Campaigns are too short

PC : Turn based WW2 goodness in the mold of Panzer General. This promises to be a true classic!

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design

Xerkis
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Northeast, USA

Post by Xerkis »

El_Condoro wrote:
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.
I only will buy turn based games. It’s about strategy, careful planning, thinking things through, and time. RTS are too high strung for my liking.
But also like El_Condoro says; this is my opinion but many here share it.
:wink:
VPaulus
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 8324
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:33 pm
Location: Portugal

Post by VPaulus »

No RTS games for me either.
If PC was a RTS I wouldn't "touch" it.
AgentX
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 381
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:38 pm

Post by AgentX »

VPaulus wrote:No RTS games for me either.
If PC was a RTS I wouldn't "touch" it.
I actually like both styles. However, with my RTS games, I like a slower paced, tactical game like Company of Heroes rather than frantic, fast paced games like StarCraft II.

Also, I believe dumbttt was stating that he wanted MP in real time, not PBEM. I don't think he was thinking of turning Panzer Corps into a RTS game. Only that he wanted turns to play out in real time, not waiting for email to make turns.
Last edited by AgentX on Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Panzer Corps Beta Tester
dumbttt
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 4:32 am

Post by dumbttt »

El_Condoro wrote:
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.
Way to attack a strawman. I wasn't talking about RTS.
Xerkis
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Northeast, USA

Post by Xerkis »

Ok?
But explain how you can have a game that is turn based when playing solo but then somehow it’s real time when playing MP?
If your opponent happens to be online at the time that you are; it is real time (more or less). The wait between moves is not much more than the wait for the AI to move when playing solo. You certainly could not have both you and your opponent moving your pieces at the same time… that would be an entirely different game.
:wink:
El_Condoro
Panzer Corps Moderator
Panzer Corps Moderator
Posts: 2119
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 9:32 am

Post by El_Condoro »

Also, I believe dumbttt was stating that he wanted MP in real time, not PBEM. I don't think he was thinking of turning Panzer Corps into a RTS game. Only that he wanted turns to play out in real time, not waiting for email to make turns.
Actually, I wasn't attacking anyone - straw or real. PBEM++ in PzC doesn't have any email at all, so when I see "real time", what am I supposed to think? Please explain what you mean.
Molve
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:06 am

Post by Molve »

dumbttt wrote:
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.
Sorry, but please start a new thread.

I would like to focus on the message that (most) people complaining about the campaign length aren't doing so simply because they want ever-more stuff for the same money.

If you disagree with the price tag placed on the game, feel free to discuss that. Elsewhere.

Instead, there is a valid gameplay balance issue at the heart of the issue. Simply put, the game doesn't have enough scenarios for the end game (in all branches of the campaign tree) to be fully enjoyable.

Adding more scenarios is a quality issue, not merely random whining from random users.
Molve
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:06 am

Post by Molve »

Xerkis wrote:But explain how you can have a game that is turn based when...
El_Condoro wrote:Please explain what you mean.
Or not. :wink:

Please, the really important task here is convincing the devs that the game needs more scenarios for its own good.
Xerkis
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:56 pm
Location: Northeast, USA

Post by Xerkis »

I have posted in various threads – including this one – that there needs to be more scenarios. And I have to believe that there will be more coming eventually. Will they come in the first patch or the one after that? Maybe, maybe not. But I’m sure they will be coming. Iainmcneil hinted above that they are coming too. Just need to be patient… although I for one am having a hard time doing that. Love this game and I want more of it.
:wink:

Also, sorry for the detour from the main topic. Many of us have become passionate about this game and seem to feel the need to correct what we perceive as incorrect statements; or at the very least try to understand where they are coming form.
:)
McRoos
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2011 8:27 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by McRoos »

I think they left some room for scenario's in the 1942-1943 period via updates or add-ons.
Commercially, that might be interesting.
Trump2016
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by Trump2016 »

Hopefully soon, we zoom way too fast in this critical period of the war.
Trump2016
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 12:38 pm

Post by Trump2016 »

iainmcneil wrote:Watch this space - we're working on something that might be of interest :)
I am watching, and did not see anything on intererst in the first patch. Is there something I missed to address the need for additional campaign scenerios?
PG2000
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 12:08 pm

Post by PG2000 »

I was also hoping that at least the campaign path would have been changed with the first patch.
So I have to continue to play (the very good) mods!
parusski
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:46 am

Post by parusski »

I love the game and have not stopped playing since I started beta testing. BUT I wish the campaigns were much longer.

The price is a steal, a great value.
Molve
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:06 am

Post by Molve »

Cap wrote:
iainmcneil wrote:Watch this space - we're working on something that might be of interest :)
I am watching, and did not see anything on intererst in the first patch. Is there something I missed to address the need for additional campaign scenerios?
I did not get the impression they were talking about the patch.

Instead my guess is that they are preparing a "map pack" that slots into the campaign structure.

Completely unrelated to the patching process, that is.

(Do note: I am not a developer and am in no way connected to Slitherine. All of the above is personal guesswork only)
Keldun
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:44 am

Post by Keldun »

Actually, I think we won't be getting any significant change to the campaign unfortunately.
Kerensky wrote:
axlroselm wrote:for next patch you need to add the real Overlord map and rename old Overlord map to Cobra. I am talking to you Kerensky!! :x
Just because I have the tag doesn't mean I created or endorse Overlord in it's current state. ;)
viewtopic.php?t=23856&highlight=overlord

That said though, I think we may have to accept the reality that the current grand campaign is not going to fundamentally change anymore, and that energies will be better spent learning our lessons and using good feedback to create increasingly impressive content moving forward.

And yes the AT mod is just that, a mod.
Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 8624
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky »

As a reminder, I did say may, not definitely, though.

During BETA there was talk of eventually incorporating new elements into the existing campaign, say Africa, for example, but at this point I don't want to say too much because it may lead to false expectations or misunderstandings. :)
Molve
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 10:06 am

Post by Molve »

I should probably add that offering an Africa campaign (or a campaign as the Western Allies, etc) as an addon or DLC that costs money is Slitherine's perogative and something I am okay with. If nothing else this means we can raise our expectations (as in "its difficult to complain about the quality of something you get for free").

This does not mean the complaints about the current campaign aren't valid, however. I still consider it a bug (rather than a limitation on content) that you can get to USA (in some paths of the campaign tree) with very few scenarios under your belt, requiring vasts amounts of prestige just to upgrade your units, skipping entire generations of gear, and missing out on opportunities to gather experience.

I do not feel we need to discuss adding new elements to fix that - I consider "new stuff" to be a completely separate subject, really. What the current game needs to fulfil its potential is a few more scenarios using only existing assets inserted into strategic places of the campaign tree. (I'm not talking about the admirable efforts to reproduce the Panzer General campaign here, I mean no changes to units or equipment, just more nodes in selected branches of the campaign tree)
Shrike
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 323
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:44 pm
Location: Belgium

Post by Shrike »

I agree with Molve. The step from 1942 to 1945 is just too drastic. I found myself "cheating" by analyzing the optimal path to make it to the USA on Field Marshall level just to stand the best chance at beating the eastcoast scenario. The first time around I was too short on units to stand a chance and didn't even manage a marginal victory. I finally beat the game by optimizing the campaign trajectory, but it shouldn't have to be that way.
monkspider
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2011 3:22 am

Post by monkspider »

I have to say that I would be pretty disappointed if the Afrika expansion *didn't* tie into the main game. I don't think that a standalone mini-campaign of 5-6 scenarios that doesn't have continuity with the greater war effort would be very compelling. I was assuming that the expansion would be like the old Panzer General where you could choose to fight the British in North Africa or the Soviets in 1941. I always thought that choice was one of the best parts about that game, it allowed you to have a bit of variety in your campaigns.

If the Afrika expansion threw in, say a Kharkov scenario as a bonus, that would just be gravy. But really, i have to say it is a bit disappointing to hear that the main campaign as it is should not be expected to change with future content. I can't help but feel that this approach is somewhat wrong-headed, IMO.
Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps”