My personal DLC interim conclusion

[raider45]

Greetings,

First,

I wanted to go back to the previously released DLC
I do this by listing my personal rating of the two released DLC so far here.
In the classic 10 point evaluation.
I give SCW 9 out of 10 points.
Why?
Well, simply after what caught my eye and drove me to play, read and advance.
Let's take the SCW campaign. Like many others, I wanted an earlier start to an AO campaign.
Spanish Civil War, cool.
Legion Condor, nice. New maps (which are nicely created) and take the player to a new theater of war, an entertaining story (unfortunately without voice output), many new units (wishes were taken into account), new Commendation Points and at the end of each battle, it tells how it happened historically, a nice ending.
Already on the first map I am challenged because I have to move my units by ship, later by plane from Africa to the European continent, the opposing navy should prevent it.
There is a lot going on in the first mission. I cannot recruit any infantry myself, this is only available as a third faction (Franko's troops), I can only issue direct orders to them on the first card (draw them independently).
Each new mission also gives me bonus points, items that I can complete to get CP. Also, I can take secret depots on some maps to feel and improve my LC's limited fleet.
As already mentioned, from the second mission, the allied Spanish infantry units (Franko´s troops) are no longer directly controllable.
Here in particular, opinions cannot be more different. Great,
I think it's just right. It was a Spanish civil war involving the LC.
Battles can be chaotic, unpredictable, new situations arise, and you have to reassess and react.
This is exactly what happens, great. We do not kill brothers, we do not conquer for our own ends, we do not lose a home, we are the allies in a foreign land.
There is an opposing hero, Vega (more of that, please!), Who unfortunately or for a good reason, lol, was destroyed too quickly. The mini mod from "nexusno 2000" could help, thanks , I'm currently testing it and after the first annihilation, I am eagerly awaiting the first resurrection.
I can live very well with the missions and their design (the cards all have their challenges) and the challenge of not completely controlling the Franko troops.
Do you love or hate Ebro ?!
Anyway, I find the most challenging, biggest and most epic battle so far in PC2, great, more of it !!!.
The new historical heroes are great, the fact that they are only available for certain types of weapons is useful.
At the end of the DLC, in my opinion, the air is a little exhausted.
Catalonia is very different from the other missions. I don't think it's that successful either.
Madrid 1939 is chaotic, I love such a situation, but an aha experience (German usage) is missing ?!
Several "smaller heroes", veterans or prototypes on the part of the fighting ?!
Some typical squares, buildings or landmarks of Madrid would have done the map well.
Ultimately, the SCW DLC is a more than successful start to the AO for me. With the exception of a few smaller things, like the number of missions (are there any specifications?), I was very excited about AO 39.

AO 39.

To start with, I am disappointed.

Why?
I can't get rid of the feeling that the attempt was made here to accommodate too much in a mission tree (too small for me) and to bring in all the wishes and critical statements (lack of infantry, not controllable by myself, Battle of Ebro).
Ok, SCW was very good and it was a conflict for several years.
39 it's already burning in several corners!
The DLC should bring something new, after starting twice, I can live well with the first mission in the Czech Republic. I'm getting a new historical hero (for vehicles).
The idea of ​​occupying the country almost without a fight is also new and appropriate.
I can now fall back on new tanks, historically correct.
anyway i expected a bit more, a prototype or a Czech unit ?!
The Saar Offensive is definitely the best part of the DLC, even if I would have expected more here too.
What's new here, missions to slow down the enemy (here with mines), as we have limited resources of material. Or, beat your opponent with his own weapon Mission, this one has a cool mission design, although it took me a lot of time and several trys.
Saarbrücken a great battle. great joy.
Finally using everything I have. If it doesn't work like that, it's not Ebro and the opponent doesn't always act happily. The other missions also have their charm, but are quite easy to complete. It should also be mentioned that I also have a larger supply of French units in my unit pool.
What did i miss?
One or two French heroes, veterans who may retire and then reappear strengthened in 1940? Is it possible? New units, prototypes of the French army. Perhaps something could have been built in here for the future (1940) by achieving more than is required and through bonus goals.

Poland and the start in Bzura.
Simply implemented unhappily.
My troops were just fighting on the Saar and now they are in position at a crisis point in Poland? How many kilometers is it from Saarbrücken to Bzura? Today, in the present, 1200 kilometers by car ?!
Well, the Poles' counter-offensive, but where are the German troops? Wouldn't it be logical if German auxiliaries were to repel an attack here or if they had to hold or even conquer a train station or airfield so that my troops can arrive quickly?
With regard to the mission design, significantly better options should be available here, SCW or the first missions in A0 39 have shown it. The one offered here is a mean disaster for me.
The mission itself is by far the best of the Polish maps.
The campaign is split up, you can see it either way. Either way will definitely not be my friends here. Short missions without major highlights (the only challenge is the Modlin fortress) the enemy is slaughtered and in the second mission I can even beat the Russians, although we are allies.
Particularly annoying was the fact that I got a script error every time with German texts and this ensured that I could neither exchange my Prestige for CP and thus later no access to rewards for CP. Further CPs were also left out. Only when I changed the text to English did it go on without any problems.
Two-thirds of the DLC is through and I'm waiting for the aha, ok Warsaw, now we're starting !?
For me, unfortunately, the biggest disappointment so far.
50 laps, a map unfortunately without typical buildings, monuments, with many ditches and airports.
Hey cool, I'll start with my entire squad at the top right of the map. Then my units plow across the map and after 35 laps it's over.
This fight (didn't feel like it) is supposed to be epic?
The opponent couldn't (no major heroes or veterans, prototypes or special defenses) and he wasn't allowed (that's what it felt like), I always waited for major counterattacks, but not much came up.
In my opinion, in this part of the DLC a lot of possibilities have not been exploited or implemented. Too bad.

Finland.
Finland also wanted a lot of the users, but 39 I don't know?
But implemented that way?
Unfortunately, I can't do much with the two cards. Well, I farm Russian units for later, cool.
Wouldn't it have been great to do it like in SCW? You have Finnish units (where are they?), You indicate the direction and they act independently and then your (small) force comes with airplanes, or tanks or ground troops and supports them.
You could also leave one or two core units to the Finns for later (possibly permanently), get a Finnish hero and a lot of thanks? Prototypes or Loot Units (Russian).
On the Russian side, I would of course have wanted units, heroes, and prototypes that would come back later, similar to the Saar offensive.
There was more in here.

Denmark.
Hola, I've discovered new units, Danish Guards, motorcycle scouts and anti-tank vehicles.
OK, the map was entertaining and if there should be a historical, temporal classification, it was also well created and playable.

What is my conclusion?
I give AO 39 5 points, so straight.
After a really very good SCW a disappointment, just playful, the story has also subsided, new units (also on the German side) are rarely found, the missions and the design did not keep what one or I would have expected. The scope of the missions (for a paid DLC) is too small and I completely missed epic battles. I would also have liked new innovations.

One last request.
I hope for the DLC 40 (or preferably for the DLC's 40), don't open too many holes, don't let it burn everywhere, but do it right. I have no problem buying two DLC 40s, which together might be a bit cheaper, but I get something in return - namely big battles, new missions, opponents, heroes on both sides, new units, prototypes and also allies that I have control yourself or not completely. But don't do it like in AO 39, it seems uninspired.

thank you

[Rhaeg]

I agree that it would be really nice for immersion if city maps had some recognisable landmarks in them. They would have to be made specifically for one map so it's not very cost effective, but small things like that can make a product shine and give us players a feeling that a developer cares about its product.

[Retributarr]

I agree that it would be really nice for immersion if city maps had some recognisable landmarks in them. They would have to be made specifically for one map so it's not very cost effective, but small things like that can make a product shine and give us players a feeling that a developer cares about its product.

"Vyy is Dat???"... could not these land-marks... that I once talked about in 'Great-Detail' be permanently affixed to a particular 'Regional-Map'[Not just a... one of a kind... very specific map... of a European Country]... meaning that for example... anytime I go to "Any" 'European-Map'... and say that I now Go-To 'Paris-France' … that I would "Always" be able to see the 'Eiffel-Tower'... why is that not possible to do that???.

[Rhaeg]

How often do you visit a map with Paris on it? Once in 1940 and once in 1944?

[Retributarr]

How often do you visit a map with Paris on it? Once in 1940 and once in 1944?

That's not what I was getting at!... I just would like to see the familiar-recognizable 'National-Icon' on any 'Map' dealing with that "Region"... even if it is 'Only-Once!'.

[Rhaeg]

How often do you visit a map with Paris on it? Once in 1940 and once in 1944?

That's not what I was getting at!... I just would like to see the familiar-recognizable 'National-Icon' on any 'Map' dealing with that "Region"... even if it is 'Only-Once!'.

Lol, don't we want the same thing then? I said I wanted it too, I just don't expect it to be done since it would be investing in art assets that would be only used in one or 2 scenarios.

[Retributarr]

"New-Icon-Image-Concept":

Emplacing or fixing 'Icons' on the 'Map' may normally be a "problem/issue" to resolve or integrate onto a 'Map'... so how about first emplacing the Iconic-Images on the Capital Cities or wherever… and then when a 'Unit' enters that particular hex with the 'Icon-Image'... the 'Icon-Image' will now temporarily disappear until the hex is once again 'Vacant'... where-upon then the 'Icon' will revert back to its former status... or re-appear once more!.

This process just might make the 'Icon-Image' conundrum less of a painful problem to deal with?.

[adiekmann]

How often do you visit a map with Paris on it? Once in 1940 and once in 1944?

That's not what I was getting at!... I just would like to see the familiar-recognizable 'National-Icon' on any 'Map' dealing with that "Region"... even if it is 'Only-Once!'.

Lol, don't we want the same thing then? I said I wanted it too, I just don't expect it to be done since it would be investing in art assets that would be only used in one or 2 scenarios.

I believe what you mean is something that can be used more than once that is endemic to most European cities to add flavor. So only Paris has an Eiffel Tower (forget about Las Vegas!), so yeah that would be one and done. But every big European city as a cathedral, or a an historical medieval district (well, at least before they were destroyed during the war ).

However, while nice, I think there's much bigger fish to fry with their time than things like this. Same goes for "Oh, and they simply copied the German motorcycle unit and couldn't make their own for Denmark!" type of comments. Yeah, nice if they did, but really not that important to me. I would much rather see their limited time/budget used for more important things.

What I seem to hear mainly from the original poster of this thread is that he seems to feel that AO39 was too simple, or easy. With that I agree.

But that was all a direct result of complaints regarding how SCW was too hard! Probably not for us hard core Panzer General/Corps fans, but they are not making or selling the game only for us. It needs wider appeal to be really successful.

I don't have the marketing/sales information to know all the demographics of who buys this game, but no matter what they do, there will always be somebody who isn't happy or wants more or something.

I do think though that the difficulty level should have been more challenging and I hope it will be so again in the future, especially considering how how cores are going to becoming more powerful with increases in experience and heroes.

Complaining about levels that should have been this way or that way or not at all are misguided. I agree to a certain extent that this or that level doesn't make sense (Skirmish with the Russians?!? ) But ultimately I didn't care. Why? Because in the end I play the map and either found it fun and designed well, or not. And when I step back from the narrative and history, that's how I ultimately judge them. And Finland and Saar Offensive were still fun and I enjoyed playing those maps. I love the chance to beat up on the French before Fall Gelb and having Char B1 tanks to roll over the Poles later. It opens opportunities that are fun.

But at the end, AO39 was too easy, especially compared to SCW IMO for ME. But I am not their sole customer.

[Kerensky]

Greetings,

First,

Thanks for your feedback, I read it all.

Interestingly enough, your feedback is the polar opposite of some feedback. When SCW scores low its because people struggle with trying to work with the AI Ally, Ebro is too hard, and so many new systems are overwhelming to acclimate to. When 1939 scores high, it's usually from people who say things like "finally I have my own infantry again" and there are far less complaints over the difficulty feeling of 1939.

Whereas the crowd that scores SCW higher over 1939 like the difficulty, like the weird new Spanish AI allies, and didnt like the 'dumbing down' of 1939.

Can't please everyone, which shows just how many players and broad an audience the game has reached.
As I've said elsewhere, AI Allies a la Spanish Civil War are finished. The unique three way Spanish German Italian partnership in that war was perfect for AI partner, main force, and auxiliary force mechanics. Trying to shoe horn that three way relationship elsewhere doesn't really fit into WW2 proper. It works in that DLC, but the system as a whole didnt work enough to have a future.

So how will future minor nation interaction work? Who knows, we'll see when we get there. Back to normal auxiliary system, or a different AI relationship (that absolutely doesnt share resources), we'll see.

But thanks for your feedback, we'll keep it in mind for the future.

[Kerensky]

What I seem to hear mainly from the original poster of this thread is that he seems to feel that AO39 was too simple, or easy. With that I agree.

But that was all a direct result of complaints regarding how SCW was too hard! Probably not for us hard core Panzer General/Corps fans, but they are not making or selling the game only for us. It needs wider appeal to be really successful.

This is not entirely true. While SCW feedback did have an effect on 1939 (that much is obvious, SCW still sitting at a very uncomfortable Mixed review rating) the original 1939 campaign from the old game took a lot of FlaK over being too difficult. Poland was fighting like a superpower, not rolling over and dying in a single month as historically appropriate. Similar complaints were leveled at Panzer Corps 2's Fall Weiss huge solo scenario (why Poland fighting so hard omg not historical!!)

What that ultimately means is that SCW got patched to tone down the difficulty (Teruel and Ebro nerfs already are live)... but 1939 isn't going to get a patch to increase it's difficulty. 1939 might get some extra fixes and adjustments, but nothing especially poignant towards re-tuning the difficulty.

I think the idea that the two DLC are re-markedly different is a strength, not a weakness. Homogenizing them to be more similar in content, cost, and difficulty is a bad thing. Every DLC should have some unique flavoring, the worst thing a gigantic Grand Campaign can be is repetitive where each DLC just feels the like the same over and over again.

So SCW will forever keep its AI Allies with resource sharing. 1939 will keep it's lower difficulty. And future DLC... I guarantee will try new things that some people will really loudly complain about because it's too radical while others enjoy it for being radical and taking new chances to explore new and interesting ways to play the game they clearly like to play.

[adiekmann]

What I seem to hear mainly from the original poster of this thread is that he seems to feel that AO39 was too simple, or easy. With that I agree.

But that was all a direct result of complaints regarding how SCW was too hard! Probably not for us hard core Panzer General/Corps fans, but they are not making or selling the game only for us. It needs wider appeal to be really successful.

This is not entirely true. While SCW feedback did have an effect on 1939 (that much is obvious, SCW still sitting at a very uncomfortable Mixed review rating) the original 1939 campaign from the old game took a lot of FlaK over being too difficult. Poland was fighting like a superpower, not rolling over and dying in a single month as historically appropriate. Similar complaints were leveled at Panzer Corps 2's Fall Weiss huge solo scenario (why Poland fighting so hard omg not historical!!)
Yes, the beginning of a campaign - any campaign - is usually the toughest because your core starts with zero experience. (The exception being the GC 42/43 WEST if you began with the default core.) However, in AO39 you (can) have your core from SCW. There's a big difference beginning with units that have at or near 2500 exp versus 0. It would be interesting for me to replay AO39 without importing my core and see if that changes my impressions of the DLC's difficulty...

What that ultimately means is that SCW got patched to tone down the difficulty (Teruel and Ebro nerfs already are live)... but 1939 isn't going to get a patch to increase it's difficulty. 1939 might get some extra fixes and adjustments, but nothing especially poignant towards re-tuning the difficulty. I wouldn't expect you/anyone to rework a previous DLC. Done is done outside of bugs. No matter what, I too would rather see your time and effort go towards working on the next DLC instead.

I think the idea that the two DLC are re-markedly different is a strength, not a weakness. Homogenizing them to be more similar in content, cost, and difficulty is a bad thing. Every DLC should have some unique flavoring, the worst thing a gigantic Grand Campaign can be is repetitive where each DLC just feels the like the same over and over again. Agree. That's why I find some of the complaints not wrong, but a bit too picky.

So SCW will forever keep its AI Allies with resource sharing. 1939 will keep it's lower difficulty. And future DLC... I guarantee will try new things that some people will really loudly complain about because it's too radical while others enjoy it for being radical and taking new chances to explore new and interesting ways to play the game they clearly like to play.

As it should be. We all need to recognize these facts and make the best of it. I admire your fortitude. It can't be easy to hear all of these complaints or requests when you better than most understand how practical they are to implement or not (like a Fw 189! )

[Rhaeg]

As I've said elsewhere, AI Allies a la Spanish Civil War are finished.

I must have missed you saying that, but I'm very glad to hear it. It's use only really makes sense in a situation where the player needs to have some minimal control over units that do not fall under their command. I don't see that happening in AO anymore.

[IttoOgami]

As I've said elsewhere, AI Allies a la Spanish Civil War are finished. The unique three way Spanish German Italian partnership in that war was perfect for AI partner, main force, and auxiliary force mechanics. Trying to shoe horn that three way relationship elsewhere doesn't really fit into WW2 proper. It works in that DLC, but the system as a whole didnt work enough to have a future.

So how will future minor nation interaction work? Who knows, we'll see when we get there. Back to normal auxiliary system, or a different AI relationship (that absolutely doesnt share resources), we'll see.

No AI anymore? That would be sad and I didn't think that players disliked it so much! I'd love a future Stalingrad map where Romanian, Hungarian and Italian units struggle are commanded by AI and you have to see how their lines are crushed and can't do much about it.

[Kerensky]

No AI anymore? That would be sad and I didn't think that players disliked it so much! I'd love a future Stalingrad map where Romanian, Hungarian and Italian units struggle are commanded by AI and you have to see how their lines are crushed and can't do much about it.

That's still possible. I meant specifically the Spanish situation.

1.You must rely on their infantry, because you don't have any (except Italians).
2.You need to order issues to them, which is a system with very low engagement. Skilled players are able to just set them to attack and then they're done managing the AI. More average Players who struggle to work with the AI aren't using the buttons enough to slow down the AI so they can support and fight alongside it better.
3. You share prestige with them. Great for players who work with them, terrible for players that don't because now they are an extra drain.