. The Karl-Gerat unit (15,10) begins the game out of supply. It seems strange that this unit would not be ready for the biggest land invasion of the war.

2. At hex 29,15 it seems like a road tile is missing.

3. I used the train option for the Karl-Gerat unit, and for the most part had no difficulty with it. However, I did notice that near the end of the scenario, when I selected the entrained unit to move, it was allowed to move to cities that were still held by Russian units. Is this really possible, or is this just to show where the train COULD go?

I was going to move onto the Early Moscow scenario, but with the new build I've decided to start over with the 1939 campaign. I'll comment on the Poland scenario in a little while.

Dave

[OmegaMan1]

With the release of the new build, I've decided to check out the 1939 campaign again with the new changes... so it's back to Poland. Here are my observations:

1. Glad to see the campaign briefings are being added. I found a few typos in the text:
a. In the sentence that reads, "You have been giving..." giving should be given.
b. In the sentence that reads, "finish your mission before August..." shouldn't the month be September or October?
c. In the sentence that reads, "word of you imminent..." you should be your.

2. I love the new combat animations and sounds! They really do give a sense of three-dimensional action. Also, the units are much easier to see with the lightened background, thank you!

3. A couple of sound issues I noticed:
a. The Panzer IA unit makes an infantry sound when it moves.
b. The truck units no longer make any sound when they move.
c. The Gebrigstager unit does not make a sound when it moves.

Overall the improvements are great... I will move on to the Norway scenario to see how naval action has changed in this build. After that I might jump around a bit in the campaigns (unless you guys would like me to stick with the '39 campaign through its conclusion). In any case I am still very much enjoying PC after more than a week of play.

[Kerensky]

With the release of the new build, I've decided to check out the 1939 campaign again with the new changes... so it's back to Poland. Here are my observations:

1. Glad to see the campaign briefings are being added. I found a few typos in the text:
a. In the sentence that reads, "You have been giving..." giving should be given.
b. In the sentence that reads, "finish your mission before August..." shouldn't the month be September or October?
c. In the sentence that reads, "word of you imminent..." you should be your.

Overall the improvements are great... I will move on to the Norway scenario to see how naval action has changed in this build. After that I might jump around a bit in the campaigns (unless you guys would like me to stick with the '39 campaign through its conclusion). In any case I am still very much enjoying PC after more than a week of play.

You're correct on all three briefing errors. Thanks for reporting these problems! If you find any more typos or faulty dates, please do not hesitate to mention them because all the current briefings are only a first draft and may very well need touching up.

[OmegaMan1]

I finished both the Norway and Low Countries scenarios today. I suffered my first loss in Norway -- getting to Namsos is very tricky! Again, rain was a big hinderance to getting units up there in time to finish the job. Still, it is an enjoyable challenge, and is something I'll have to experiment with as far as how I place my initial forces. Overall, no big issues in the scenario, just sound/graphics stuff:

1. All of the following units are "silent" when moving: all naval units, pioniere unit, paratrooper unit.
2. Two suggestions: for bombers, when attacking a ground/naval unit, perhaps a graphic of bombs dropping instead of guns firing (I love the Ju-87 noise!). Also, when a submarine fires, a torpedo sound would be good.

As for the Low Countries, there were no outstanding issues (other than the sound/graphic notes above). It still seems the AI is moving units out of positions that would be better held defensively, although not as much as the first time I played this scenario. I was wondering about one thing, though. The BEF put up a spirited defense at Dunkirk and even attempted a counterattack at Arras. Currently there seems to be little UK presence in the scenario (IIRC the only British unit is a recon next to Dunkirk). I think a few more BEF units, particularly around the Channel ports, might add a bit more challenge to the scenario. It would certainly give the German player more to think about once his forces reach the Channel coast.

As for the scenario briefings, the intros to Norway, the LC and France all read very well. I especially like how it is suggested in the LC briefing to aim at cutting off the Allied forces by making a dash for the Channel... this is a good piece of advice to a newer player who may not realize how the campaign was fought historically.

That's it for tonight. Off to France tomorrow!

[uran21]

Currently there seems to be little UK presence in the scenario (IIRC the only British unit is a recon next to Dunkirk).

British have two infantry, anti-tank, anti-aircraft, artillery, tank and fighter in LC. No recon, maybe they recaptured some supply hex from Germans? Or was it French recon?

[OmegaMan1]

Hi Uran21, it was indeed a French recon, my mistake. And I misspoke -- I realize there are indeed more British units in the Antwerp-Brussels area. I meant to say that perhaps Dunkirk and either Calais or Boulogne should have a few British units, even if they are only infantry garrisons. It just seems a bit too easy currently to take the Channel port cities. Even with the bulk of the Allied forces in central Belgium, it might help the AI be a bit more of a challenge if there was a unit or two in the Channel cities. (Especially since a human Allied player would offer more defense of these objectives.) Again, just a thought.

[OmegaMan1]

Finished the France scenario today. No real issues to report... in fact, the scenario plays quite well! I did notice another "silent" unit, the recon vehicles. Otherwise all of the previous comments hold true as well. Also, I have a question -- in the old PG games, you could win a scenario if you successfully eliminated all of the AI's units (even if there were objectives not yet captured). I tried this in the France scenario; I destroyed the last French units around Tours, the last objective I had to take. However, the scenario did not end until I actually occupied the last objective hex. So I guess eliminating all enemy units does not end the scenario, correct?

Since I managed a decisive victory in France, it's off to Sea Lion '40 once more. Hope I have better luck against the Royal Navy this time!

[uran21]

Also, I have a question -- in the old PG games, you could win a scenario if you successfully eliminated all of the AI's units (even if there were objectives not yet captured). I tried this in the France scenario; I destroyed the last French units around Tours, the last objective I had to take. However, the scenario did not end until I actually occupied the last objective hex. So I guess eliminating all enemy units does not end the scenario, correct?

Correct.

Since I managed a decisive victory in France, it's off to Sea Lion '40 once more. Hope I have better luck against the Royal Navy this time! Smile

Try to delay your land forces in transports until you get rid of a threat

[OmegaMan1]

Uran, I did exactly as you said -- namely, I was agressive with the German navy and air forces and tried to sink as much of the Royal Navy as possible in the first two turns. This worked rather well, and I managed to ferry my units across without a loss (although two units took damage from air attacks). I managed to win the scenario with two turns to spare this time, still a marginal victory. This brought a question to mind: does a player receive a prestige bonus for the next scenario depending on what type of victory is won? And if so, is that bonus hard-wired or can you gain more by finishing a scenario faster?

I encountered no problems in the Sea Lion 40 scenario itself. I did notice one small typo in the scenario briefing, however; where it says, "You should tread lightly, ..." the comma should be a semicolon. (I work as a copy editor, so sorry if it seems I am nitpicking! ) I hope to finish Barbarossa tonight, and get back to early Moscow (if I'm fortunate enough to gain a decisive victory).

[OmegaMan1]

This weekend I finished both the Barbarossa and Early Moscow scenarios. I won decisive victories in both games. Overall, both scenarios played well, although they both had the same "feel" -- i.e., in the early game turns the German player must bash through a thick line of defense, breaking out and making a mad dash to gain all of the remaining objectives before the window for a decisive victory is closed. Nevertheless I think this works well in the '41 Russian front scenarios, since the Red Army tended to mass its forces along the front and not defend in depth.

As far as issues go, I found nothing in either scenario to be out of place -- except, of course, for the aforementioned movement sound issue. Actually, it seems in both scenarios that ALL vehiclular movement -- tanks, trucks, even trains -- has dropped out. I guess this issue varies from scenario to scenario at this point?

I do have a question about the choice between going for Early Moscow or the historical Kiev scenario. The obvious benefit of taking the early Moscow route is the possibility of knocking Russia out of the war in 1941. What, if anything, is the benefit of choosing Kiev instead? I assume there has to be some sort of give-and-take in the choices (especially since the briefing before the scenario choice hints there could be a loss of prestige in choosing to go to Moscow instead of Kiev). Otherwise, why not make early Moscow an automatic choice for a decisive Barbarossa win, and Kiev for anything less. Just looking for some insight on what choice to make.

Now, back to England with Sea Lion 42. I assume the British will be joined by the US in this scenario?

[Kerensky]

I encountered no problems in the Sea Lion 40 scenario itself. I did notice one small typo in the scenario briefing, however; where it says, "You should tread lightly, ..." the comma should be a semicolon. (I work as a copy editor, so sorry if it seems I am nitpicking! ) I hope to finish Barbarossa tonight, and get back to early Moscow (if I'm fortunate enough to gain a decisive victory).

You're right again, thanks for the report. Keep them coming!

[OmegaMan1]

I finished the Sea Lion '42 scenario last night. Crossing the Channel was definitely tougher this time around. However, once the Germans got ashore in force, things went pretty quickly in my favor, and I finished with a decisive victory. A few thoughts:

1. What is the purpose of the radar units? They don't seem to have any defensive or offensive capabilities, so is there some other benefit they give the Allies? I destroyed the radar stations near the German landing beaches, but afterward I just ignored them. As an aside, when a plane is over a radar unit, and the ground unit view is on, the tiny plane icon is almost impossible to see (it blends in with the radar "dish").

2. I noticed that when I place a fighter unit next to a bomber unit, the fighter will defend against the first enemy air attack, but then do nothing in any subsequent attacks. Maybe I'm remembering this wrong, but I thought in previous PG games a plane would defend against as many attacks as possible in a turn (unless it ran out of ammo first). Is this not the case in PC (and for that matter, does this also apply to defensive artillery fire as well)?

3. I noticed during the AI's turn, air battles are hard to follow -- namely, the screen does not switch to a "plane" view on the map but stays on the "ground" view, making it difficult to see what's going on sometimes.

With that, it's on to the USA scenario. I'll have a report on what happens a little later.

[OmegaMan1]

So I just finished the USA scenario. I'll touch on the two issues I noticed before I share my feelings about the scenario:

1. I noticed that the USA is completely devoid of rivers! I assume these will be added in a later build?

2. In air-to-air combat, there were no animations or sounds when AI air units would attack my air units. This led to a few instances where my air units would simply "vanish" with no seeming reason; it took me a couple of turns to realize it was the AI attacking my air units and destroying them, but nothing was indicated to show combat had occurred.

As for the scenario itself... I think, for the first time since I have been playtesting PC, I was disappointed. I think I expected the final scenario to be a really difficult affair; after all, this is the final battle and if you've reached this point, a good challenge would seem to be in order. Initially this was the case; the U.S. naval and air units attacked my units agressively, and I lost a good number of units in the first few turns. However, once I was established on the ground, I was able to quickly rebuild some of my force and strike out into the American heartland. Alas, there were very few U.S. forces on the board; other than concentrations around Washington, Virginia Beach and Charlotte, most cities either had one unit or none at all. (New York seemed especially easy to take, with only one or two units present.) The southern and western portions of the map seemed deserted... I would have thought each objective would at least have one garrison unit!

It seems that, in its current state, the U.S. map is a bit too big... maybe it should be cut down to the immediate mid-Atlantic area so that the scenario has a better focal point. Either that, or there should be some more "strongpoints" that offer a bigger challenge in the later stages of the scenario.

Please note this isn't a knock on PC itself... as I said, I have greatly enjoyed the game thus far, and even this experience leaves me wanting to play the game again. I guess I am just hoping that the final battle will be a meatier challenge in future builds.

Next up, I will start playing the 1941 campaign.

[OmegaMan1]

I started the 1941 campaign today. It seems that the Barbarossa scenario is a lot tougher without more experienced and upgraded units. In fact I was surprised to see so many early-model armored units in service... made the scenario a little more challenging to play, so that's not necessarily a bad thing. I could only manage a marginal victory this time, so I will be making my first visit to Kiev in the next scenario.