Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
I see. So - if I`m reading correctly between the lines - in an Axis campaign Finland won`t appear at all and since there doesn`t seem to be any real focus on army group south up to Stalingrad(which is already included in the main campaign) I`m guessing you won`t really have a need to buff up Romania above the infantry/antitank/artillery level in any future DLC. But once the DLC year mission packs for the Axis campaign are done I fear it will move to "it`s up to the modding community"/"by this stage adding more units and missions won`t sell any more copies of the game"(which is something I`ve experienced with other games). With all the content being made and obvious support for the game I was a bit overwhelmed into getting the impression that it will be very all inclusive in all regards so was really looking forward to choosing which army group to take in a Barbarossa campaign for example. And leaning towards either south or north because frankly I`m a bit tired of army group center. I remember in PG2 when I reached America that I had various allied units in the army, from Finland to Romania to Italy and iirc even a spanish unit.Rudankort wrote: I mean campaign played on the side of the Soviet Union, where Winter War might be featured.
Was very fun for me hence the disappointment here. Still, Panzer Corps is a good game and I don`t mean to belittle your work. Just noticing that it follows a different concept than I was personally hoping for.
Yes, I saw the Leningrad41 on that list and it`s what you`ve said that made me expect little or no presence at all on the part of the Finnish army. Personally I would have liked to see the winter war(and able to play Finland).Rudankort wrote:DLCs will give the north and south army groups more attention (see the list of scenarios for DLC '41, http://www.slitherine.com/games/pzc_DLC_3). But even in the battle around Leningrad the involvement of Finland was minimal.
Oh, let`s not go down that road of strict "historical accuracy" in games. There are only casualties and no winners in such "battles".I don't think it is realistic to expect finnish troops in USA as part of german core.
From my personal experience with other games. The entire USA campaign is entirely hypothetical of course and since the game puts the player in the position to command all the major operations in the war on this side of the front than he/she can invade USA with whoever he/she wants. On a more detailed level if you really feel the need for justification there are plenty excuses for such a scenario(like the need to present it as a multinational campaign, the need to minimize casualties on your core units or the presence of "volunteer" units without official state backing etc.). So it`s just stretched, not wholly absurd. Frankly, with anyone powerful in Europe gone I don`t see how someone could just refuse to go along with a request for troops.I posted about it somewhere, but don't remember where. In brief, profile view of the units looks better than any other in most cases, is by far the most recognizable, and the battlefield looks much more smooth and uniform when the units are not facing in different directions. Also, this allowed us to keep overlaps of unit icons under control and have the icons as big as possible (there would be much more overlap between tanks facing upwards/downwards etc.). Of course, this saved us some work too, in particular with animations which we did not need to render in many different directions. And as a bonus, we were able to save some RAM.Mark50 wrote: 1. I`ve read that the 2d units a la PG(1) was a conscious decision, but I`ve seen no details as to why. If I understand correctly the units do exist in 3d so that their renders look good(and they do btw). Is there a post that I can`t find that details the devs` view on this subject? Was it a technical or purely esthetic decision?
We are considering all fronts and battles in WW2, Pacific included, but it is too early to go into details on this.Mark50 wrote: 2. Have you considered doing a pacific general game too if panzer corps does well(which I hope it will)?
Yes.Mark50 wrote: EDIT: one more: is the avatar updating itself depending on the number of posts?
Here again, it is too early to say what the allied campaign(s) will be like. We got a lot of good feedback on the german campaign, as well as DLCs, and we'll try to take all this feedback into account when designing allied stuff. I'm pretty sure the soviets will be separate though.Mark50 wrote:If you were to make an allied campaign how would you design it in terms of its course? Since you`ve mentioned a soviet campaign I`m guessing you`d split it between east and west. But would the west be a single campaign basically following the battles that involved the british or a compendium of campaigns depending on the dominant power(british, american and maybe even french)?
