An honest Game

[fgiannet]

One of the things I enjoy the most about Panzer Corps is the fact that it is an honest game. Some games of the past would use heavy marketing or dishonesty to make the game seem better than it was. The manual would state a tank destroyer was good against tanks but will suffer at the hands of infantry but then the game would give a Marder (without a machine gun) the same soft attack as a tank. 6 months ago I played Panzer Marshal on the iPad and attacked a 2 strength German unit with 0 ammo in close terrain with 5 full strength infantry units supported but artillery. Not a single unit of damage was inflicted. This does not happen in Panzer Corps even if the attacking units are raw (which is a good thing because that is just too many people attacking from three sides).

It seems as though some games are made with a great set of rules that are open to all (you can ramp it up to ridiculous difficulty levels if you want) while other games are made with not open (sometimes even misleading) rules. The first type, Panzer Corps, you can play many times in many different ways while the second type, not naming names, will have you playing 5 times to win because there is really only one way to win (and oftentimes once you understand that way you can beat all the other scenarios by using it because the conditions are often the same........it seemingly makes for less strategy).

I would be curious whether more people enjoy the versatility of the first type or the accomplishment/satisfaction of finally beating the second type. As a game designer I would think knowing how much of the market definitively belongs in each group would be key (of course there will be some overlap).

I am grateful Panzer Corps went the first route and all the units have their uses compared to some games, including some games being made today, where a lot of the units just seem to exist for appearances (I played Allied General, 20 years ago, using about three unit types, all that stuff in the manual about different unit classes was really just marketing to make the game sound more complex than it really was). I have never enjoyed a game as much as Panzer Corps and it is because I can do so much with it (even raw infantry can be effective with the right strategy). Panzer Corp seems to lead to more strategy (even educating me on new strategies).

You would think clear honest rules and versatility, almost by definition, would lead to a bigger market but I wonder.......some of the gripes about Panzer Corps 2 is that certain hero’s/settings make it too easy (which Slitherine handles with dignity instead of saying “well don’t use them then.....”) and I would imagine these gamers would prefer the second type game (might even lose interest in the first).

[heinzrondorf]

I agree. The game is great in that you can play it and replay it in so many different ways and that all units and unit classes are useful in their own way. When I first played the game a couple of years ago I had a more "primitive" approach where I thought a certain type of brute force would win it for me which was based on my experiences with similar games so I never used for instance strategic bombers or anti-tank units. Now I could not imagine playing without them and other types of units. There is so much finesse in Panzer Corps which makes it great.

[fgiannet]

I agree. The game is great in that you can play it and replay it in so many different ways and that all units and unit classes are useful in their own way. When I first played the game a couple of years ago I had a more "primitive" approach where I thought a certain type of brute force would win it for me which was based on my experiences with similar games so I never used for instance strategic bombers or anti-tank units. Now I could not imagine playing without them and other types of units. There is so much finesse in Panzer Corps which makes it great.

I agree. The game is great in that you can play it and replay it in so many different ways and that all units and unit classes are useful in their own way. When I first played the game a couple of years ago I had a more "primitive" approach where I thought a certain type of brute force would win it for me which was based on my experiences with similar games so I never used for instance strategic bombers or anti-tank units. Now I could not imagine playing without them and other types of units. There is so much finesse in Panzer Corps which makes it great.

I did the EXACT same thing and even put it away for a few years. I just assumed it would be like so many of its predecessors. Holy crow was that a mistake and I don’t feel like the true depth of the game was highlighted/advertised enough (again, most of the players might not care though...). I understand a company wanting to leave the reviews and YouTube videos to the players but there was A LOT not being covered in terms of history and depth when I was looking years ago.

You could actually make a great series of YouTube history lessons just by playing the game historically (the only slight problem would be the enemy being too numerous but we would be focusing on the side of the player anyway). People could learn/discuss the evolution of tactics, understand the strategy/economics behind operations, and clear up WW2 myths (like “the Soviets were just an endless wave of conscripts who won by sheer numbers without strategy or innovation”.....playing this game has taught me it really became quite the opposite! In Fact, I recently read that the Germans had created an Artillery Division later in the war based off their experience facing Soviet Artillery Divisions....). I do not think you could create such a series with many other games even though they all go to great lengths to proclaim how historically accurate they all are (meanwhile their in-game infantry is useless etc.).

As I get older I am starting to see strategy games fitting into one of those two categories more and more. I understand starting a game easy in order to get someone hooked and eventually making it nearly impossible to beat (I live in Las Vegas). That might be the best money maker for a company and might be what the masses want anyway.

I just seem to appreciate Panzer Corps, and the honesty of it’s design, the longer I play it. It is truly unique in that way and, like a fine wine, stands out from all the others.

[faos333]

....... I just seem to appreciate Panzer Corps, and the honesty of it’s design, the longer I play it. It is truly unique in that way and, like a fine wine, stands out from all the others.

100% agree