My Opinions on Panzer Corps 2 with focus on the first two Grand Campaign DLCs

[SSLConf_pewp3w]

Let me preface this by saying that this represents just my personal opinion and I write this because I want to hear other opinions as well.
SCW and 39 have been talked about a lot and I am a bit late to the party, but nevermind, let's go.

I played every single campaign for PC1. I never played on the very high difficulties because I am just not that masochistic. It has become one of my favorite games, maybe slightly behind Europa Universalis 4 and Civilization 4.
I was very hyped for Panzer Corps 2 and preordered it with the first two DLCs.
Played it when it came out and it was good, but not nearly as good as PC1. This has been discussed many times, biggest turnoff for me was the 3d view and the (almost) impossibility to distinguish some of the units.
After finishing the base campaign I stopped playing and came back some time later then the first three DLCs had been released. I started the SCW but quit after the first three missions since I just couldn't deal with the allied AI Infantry.

I played SCW again in June and powered through, although I will admit that it wasn't nearly as much fun as I hoped it would be. The main reason for this was that you had to rely on the allied spanish Infantry. Now I know you could manipulate them in such ways that they act the way you want, but this did not work as good as I would hope. There were multiple issues that I had to deal with repeatedly:
- AI not moving where you would expect them to -> I attack an enemy infantry with two or three artillery and leave a free space so the AI can move there and attack. Instead they just attack somewhere else. This had the bonus issue that this sometimes left your support units open for attack
- AI attacking encircled units and breaking the encirclement that way -> This was infuriating. Quite a few times I had a great encirclement going but the AI came in and ruined everything. And no, "hold position" did not work.
- AI unable to deal with defending and attacking at the same time. If you own some victory points and the enemy as well, the AI doesn't know what to do. If you set attack order, they will abandon conquered VPs and move towards enemy VPs. This leads to an enemy reconquest of your VPs. If you set defend order they won't attack enemy VPs, making it really hard for you to take them
- AI attack calculation to different. Sometimes AI attacks although the odds are massively against them. Other times they don't even attack when the odds are really good. Very annoying on Ebro. I had one turn left to take the last VP. I shelled it with three artillery and took care of enemy support units. AI would have been able to attack the VP with three full strength infantry. Instead they just move to a tile next to it and wait.

The random enemy reinforcements very a cool factor. This really makes recon more useful and I liked it a lot. The enemy reinforcement zones are usually clearly delienated clearly. Sadly, on some maps this doesn't work that well, for example on Teruel, enemy reinforcements arrive in the southeast, but one doesn't know that. Really annoying when you have just cleared that area and then enemy troops spawn right there.

Now I hoped for a better GC 39. And it was better.

I liked the diversity of missions and it was not an issue for me that the polish campaign was so short. It was weird that one was able to fight the russians without repercussions though.
I was happy that there was no allied infantry that you could not control. I hope this will not return (or at least not often).

Sometimes you get text prompts (e.g. sinking of Blücher) during enemy turns. The enemy keeps moving and you can't see it. That's really weird.

If there was not PC1 to compare this too, I would probably think this is a very great game. But it just pales in comparision.
If there ever is to be a PC3 (which I hope for), 2D is just better suited. I simply don't understand what 3D is supposed to bring to turn based games. Same for civilization. I mean the graphics are still bad and they will always be. But from a gameplay perspective it unnecessarily complicates things. I thought maybe there was some work done on this, but I still can't differentiate a lot of units (unless I use special camo). In PC1 you could see any unit at a glimpse, even different versions of PZIII and PZIV were easiy to differentiate. In this game I can't even see which plane is which (again: unless I use camo). This gets even worse in snow. If the ground is frozen I can't even see the movement indicators properly (whether my units will dismount or not is REALLY hard to see).

Then another thing: I might be doing something wrong, but this game seems much to easy to me. I know, I am not playing on highest difficulty, but some hero combos are ridiculously overpowered. For example I overstrengthened my Verdeja to 15 and gave him Rapid Fire, Ignores Entrenchment and no retaliation. With this unit I can blitz right through even the strongest enemy fortifications and destroy 4 or 5 units per turn, even if they are in close terrain and fortified. And if they are supported to well, I can just shoot it with my 21cm Mrs 18 with 20 Strength and no slot cost. The super heroes are very strong as well. Galland makes it super easy to achieve air superiority in very few turns.

Now on to the good stuff:

I like the briefings and debriefings, they are very well made for a game like this and really interesting. Same goes for the many options you have to customize your campaign. Using the many different boni and mali or extra challenges can be quite fun. Many units that were close to useless in PC1 (AA, AT, Recon) are not at least somewhat useful, but often actually quite powerful. The tasks in the GC are much more diverse than in the base campaign, this is really fun. The unit variety is greatly increased as well, and the hero abilities are cool and its fun to experiment with combinations (although it can lead to very op units).

In the end I would like to say that this is still a pretty good game, that's why I keep playing it. My post might seem like I hate this game, this is not the case. It's just from the perspective of PC1. PC2 is for example much better then OOB imho.


edit: Oh, one question. I often feel like the combat randomness is biased against me. That obviously is not the case, because you remember bad events more strongly, but your units often have less predicted damage if another of your units already attacked the enemy unit beforehand. I know this is because of the way the combat calculation works. But was this the same in PC1?

[Bee1976]

Well, i wasnt sure if i wanna play pc2 for the same reasons. The Graphic. But well, now i have struggles with pc1 and enjoy pc2 way more (graphicwise).

The allied AI in SCW was most fun for me. They behave kinda "unpredictable". There are many ways to handle them. Easiest way is massive support. I.e. dive bombing enemy artillery even if its protected by aa (planes are cheap to reinforce, you save way more prestige if your allies dont have to repair that often), strat bombing enemy infantry and using artillery to supress enemies at the frontline.

But you can order them to hold position, form your frontline, take care of any dangerous places and orden them to attack later. there is enough time for this way. You can pimp that up with aux force and cheap italian infantry.

I like nearly all DLCs but the most fun dlc was SCW for me. Old and inferior hardware, intresting and new battles and of course that spanish ai allies with a little deathwish burning your prestige.

[eskuche]

As a longtime PC1 player as well, I will leave out the balance issues for other threads.

I will say the customizability is fun. Might be more interesting and higher stakes if challenge modes had achievements attached to them.

Regarding the combat odds, the main factors are that kills remove (some) suppressed steps, and suppression attack steps that hit an already suppressed step do not count. So while you can take a unit from 0/15 to 5/15, the next shot will probably only get to 7/15. There is also a weird rounding issue with 1-99% combat randomness that I reported very very early on release and that I think is still partially extant.

[adiekmann]

There are lots of things that I like better about PC2 than its predecessor. What I miss or liked the most about PC1 is the GC and it's missions. But before PC2 even was released I recognized the challenge facing the designers of PC2: How do you not make it just a rehash of PC1's GC while keeping it fresh and interesting? I think they have largely succeeded, albeit took some gambles with new ideas that not everyone is a fan of. But would you have preferred it if they had just redone the GC but with updated maps, graphics, etc.? I for one no.

The graphics were a challenge for me too at the beginning and I still sometimes click on the wrong unit, particularly when an air and ground unit share the same hex. I too had issues with differentiating between different tanks, aircraft, and infantry units. For example, I still think it was quicker and easier to tell the difference between a grenadier/pioniere/wehr infantry at quick glance in PC1 than it is in PC2. However, that being said, I got used to it. The 3D engine allows for easy changing of the camo/color scheme and that's my fun and easy solution now to tell units apart. I think with aircraft they made some basic changes since the release of the vanilla campaign that has helped too even if you're not into the different camo scheme thing. (I sometimes did that with PC1 using somebody's mod but it was a major pain-in-the-ass compared to PC2's built-in capability.)

In short, I have uninstalled PC1 from my PC and I can't image playing it again. I think I would miss too many improvements in PC2 that would way outweigh any disadvantages. I went through the same thing when Panzer General 2 was released. As big of a fan as I was of the original, I never could go back to playing it instead of PG2. Plus, there are a ton of ways to adjust the game to make it easier or harder for any given player to fit their idea of fun.

[Raganr129]

I played PC1 for well over 1,000 hours according to Steam, so clearly I think it was a good game, and I do go back to it from time to time simply because at this point it still has vastly more content than PC2.

That said, I definitely feel myself missing all the improvements that PC2 introduced, and it takes an adjustment period to get used to PC1 rules again. The supply system is better, I can use Recon, AT and AA units where I would almost never in PC1 (Otto Carius' Jagdtiger in the GC comes to mind). I like how my army has some variety in say, which tanks I'm fielding, since the slot costs matter. Unit abilities like overrun change how I plan battles to suit a more mobile style of warfare than I feel in PC1. The graphics I thought were a good improvement, the models are very well done IMO. Campaign design has evolved a lot to the point where I think PC1 has been overshadowed at this point.

My favorite feature is all the ways you can customize your gameplay experience so much more than in PC1. You can move heroes around to customize units, you can put camos on them, and there's one hero whose traits you can customize even more specifically (hoping for more of those). And all the challenge rulesets and traits for your general are great too (I particularly enjoy the limited stock option on my current playthrough).

Going back to PC1 really feels a little bland nowadays.

[Kerensky]

I played PC1 for well over 1,000 hours according to Steam, so clearly I think it was a good game, and I do go back to it from time to time simply because at this point it still has vastly more content than PC2.

That said, I definitely feel myself missing all the improvements that PC2 introduced, and it takes an adjustment period to get used to PC1 rules again. The supply system is better, I can use Recon, AT and AA units where I would almost never in PC1 (Otto Carius' Jagdtiger in the GC comes to mind). I like how my army has some variety in say, which tanks I'm fielding, since the slot costs matter. Unit abilities like overrun change how I plan battles to suit a more mobile style of warfare than I feel in PC1. The graphics I thought were a good improvement, the models are very well done IMO. Campaign design has evolved a lot to the point where I think PC1 has been overshadowed at this point.

My favorite feature is all the ways you can customize your gameplay experience so much more than in PC1. You can move heroes around to customize units, you can put camos on them, and there's one hero whose traits you can customize even more specifically (hoping for more of those). And all the challenge rulesets and traits for your general are great too (I particularly enjoy the limited stock option on my current playthrough).

Going back to PC1 really feels a little bland nowadays.

I feel like Panzer Corps and Panzer General are very similar in this way.
It's fun to go back and look at original Panzer General for the nostalgia factor, but it really feels outdated to play. Back in the day (before Panzer Corps), if I actually wanted to play a game, I'd always be playing Panzer General II and not going back to original Panzer General.

Panzer Corps isn't quite as dated as Panzer General, but the feeling is similar. It's fun to go back and look at Panzer Corps, but if I really want to play modern turn base strategy, I'm loading up Panzer Corps 2.

[BaronVonKrieg]

I played PC1 for well over 1,000 hours according to Steam, so clearly I think it was a good game, and I do go back to it from time to time simply because at this point it still has vastly more content than PC2.

That said, I definitely feel myself missing all the improvements that PC2 introduced, and it takes an adjustment period to get used to PC1 rules again. The supply system is better, I can use Recon, AT and AA units where I would almost never in PC1 (Otto Carius' Jagdtiger in the GC comes to mind). I like how my army has some variety in say, which tanks I'm fielding, since the slot costs matter. Unit abilities like overrun change how I plan battles to suit a more mobile style of warfare than I feel in PC1. The graphics I thought were a good improvement, the models are very well done IMO. Campaign design has evolved a lot to the point where I think PC1 has been overshadowed at this point.

My favorite feature is all the ways you can customize your gameplay experience so much more than in PC1. You can move heroes around to customize units, you can put camos on them, and there's one hero whose traits you can customize even more specifically (hoping for more of those). And all the challenge rulesets and traits for your general are great too (I particularly enjoy the limited stock option on my current playthrough).

Going back to PC1 really feels a little bland nowadays.

I feel like Panzer Corps and Panzer General are very similar in this way.
It's fun to go back and look at original Panzer General for the nostalgia factor, but it really feels outdated to play. Back in the day (before Panzer Corps), if I actually wanted to play a game, I'd always be playing Panzer General II and not going back to original Panzer General.

Panzer Corps isn't quite as dated as Panzer General, but the feeling is similar. It's fun to go back and look at Panzer Corps, but if I really want to play modern turn base strategy, I'm loading up Panzer Corps 2.

i think that panzer corps 2 has the best graphics in this type of games, at least the ones i know it really fits well

[Kerensky]

i think that panzer corps 2 has the best graphics in this type of games, at least the ones i know it really fits well

Just being able to camo paint my units is freaking awesome. That has never been possible in a Panzer General game before, not without fully re-texturing the whole unit sprite through modding.

[BaronVonKrieg]

i think that panzer corps 2 has the best graphics in this type of games, at least the ones i know it really fits well

Just being able to camo paint my units is freaking awesome. That has never been possible in a Panzer General game before, not without fully re-texturing the whole unit sprite through modding.

yeah i like that aspect. making my core mine trough camo and insigniam, i like having that modification aspect in a game

[Bee1976]

My favorite feature is all the ways you can customize your gameplay experience so much more than in PC1. You can move heroes around to customize units, you can put camos on them, and there's one hero whose traits you can customize even more specifically (hoping for more of those). And all the challenge rulesets and traits for your general are great too (I particularly enjoy the limited stock option on my current playthrough).

So much this! I can fully agree to this!

[SSLConf_pewp3w]

There are lots of things that I like better about PC2 than its predecessor. What I miss or liked the most about PC1 is the GC and it's missions. But before PC2 even was released I recognized the challenge facing the designers of PC2: How do you not make it just a rehash of PC1's GC while keeping it fresh and interesting? I think they have largely succeeded, albeit took some gambles with new ideas that not everyone is a fan of. But would you have preferred it if they had just redone the GC but with updated maps, graphics, etc.? I for one no.

Interesting post. I agree with you, it is good that they tried some new stuff. And like I wrote as well, I have no problem with new ideas per se, especially the 1939 GC was to my liking. SCW fell flat in comparision imho.

The graphics were a challenge for me too at the beginning and I still sometimes click on the wrong unit, particularly when an air and ground unit share the same hex. I too had issues with differentiating between different tanks, aircraft, and infantry units. For example, I still think it was quicker and easier to tell the difference between a grenadier/pioniere/wehr infantry at quick glance in PC1 than it is in PC2. However, that being said, I got used to it. The 3D engine allows for easy changing of the camo/color scheme and that's my fun and easy solution now to tell units apart. I think with aircraft they made some basic changes since the release of the vanilla campaign that has helped too even if you're not into the different camo scheme thing. (I sometimes did that with PC1 using somebody's mod but it was a major pain-in-the-ass compared to PC2's built-in capability.)

Yeah, I got used to it as well and figured out ways to work around my problems. But that's not good. You shouldn't need to get used to it or find out ways to deal with the problem. There shouldn't even be any problems at all.

i think that panzer corps 2 has the best graphics in this type of games, at least the ones i know it really fits well

Just being able to camo paint my units is freaking awesome. That has never been possible in a Panzer General game before, not without fully re-texturing the whole unit sprite through modding.

Maybe everything boils down to this for me, I couldn't care less for graphics. I have never ever used insignia and I only use camo because I have no other choice and wouldn't be able to differentiate my units. I guess I sound like a broken record, complaining about the graphics

Anyways, thanks for all your replies.

[nexusno2000]

PzC2 is by far my favorite hex-based wargame.

Why?

It's tactically much deeper than any of its predecessors/competitors. You are actually rewarded for using different unit classes, coordinating attacks, setting up encirclements, and properly defending your own exposed units. This makes it infinitely replayable.

Is it perfect?

Absolutely not. No game is. It's merely the best there is - by a good margin.

What could be better?

The AI, definitely. It's not BAD as such. In fact, it's better than most other game AI!

But still, there are aspects that lead to ludicrous results. The worst of which is the AI's utter inability to force attacks through choke points.

The core campaign is great. Most of the scenarios too, although there should have been many more by now.

The AO series is great overall, but a bit uneven:

- SCW is amazingly well done - but horribly marred by the allied AI system combined with the decision to make the AI allies eat YOUR prestige. Dumbest design decision in a game ever.
- 1939 is a very confusing affair. Starts with a puzzle - ends with butchering defenseless Danes. And the Finns aren't even in the Finnish branch. WTF!? The French scenarios are well done and easily the best of the lot. They even contrast nicely to the much more intense battles of 1940. But Poland has one good scenario. The rest have A) no resistance, B) is about capturing Soviet gear), C) a huge city map with nothing going on.
- Fortunately, after Norway 1940 the series improves IMMENSELY. 1940 + 41 are where the fun is.
- 1942 will be equally great once it patches to a finished state.

[lordjani]

I am a HUGE fan of Panzer Corps 1 grand campaigns so at first i didn't like what i saw on PC2. I hesitated very long before finally getting the game. I skipped the base game's campaign completely because the experience from PC1 grand campaigns vs. base game. At first i had difficulty learning the new mechanics but now i'm on GC40 and inho Panzer corps 2 feels more realistic than PC1. Finally use for scouts and encirclement feels very realistic. I actually liked the Spanish campaign the most because i couldn't control infantry so it was totally new concept. In GC39 and 40 it's like more the same from PC1 with a different combat mechanics. The heroes are way overpowered in my opinion. Next playthrough i think i will limit them to one per unit.

[Xenos]

It's indeed easier than PzC1. But it should be said that some grand campaign PzC1 scenarios were brutally hard, so I wouldn't say that PzC2 is an easy game overall. Just middle-of-the-road as far as tactical turn-based games go. About graphics, I don't think it's ugly at all. It's actually nice. But it's true it makes things less clear than simple 2D. It's a trade-off between simplicity and beauty.

[Xenos]

There are lots of things that I like better about PC2 than its predecessor. What I miss or liked the most about PC1 is the GC and it's missions. But before PC2 even was released I recognized the challenge facing the designers of PC2: How do you not make it just a rehash of PC1's GC while keeping it fresh and interesting? I think they have largely succeeded, albeit took some gambles with new ideas that not everyone is a fan of. But would you have preferred it if they had just redone the GC but with updated maps, graphics, etc.? I for one no.

Interesting post. I agree with you, it is good that they tried some new stuff. And like I wrote as well, I have no problem with new ideas per se, especially the 1939 GC was to my liking. SCW fell flat in comparision imho.

The graphics were a challenge for me too at the beginning and I still sometimes click on the wrong unit, particularly when an air and ground unit share the same hex. I too had issues with differentiating between different tanks, aircraft, and infantry units. For example, I still think it was quicker and easier to tell the difference between a grenadier/pioniere/wehr infantry at quick glance in PC1 than it is in PC2. However, that being said, I got used to it. The 3D engine allows for easy changing of the camo/color scheme and that's my fun and easy solution now to tell units apart. I think with aircraft they made some basic changes since the release of the vanilla campaign that has helped too even if you're not into the different camo scheme thing. (I sometimes did that with PC1 using somebody's mod but it was a major pain-in-the-ass compared to PC2's built-in capability.)

Yeah, I got used to it as well and figured out ways to work around my problems. But that's not good. You shouldn't need to get used to it or find out ways to deal with the problem. There shouldn't even be any problems at all.

i think that panzer corps 2 has the best graphics in this type of games, at least the ones i know it really fits well

Just being able to camo paint my units is freaking awesome. That has never been possible in a Panzer General game before, not without fully re-texturing the whole unit sprite through modding.

Maybe everything boils down to this for me, I couldn't care less for graphics. I have never ever used insignia and I only use camo because I have no other choice and wouldn't be able to differentiate my units. I guess I sound like a broken record, complaining about the graphics

Anyways, thanks for all your replies.

I use camo and insignia to roleplay a little bit as Axis auxiliaries. I've some tanks from the Balkans campaigns wearing Italian colours, a Finnish fighter squadron, Romanian infantry... it's a nice little things to have them represented in some ways.