Why do you still stick with the OG Panzer Corps?

[heinzrondorf]

My biggest issue with PzC (macOS issues aside) is definitely the hero system. I just can't understand how someone thought it would be a good idea to have a system where all units (more or less) can get the same types of heroes and there is no way of re-assigning/moving the heroes to units where they would actually be useful. It beggars belief that the hero system passed even the alpha version of the game let alone ended up in the final product. Move heroes on planes? Spotting heroes on towed artillery? Really? On the other hand a move hero on a 8.8 makes a huge difference and a spotting hero on a recon unit is great. The heroes have such a HUGE impact on the gameplay over a long campaign and the system is so flawed in PzC you get a situation where you either reload to get (somewhat) what you want or "hero farm" in order to increase the chances of getting something useful.

When I found out the hero system had been revamped in PzC 2 I became very enthusiastic but having read the comments on other issues with PzC 2 I am not anymore since it seems other aspects of PzC have been sacrificed in order to accommodate the 3D engine.

I would have paid money just to get a 1.5 patch of PzC where the hero system was revamped and it is such as an easy thing to correct which makes it even more frustrating.

[Uhu]

I see your points and partly agree with it. I do not agree to move heroes to another units. That would be to easy. But I would make it more sophistical: hero types for the given unit type and only 1 point of it/hero. In that way it would be like an RPG system.

My biggest issue with PzC (macOS issues aside) is definitely the hero system. I just can't understand how someone thought it would be a good idea to have a system where all units (more or less) can get the same types of heroes and there is no way of re-assigning/moving the heroes to units where they would actually be useful. It beggars belief that the hero system passed even the alpha version of the game let alone ended up in the final product. Move heroes on planes? Spotting heroes on towed artillery? Really? On the other hand a move hero on a 8.8 makes a huge difference and a spotting hero on a recon unit is great. The heroes have such a HUGE impact on the gameplay over a long campaign and the system is so flawed in PzC you get a situation where you either reload to get (somewhat) what you want or "hero farm" in order to increase the chances of getting something useful.

When I found out the hero system had been revamped in PzC 2 I became very enthusiastic but having read the comments on other issues with PzC 2 I am not anymore since it seems other aspects of PzC have been sacrificed in order to accommodate the 3D engine.

I would have paid money just to get a 1.5 patch of PzC where the hero system was revamped and it is such as an easy thing to correct which makes it even more frustrating.

[heinzrondorf]

I see your points and partly agree with it. I do not agree to move heroes to another units. That would be to easy. But I would make it more sophistical: hero types for the given unit type and only 1 point of it/hero. In that way it would be like an RPG system.

I would have been fine with that. As long as certain types of heroes could not be assigned to certain types of units.

- No move heroes for planes
- No spotting heroes for planes (in real life "spotting" is probably one of the most important and valued traits which really affects combat performance of a pilot but not in the game)
- No spotting heroes for artillery (at least if the unit is currently towed artillery)
- No spotting heroes for anti-aircraft (see above regarding planes, great in real life - more or less useless in the game)

There are probably other ones but the above are the ones that immediately come to mind and are absolutely infuriating in my opinion. No hero is COMPLETELY useless but if you compare the above with getting an attack, defence etc hero for the above unit type it is like night and day over the course of a campaign.

[Uhu]

We agree. Also no Ini for Art. units for example.

I see your points and partly agree with it. I do not agree to move heroes to another units. That would be to easy. But I would make it more sophistical: hero types for the given unit type and only 1 point of it/hero. In that way it would be like an RPG system.

I would have been fine with that. As long as certain types of heroes could not be assigned to certain types of units.

- No move heroes for planes
- No spotting heroes for planes (in real life "spotting" is probably one of the most important and valued traits which really affects combat performance of a pilot but not in the game)
- No spotting heroes for artillery (at least if the unit is currently towed artillery)
- No spotting heroes for anti-aircraft (see above regarding planes, great in real life - more or less useless in the game)

There are probably other ones but the above are the ones that immediately come to mind and are absolutely infuriating in my opinion. No hero is COMPLETELY useless but if you compare the above with getting an attack, defence etc hero for the above unit type it is like night and day over the course of a campaign.

[guille1434]

What I think it would be nice about heroes is to give the player/modder control over what kind of heroes could apperar in the different unit classes, by means of an excel table (just the same to the experience/initiative tables files or the kills/heroes probability ones already present in the game).
Editing such a table, the player can "tell" the game which stats can be improved by heroes in each of the different unit classes, and adjust the kind of heroes possible to the different units.

Also, the possibility to "rotate" or asign heroes to a different unit to the one that "gave birth" to him should be present as an optional fetaure (just like reform units or not).

[proline]

I would have been fine with that. As long as certain types of heroes could not be assigned to certain types of units.

- No move heroes for planes

You do realize there were actual move heroes on planes in WW2, right? That was Charles Lindbergh's job, among others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_L ... rld_War_II

[Ursulet]

I see your points and partly agree with it. I do not agree to move heroes to another units. That would be to easy. But I would make it more sophistical: hero types for the given unit type and only 1 point of it/hero. In that way it would be like an RPG system.

I would have been fine with that. As long as certain types of heroes could not be assigned to certain types of units.

- No move heroes for planes
- No spotting heroes for planes (in real life "spotting" is probably one of the most important and valued traits which really affects combat performance of a pilot but not in the game)
- No spotting heroes for artillery (at least if the unit is currently towed artillery)
- No spotting heroes for anti-aircraft (see above regarding planes, great in real life - more or less useless in the game)

There are probably other ones but the above are the ones that immediately come to mind and are absolutely infuriating in my opinion. No hero is COMPLETELY useless but if you compare the above with getting an attack, defence etc hero for the above unit type it is like night and day over the course of a campaign.

I am playing the Us Corps, i am mid 1943 and got 2 spotting heroes on a P-47 and that comes very handy, as i play it for the first time. Gives Real insight on the map.

I also got 2 3D heroes yesterday, in a row. On my mobile AA and a towed arty.

[heinzrondorf]

I would have been fine with that. As long as certain types of heroes could not be assigned to certain types of units.

- No move heroes for planes

You do realize there were actual move heroes on planes in WW2, right? That was Charles Lindbergh's job, among others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_L ... rld_War_II

Yes I do realise that but thanks for the history lesson. I am sure there were plenty of guys in WW2 who would have been considered spotting heroes in artillery units as well. Does not make them any more useful in a turn-based computer strategy game.

[heinzrondorf]

I am playing the Us Corps, i am mid 1943 and got 2 spotting heroes on a P-47 and that comes very handy, as i play it for the first time. Gives Real insight on the map.

I also got 2 3D heroes yesterday, in a row. On my mobile AA and a towed arty.

3D on artillery is not ideal but I like converting them into Wurfrahmen if its the first hero on an artillery unit. Then they have at least a tiny chance of protecting themselves compared to the regular Wurfrahmen.

[Uhu]

Also it can have less damages, if attacked from far. Or, if the player decides to upgrade it to Assault art., than it has some use. Still better than getting spotting, or ini.

I am playing the Us Corps, i am mid 1943 and got 2 spotting heroes on a P-47 and that comes very handy, as i play it for the first time. Gives Real insight on the map.

I also got 2 3D heroes yesterday, in a row. On my mobile AA and a towed arty.

3D on artillery is not ideal but I like converting them into Wurfrahmen if its the first hero on an artillery unit. Then they have at least a tiny chance of protecting themselves compared to the regular Wurfrahmen.

[Ursulet]

You cant get initiative on an arty. Unless on at mode

[Duedman]

Graphics on PC2 took me a long time to get used to. PC1 was so much better.
Also, small maps are bad. Battlefield Europe Mod was super awesome and is not possible with PC2

But encirclement system -as easy/cheesy as it is- reeeeeeeallly makes a difference

[PanzerCro]

I'm glad to see this forum section more or less alive. What are your reasons for not jumping on the PzC2 bandwagon?

Because Panzer Corps is still very good game, and second my PC is too weak for PzC2

[proline]

I'm glad to see this forum section more or less alive. What are your reasons for not jumping on the PzC2 bandwagon?

Because Panzer Corps is still very good game, and second my PC is too weak for PzC2

It never ceases to shock me just how high the PzC 2 system requirements are just to play what is effectively a board game. Most of the time you are literally looking at a static image.

[goose_2]

I'm glad to see this forum section more or less alive. What are your reasons for not jumping on the PzC2 bandwagon?

Because Panzer Corps is still very good game, and second my PC is too weak for PzC2

It never ceases to shock me just how high the PzC 2 system requirements are just to play what is effectively a board game. Most of the time you are literally looking at a static image.

I know. My computer could handle the graphics and system requirements of Starcraft 2. I know it isn't that recent of a game, but there are constant moving parts with real time gameplay. But PC2 caused my computer to limp. Just unnacceptable

[goose_2]

I'm glad to see this forum section more or less alive. What are your reasons for not jumping on the PzC2 bandwagon?

Because Panzer Corps is still very good game, and second my PC is too weak for PzC2

It never ceases to shock me just how high the PzC 2 system requirements are just to play what is effectively a board game. Most of the time you are literally looking at a static image.

I know. My computer could handle the graphics and system requirements of Starcraft 2. I know it isn't that recent of a game, but there are constant moving parts with real time gameplay. But PC2 caused my computer to limp. Just unnacceptable

[PeteMitchell]

So why is that?

[dalfrede]

So why is that?

UnrealEngine has a very high graphics card load.
It may be possible to reduce with 'optimization' but it hasn't happened yet.

[captainjack]

I have a pretty decent PC and it can only just cope with Panzer Corps 2 demands.
The fact it has such poor graphics and lacks any sense of being special meant I simply gave up playing after a couple of starts and went back to Panzer Corps 1.

As for Panzer Corps 1, it works, has a fun feel to it, can withstand multiple replays, has a good number of excellent mods and isn't difficult to fine tune equipment stats, add units etc. While a slightly more user friendly editing system might help for creating new scenarios and campaigns this is not too hard if you're methodical, and there are some top grade mods that show the main limit is times, patience and imagination.

[Rifraff]

Rudel is the best unit in pc1.. In pc2 all your army can be Rudel like. The only way to counter that is masses and masses of over-strenghthed ai units. It is not fun when most of the damage done to my corps is by artillery units placed on a hill(no hills on my side of the map) surrounded with AA that can out range me..

Don't know why graphics is brought up.. PC2 is clearly better graphics.. Gameplay? Well absolutely no comparison.. Sometimes I think I am just playing it because I enjoyed PC1 so much.

I also think that multiplayer games are way over balanced that playing against a similar skilled opponent, whoever goes first has a massive advantage. on who wins