Slitherine

Hello Generals,

we are excited to share with you the upcoming plans for the Panzer Corps 2 franchise that we have been working on, the roadmap below best captures the next steps to come:



We’re currently developing 2 new DLCs so expect new mission locations, units, and many other exciting additions as the story continues.


Last week, on May 30th, we released 5 new free chess maps for you to play in the meantime.

See you soon.

A bit strange the roadmap is for 2024 - 2025, yet it just shows things until end of 2024, but I guess it makes sense after Pacific DLC and how the hype backfired. Who knows, we might have another AO or a longer allied campaign planned for 2025, but it won't be revealed until things are set in stone for a release with no major drawbacks.

Of the two things upcoming, Frontlines DLC is the more predictable, but I am looking forward to see what small snippet of the conflict will be selected this time and what special gimmicks will be explored. It should work well enough.

As for War Stories... this sounds suspiciously British, but might also be an indicator that this series will focus more on the narrative of the campaign.

They binned Pacific have they?

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

Shelved, which might as well be binned for the foreseeable future until even by accident a way to make naval combat more fun is invented.

Tassadar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:56 pm

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

Shelved, which might as well be binned for the foreseeable future until even by accident a way to make naval combat more fun is invented.

Where did they officially state that? I haven't been on here for a while, so I missed the news.

In "New frontlines" dlc, I imagine Hitler followed the mocked Guderian advice, and launch Barbarossa only up to the Dniepr river where Hitler immediatly build in 1941, and not the too late 1943, the Panther-Wotan "maginot" line from Crimae up to Leningrad for a beneficial status-quo by this "China wall": Main goals become to take Kiev and actually Leningrad, and from this line launch raids of encirclements to destroy the russian army.
Guderian was the sole to believe that the afar Volga line Arkangelsk-Astrakan, to actually put down Russia, was a nice dream strategical goal, but he followed the orders.

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 8:01 pm

Tassadar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:56 pm

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

Shelved, which might as well be binned for the foreseeable future until even by accident a way to make naval combat more fun is invented.

Where did they officially state that? I haven't been on here for a while, so I missed the news.

On a stream, you can refer to this thread: https://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=114262

Tassadar wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:35 pm As for War Stories... this sounds suspiciously British

My first thought on "war stories" was a long campaign DLC series. But maybe im too connected to "Wagner ans his capitana"...

For the Next Frontlines DLC i hope for Stalingrad or Opration Husky

I'm disappointed that there isn't going to be a Panzer Korps Pacific. I was looking forward to it as the European theatre has been done to death.
I understand the "Naval Combat in PK2 sucks" concept, but doing the landings and pushing inland could have been fun. US had overwhelming forces - especially with no reinforcement for J - but time limits on scenarios could still make them challenging.
A sub vs J convoy to prevent/allow reinforcement could be a decent scenario. Guadalcanal, New Guinea, Port Moresby, Singapore, Chindits, even a "Bridge on the River Kwai" scenario could be fun and challenging. Tarawa and Iwo Jima would be musts.
I really hope Slitherine/Matrix reconsiders.

"War Stories" DLC seems to be a series of missions ?

uncus wrote: ↑Thu Jun 06, 2024 7:22 pm I'm disappointed that there isn't going to be a Panzer Korps Pacific. I was looking forward to it as the European theatre has been done to death.
I understand the "Naval Combat in PK2 sucks" concept, but doing the landings and pushing inland could have been fun. US had overwhelming forces - especially with no reinforcement for J - but time limits on scenarios could still make them challenging.
A sub vs J convoy to prevent/allow reinforcement could be a decent scenario. Guadalcanal, New Guinea, Port Moresby, Singapore, Chindits, even a "Bridge on the River Kwai" scenario could be fun and challenging. Tarawa and Iwo Jima would be musts.
I really hope Slitherine/Matrix reconsiders.

There's a lot of land theatres that can still be dealt with, but a lot of time... lost on the naval stuff probably doesn't help.

I assume it all depends on the profit factors more than anything, bean counters got to make bank I presume.

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

What, the whole Pacific?!
LOL No. We cancelled one Pacific project because the navel aspect it relied on couldn't be made good enough to sell.

No where have we said we're not going to make other Pacific DLC.

P

Patrick Ward wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 11:28 am

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

What, the whole Pacific?!
LOL No. We cancelled one Pacific project because the navel aspect it relied on couldn't be made good enough to sell.

No where have we said we're not going to make other Pacific DLC.

P

A-HA! I have it in writing now, and shall hold you to it. Pacific DLC when?

Gotcha - Japanese campaign in Manchuria and China. Maybe Burma and hypothetical "meeting uncle Rommel" in India.

Who needs a the IJN for that

Would come in very handy for the conflicting ressources and goals between Imperial Japanese Army and Navy.

wecker wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 3:12 pm Would come in very handy for the conflicting ressources and goals between Imperial Japanese Army and Navy.

That's probably the best way to utilize prestige sinks any campaign could ever introduce.

RVallant wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 1:52 pm

Patrick Ward wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 11:28 am

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

What, the whole Pacific?!
LOL No. We cancelled one Pacific project because the navel aspect it relied on couldn't be made good enough to sell.

No where have we said we're not going to make other Pacific DLC.

P

A-HA! I have it in writing now, and shall hold you to it. Pacific DLC when?

AH but no where have we said we are ....



I hope we've learned our lesson and don't announce anything about anything until at least the beta is ready to start.

P

ErissN6 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 8:04 pmI imagine Hitler followed the mocked Guderian advice, and launch Barbarossa only up to the Dniepr river where Hitler immediatly build in 1941, and not the too late 1943, the Panther-Wotan "maginot" line from Crimae up to Leningrad for a beneficial status-quo by this "China wall": Main goals become to take Kiev and actually Leningrad.

"OKW and OKH, those officers must have been surprised that the Führer did not name a point of maximum effort or Schwerpunkt, the strategic objective to be gained. Instead he named three targets, allocating one to each of the Army Groups which were to fight the war: Leningrad for Army Group North, the Ukraine for Army Group South, and for Army Group Center, Moscow—but only after the northern and southern goals had been gained. Hitler declared Moscow to be a geographical term with no military significance. His decision broke with the German Army’s basic precept that Field armies march separately but strike together. In Russia his Army Groups would march separately and would also strike separately."

So, despite many westerners tell Hitler was a bad strategist, for me Hitler had quite launched the limited "good" strategy (not naming the afar A-A line): to attack north and south, but he should have continued it, not trying to go to Smolensk (first strategical defeat here) and then Moscow before taking Leningrad (and Kiev, here what he did before continueing after the Smolensk shocking stop).

Patrick Ward wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 11:28 am

RVallant wrote: ↑Wed Jun 05, 2024 7:53 pm They binned Pacific have they?

What, the whole Pacific?!
LOL No. We cancelled one Pacific project because the navel aspect it relied on couldn't be made good enough to sell.

No where have we said we're not going to make other Pacific DLC.

P

I've played Strategy Games for decades. A number of them had 'Naval' actions in them. So whatever slitherine intended for how to "display-portray" these 'Naval-Aspects'...Stop and Now consider!... if developing a 'Naval-Presentation' is beyond the present or current capabilities of Developers at this time... or too insurmountable for the Game designers... then 'Scale those ambitions down!"... we do not require the... "Crème de la Crème"... or the 'Best Type' of a particular thing!. Just 'Make it Workable'.

:Scaling Down:.. . what does that really imply???.
~~~Less attention to hyper-design of Ships... instead!... use more basic_ less detailed graphics for Ships. If as an added alternative... give the "Option" to have the Ships full-glory revealed in a separate independent still-shot graphics view... for the player to mull-over... if they really want to see what it really looks like.
~~~Simpler Combat results... avoid complex damage assessment combat results on Ships.
~~~Have the "Fleet" represented by a "Single-Icon"... but!...when engaged with enemy forces... then have the entire Fleet-Fleets displayed.,, for both sides.
~~~If in the case of "Aircraft-Carriers"... before one launches an "Air-Mission"... go "Deluxe" on then revealing the Carrier separately on the screen to help immerse the player into the current situation to assist in the assessing and allocating of the respective aircraft needed for the upcoming mission... this will help in making more of "a feel of realism" for the player.

Patrick Ward wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:28 pm

RVallant wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 1:52 pm

Patrick Ward wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 11:28 am

What, the whole Pacific?!
LOL No. We cancelled one Pacific project because the navel aspect it relied on couldn't be made good enough to sell.

No where have we said we're not going to make other Pacific DLC.

P

A-HA! I have it in writing now, and shall hold you to it. Pacific DLC when?

AH but no where have we said we are ....



I hope we've learned our lesson and don't announce anything about anything until at least the beta is ready to start.

P

Would it trouble you too much to spend a day or two to recompile the iPad version of Panzer Corps 1 and put it in the Mac App Store? Literally the only thing it needs is support for screen resolutions above 1024x768. Is that too much to ask?

proline wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 5:20 am

Patrick Ward wrote: ↑Wed Jun 12, 2024 10:28 pm

RVallant wrote: ↑Mon Jun 10, 2024 1:52 pm

A-HA! I have it in writing now, and shall hold you to it. Pacific DLC when?

AH but no where have we said we are ....



I hope we've learned our lesson and don't announce anything about anything until at least the beta is ready to start.

P

Would it trouble you too much to spend a day or two to recompile the iPad version of Panzer Corps 1 and put it in the Mac App Store? Literally the only thing it needs is support for screen resolutions above 1024x768. Is that too much to ask?

I can't see us releasing on or supporting Apple again in the foreseeable future, but its not my call.

And for the record, I co-founded an iOS studio back in the day, making wargames specifically for iPad. It would take a lot more than a day or two and would more than quadruple the file size to create all the graphics required for 2x and 3x to a good enough quality ( you can't just stick them through an AI upscaler ). We would then also be expected to partake of and support the Apple ecosystem and provide continued support for the game.

P