Boy!, how I'm glad to see you back.

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
'Fcourserezaf wrote:Hey there bebro, remember me?
Yeah, I'm probably not too inventive on that vic conditions part. Some things might still need rework or error correction - it's a prob of time mostly. For example, those Darwin conditions you mentioned.Some general comments about gameplay in the campaign:
The only things I was a bit unhappy with were the victory conditions. Spoiled by the official DLCs, it was a bit sad that almost all DV/MV differences came down to either capturing the same objectives in less time or capturing more objectives.
I liked the briefings with the little maps on them, though they didn't read very Japanese - and a proper impersonator reading them aloud could have done wonders. But I think it's a good call that, rather than doing a poor job at "japanizing" the briefings, you just kept the "coloring" to a minimum and kept to your ropes. And, without access to a professional Japanese voice actor, you just left the briefings in text form. Once again, I think you made the best calls here.
Personally found #1 not so hard (easy to say if you made itNow, I'll give some specific comments about every level. I replayed them all (if neccessary) until I could get a DV, so this is the "optimal" path. Here's what I thought about the various scenarios.
SC1: Lake Khasan.
SC2: Khalkin Gol.
Probably should have paid more attention to the captured stuff - If I ever get around to update I'd include at least a TP and think about other types to capture - just wanted to avoide that the player ends up with Allied stuff as best parts of his core.SC7: Singapore
Now we're talking. This one was just about perfect.
Room for maneuvering and different strategies, strong but not too strong opposition, time limit JUST right, what's not to like?
My only nitpick are the lackluster captured units (an AT unit without transport you cannot upgrade? Seriously?).
Glad to hear that. Maybe I tone #1, #2 down indeed.Closing thoughts:
While the first two scenarios are stinkers in my book, overall this was an outstanding and thoroughly enjoyable experience.
I liked your approach to special units, using stuff from the Navy and the lineup of units you provided in general.
Yeah, seems to be related to PzC mechanics - IIRC land units get some ini boost when attacked from air, But yeah, could be worth to boost bombers a bit to balance it better and make them more usefulMy only criticism lies with the bombers, which feel woefully underpowered. With powerful AA guns everywhere and usually significant fighter cover in the air, I hardly ever used my bombers except to soften up armor when I had managed to win air superiority. And even against armor they too often took losses - one time in the last mission my best bomber lost 6 str bombarding an isolated unit of mobile artillery. Ouch.
No prob, and certainly not too harsh - constructive feedback is always welcomeMy apologies for the looooong wall of text, but if you bothered to read it, thank you, thanks for making the campaign and best of luck for whatever it is you're doing these days.
PS: I hope I haven't been too harsh after all.
_____
rezaf
Thanks.bebro wrote:'FcourseWelcome back!
I was hoping feedback was welcome - when I create something, I always like to hear about folks actually making use of it (see DCS), and I was hoping the same applied to scenario/campaign creators.bebro wrote:Thanks for the feedback, very much appreciated.
Fine, if you end up finetuning some stuff, that's great, but I know you have other things to do these days.bebro wrote:I'm not commenting on all, but some points
I figured as much, but I don't think I ever put even one piece of the capturable stuff on my core for even a limited time. Except the Rolls Royce, which I used for three missions or something.bebro wrote:Probably should have paid more attention to the captured stuff - If I ever get around to update I'd include at least a TP and think about other types to capture - just wanted to avoide that the player ends up with Allied stuff as best parts of his core.
IMO, that's one of the artifacts that remains in PzC's mechanics. Battle is often TOO lethal, especially when at the mercy of the RNG. You can expect a walk in the park 0:5 and end up suffering a 7:3, or something along those lines. Or, an enemy attacking you on his turn can get a lucky roll and destroy half your formation. I know there's now cheats addressing both issues, but cheats are not core mechanics. If Rudankort was ever to make a PzC2, I'd hope for these things to be addressed at the very least. But I disgress, this isn't the right place for such discussion.bebro wrote:Yeah, seems to be related to PzC mechanics - IIRC land units get some ini boost when attacked from air, But yeah, could be worth to boost bombers a bit to balance it better and make them more useful
I'm relieved you look at it this way. And, I have to thank you once again for making this great campaign. Thumbs way up!bebro wrote:No prob, and certainly not too harsh - constructive feedback is always welcomeThx!