PC 1st Improvement

[Razz1]

I am still available for testing all improvement and I am sure allot of other members will join.

So I assume this beta thread remains open and all new improvements will be listed here first, so we can test them?


I know we won't have a patch, just improvements!

[IainMcNeil]

Thanks guys - we are planning to keep the beta forum alive for patches. You're welcome to use this forum on an ongoing basis if you just want to discuss stuff away from the crowds.

[VPaulus]

Yes I think that's a nice idea, for some "core" elements like Razz for example, to continue and giving their opinion and helping this way the developers.
Probably some new players could be invited to participate, but that would be harder to manage and would raise the question who deserves or not and end up creating some confusion.

[grabbysnatch]

would love to continue testing, although I am not as experienced as some, sometimes a new set of eyes and all that

[OmegaMan1]

I would love to continue testing PzC expansions in the future. This experience was just fantastic, and I can't wait to see what's coming down the pike.

[mllange]

I would love to continue testing PzC expansions in the future. This experience was just fantastic, and I can't wait to see what's coming down the pike.

I couldn't agree with this more, as I mentioned in the Quarter to Three review, this has been the most enjoyable beta testing experience I've ever participated in and I'm looking forward to any expansions in the future.

[Jonesy1760]

Great game,great improvements,looking forward to more info about PzC.

[Razz1]

I would like to see non mobile AT units enter thick forest hexes.

Perhaps re-look at recon and have a lower unit valuable by making range sight 4. Example Sdkfz 222 sight 4

Why, movement range is low uses wheels so hard to move into forest or hills. now a player may want the 222 over a newer unit that moves range 8 and spots range 3. Haven't used the Allies enough to see which of these units could use the same idea. Perhaps the Stuart M3?

[Razz1]

if we can upgrade the 38t to a tank destroyer for 50% off


While the Panzer 38(t) had largely become obsolete as a tank in early 1942, it was still an excellent platform for adaptation into a tank destroyer, among other roles. Since the Soviet 76.2 mm field gun was captured in large quantities, the decision was made to mate this gun to the Panzer 38(t).

To do so, the turret and upper superstructure of the Panzer 38 were removed and a new superstructure was bolted on to the chassis. The upper structure mounted the gun and an extended gun shield, giving very limited protection for the commander and the loader. Armour protection overall ranged from 10 to 50 mm. The gun, commander and loader were located on top of the engine deck. It had higher silhouette than Panzer 38, which made it more vulnerable to enemy fire.

The now-called 7.62 cm PaK 36(r) was rechambered to be able to use standard German 75 mm ammunition, of which 30 rounds could be carried inside the vehicle. Apart from the main gun, there was a 7.92 mm machine gun mounted in the hull.

This tank destroyer was put into production as the Panzerjäger 38(t) für 7.62 cm PaK 36(r), Sd.Kfz. 139. A total of 363 of this Marder III variant were built from April 1942 to 1943. [High Resolution]

[Razz1]

Can we get a tile for a supply depot and also an oil derek tile?

I use some flags as objectives or as supply depots. ( They generate prestige per turn if owned by a player )

This way we can set up victory conditions upon capturing supply depots and oil resources.

[tnourie]

Can we get a tile for a supply depot and also an oil derek tile?

I use some flags as objectives or as supply depots. ( They generate prestige per turn if owned by a player )

This way we can set up victory conditions upon capturing supply depots and oil resources.

That's a great idea, and would make the Bulge scenario complete and proper. It would also add a whole other element into the tactics employed by both armies in other campaigns and scenarios.