Campaigns are too short

PG2000 · Post by **PG2000** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:21 pm

In my opionion the campaigns are too short, i.e. the moment i have the best heros/equippment the campaign ends. This is a little bit demotivating.
Please add some additonal maps to each campain or make the good heros/equippment available earlier!!!

Fritz · Post by **Fritz** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 5:25 pm

Look at the scenario section or play a higher difficulty. A well planned campaign takes most time 20 hours plus.

PG2000 · Post by **PG2000** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 6:37 pm

The time needed for a campaign is ok. What i ment is that when you have the best units/heroes the campaign is over so i can use them for only one or two maps.

AgentX · Post by **AgentX** » Sat Aug 13, 2011 7:13 pm

PG2000, here are a couple of modded campaigns that will give you a longer experience.

Locarnus' mod that gives a more "Panzer General" like campaign. You follow the right path and can have 17 mission campaign:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2865453

Mannock's Map Pack adds 5 maps he created to increase the stock campaign length:
http://slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26589

*When using a modded campaign, make a backup of your campaign.pzdat file (the Locarnus mod provides a backup for you). This is so you can go back to the stock campaign without having to uninstall/reinstall the game.

Hammer4000 · Post by **Hammer4000** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:59 am

Go ahead and play the Original PG campaign mod found here, it has some 36 missions,(& a fav of mine there's a Moscow 42 & a Sealion 40, , 43) it plays very well, and let the creator know about any bugs, ext you may find, has were in the stages of fine tuning it. & adding missions to it. After all the original campaign tree structure was nicely built, and why not improve on whats good already?

An example mission i would like to see is, if the German player can manage to make it on the Pacific United States,(or midland) that there should be Japanese units available to use.

PG2000 · Post by **PG2000** » Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:45 am

Thank you all for your advices. At the moment I am trying Locarnus' mod, which (as I know) allows up to 3 additional missions. The 3 extra missions may be enough to have some fun with my experienced army

After that I'll also try the Original PG campaign mod.
But I Still think it's a pity that the Original game ends when I have the most "interesting" army/units.

Kerensky · Post by **Kerensky** » Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:01 am

That's why I made the two extra USA scenarios, a little bit of extra time to play with the top end units.

Xerkis · Post by **Xerkis** » Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:17 am

First off, I am most definitely for a longer campaign.

But I think, in the interest of game balance; there might need to be a few changes to the hero system if there are added missions to the campaign trail. This is depending upon where the new missions were added though. If you put them in or around the end of the campaign, then it should be fine. But if they are added early on in the campaign, then I think you will end up with too strong of units too fast for the scenarios already there now.

I personally would like to see more missions to the beginning to middle part of the campaign; when you have the weaker equipment. That way you have more time to see your army build, struggle and grow it to something worthy of its efforts.

But wherever you add more missions to the campaigns; they do need to be added. Definitely too short; this is an awesome game, want more of it.

steelwarrior · Post by **steelwarrior** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 2:48 am

totally agreeing - longer campaign - there can be shorter ones for other player style players - but I want a 30+ scenario campaign - maybe the next Addon cand the other ones coming can add up to one superlong campaign ???

Pleeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaase!

Post by **IainMcNeil** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:13 am

Watch this space - we're working on something that might be of interest

Xerkis · Post by **Xerkis** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 11:26 am

iainmcneil wrote:Watch this space - we're working on something that might be of interest

You guys sure know how to tantalize your fans. Much more of this, and I will have to get a new keyboard from me drooling over it so much.

steelwarrior · Post by **steelwarrior** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 4:53 pm

I will watch carefully - I am anyway already advertising PC in all German strategy forums and it seems to work

cause I want to have many addons and sequels - so pure selfishness

flakfernrohr · Post by **flakfernrohr** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:43 am

I've just added a 600gb Velociraptor Hard Drive for my game computer just to store and manage PzC games and mods. Bring all of "em on. I'll take "em.

VPaulus · Post by **VPaulus** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 2:04 am

I hope you don't just have add a Velociraptor because of Panzer Corps... I mean any lousy green series would be enough.... After all this isn't an ArmA game.

flakfernrohr · Post by **flakfernrohr** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 5:04 am

Actually I added the Velociraptor because I got it for a good price, but I didn't want to put PzC and some games on my other drives that have flight programs and games. I used the excuse to buy it because of PzC even though I know it was like pointing an 88mm and shooting a bullfrog.

Now I have piece of mind.

dumbttt · Post by **dumbttt** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 5:21 am

Totally agree. The campaign is way too short. Campaign in PG1 was much more meaty. It seems like the developers only gave it a half-hearted effort here.

Molve · Post by **Molve** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 12:02 pm

I agree the campaign is too short, but not in the "I'm not getting my money's worth" sense.

Instead, the campaigns need more mid-war scenarios inserted so that the jump (in campaign time) never becomes too abrupt.

As it is, it's entirely possible to end up in a 1944 scenario still with a 1942 army; meaning you need to spend all your prestige just to catch up on equipment upgrades.

This isn't a question of not providing good gaming; it's a serious quality issue that needs to be addressed.

The way the Panzer General type of games works means each campaign must be meticulously built and balanced to never mean too large jumps in time, and here the PC team needs to add a few more scenarios.

The game itself and the amount of included gaming hours is fine. But the main campaign is stretched too thin for the number of scenarios (not in total but in each particular branch of the campaign tree).

If it isn't feasible to add more scenarios, then consider changing the campaign so it either begins later than 1939 or ends earlier than 1945 but with the same number of scenarios of course.

As I said, this is not a complaint the game doesn't provide enough value. I would be fine if Slitherine narrowed down the game contents to say the first half of the war. This would more honestly convey what you're getting (in terms of "campaign tree branch depth"), and it would allow for a truly satisfying campaign experience. Then Slitherine could probably charge the same amount of money for a second game covering the second half of the war, provided it offered a similar wealth of closely intervalled scenarios (and, of course, that you could play the entire campaign once you have both games!).

Keldun · Post by **Keldun** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 1:51 pm

I got much fun out of this game, definitely my money worth of it. I also loved the narrative part of the game so that we don't feel like we are being thrown random mission in succession.
But I have to agree, I would have appreciated more missions in the campaign and I felt that the point from where we get tiger 2, maus etc.. to the end feels a bit too fast to really have time to appreciate those units.
If more well done full missions could be placed in the campaign to add a bit more meat to it, I think this game could wipe out anything on top of my epic strategic game list .

dumbttt · Post by **dumbttt** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 4:16 pm

Molve wrote:I agree the campaign is too short, but not in the "I'm not getting my money's worth" sense.

Totally disagree. This game is a virtual copy of PG1, incorporating little new innovation while containing less content than a game made 20 years ago. The campaign path is but one area of the game that could use more content. The "Library" content is way too thin, I would expect a paragraph describing each unit. PBEM is a bizarre throwback, in 2011 we expect real-time multiplayer. Although not a huge deal, the graphic would have been much, much better. When I first saw the screenshot, I thought the game was made at least 5-7 years ago and some how never came up on my radar.
I remember paying $9 for PG1 (PS1) back in 1995. Even with inflation factored in, this game cost twice as much as the game it copied from. I realize that the developer are small-time operations and don't have the economies of scale that huge companies have, but $40–50 is definitely too much. While I don't personally care for the purchase price because I am a big fan of PG and have the money, I don't see how the average gamer would even consider paying $40-50 for such a game. Maybe $25 or less is more reasonable. That being said, I am glad someone is restarting the series, so no complaint here, I just don't see how they can hope to reach audience beyond the old PG crowd.

El_Condoro · Post by **El_Condoro** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:25 pm

dumbttt wrote: in 2011 we expect real-time multiplayer

Sorry, dumbttt, but I totally disagree with you on this one - it's one of the main reasons I still love these types of games (turn-based strategy and the MP system) - I loathe real time games. There are many reasons why. Anyway, it's an opinion thing but I think there would be many here who agree.