Slitherine

I never was a big fan of Panzer General or Panzer General II or ALlied General or Peoples General or Fantasy General. But, I really enjoyed Pacific General. So, I'm wondering how long before you get around to remaking that one?

The Pacific theatre is definitely worthy of a good strategy game, but I don't think we'll be seeing "Pacific Corps" as such, nor do I think there is much demand for it (in preferring Pacific General, you are in a minority I'm afraid). And like adherbal says, they don't want to be typecast as "the remake company". Panzer Corps, as a reimagination of the classic, was a pleasant surprise, and for me at least, felt just right in this point in time. If and when the Pacific theatre is being dealt with, however, I don't necessarily expect the same engine to be used. Perhaps as an expansion, or mods perhaps? There is already at least one Pacific campaign available to Battlefield Academy, we might well see something similar added to Panzer Corps.

Our plans are to build out this series over the coming years, that is all I can say at this point officially.

Africa, Allied, Pacific , Fantasy... all are on our wishlist, how, when and if, only time will tell.

Peoples ?

Re-doing Fanatasy General would open up a whole new market for you and really be a catalysit for growth

American Civil War, Napoleonics, 7 Years War in Europe

I too loved Pacific General.

Razz1 wrote:I too loved Pacific General.

+1

I'm a fan of Pacific General as well. In my opinion Panzer Corps is a step back from Pacific General as it doesn't allow buying naval units and doesn't have a detailed damage model for ships. Plus, naval support fire is too ineffective.

MrFancypants wrote:I'm a fan of Pacific General as well. In my opinion Panzer Corps is a step back from Pacific General as it doesn't allow buying naval units and doesn't have a detailed damage model for ships. Plus, naval support fire is too ineffective.

Too inneffective? play Norway and see what those Brits can do to your helpless ground forces! Also, not sure why a werhmacht Army/Army group commander would be able to "requistion" direct control over Naval units (which once you are in Russia would be waste of core slots anyhow)

Dont get me wrong though, if they redue a Pac Gen game , i would expect a more detailed modelling of ships.

Except for the awful Midway Scenario, Pacific General was great. I hope that in "Pacific Corps", they keep the primary focus on ground units and a traditional island hopping campaign, with air and naval doing their usual supportive roles.

lordzimoa wrote:Our plans are to build out this series over the coming years, that is all I can say at this point officially.

Africa, Allied, Pacific , Fantasy... all are on our wishlist, how, when and if, only time will tell.

Well it's nice to read "I'm not in a MINORITY" as kissant would have me believe. I can wait and would definitely want on the beta team for Pacific General. It's the best Panzer General game made imho. Plus there's not enough games on the land based Pacific side of the war. We already have enough WW2 and Africa korp and Eastern Front. Those are the ones that should move to the minority column for future releases.

MrFancypants wrote:I'm a fan of Pacific General as well. In my opinion Panzer Corps is a step back from Pacific General as it doesn't allow buying naval units and doesn't have a detailed damage model for ships. Plus, naval support fire is too ineffective.

Well, you are the head of a Panzer corps, and not part of the Kriegsmarine, so it makes sense that you shouldn't be able to buy naval units. Besides, naval units are more expensive and time consuming to make than any land or air units, and it is likely that High Command has a spare battleship they can lend you in case you want another one. Hearts of Iron gives a more realistic feeling of this sort of thing, as it easily takes 2-4 years for a capital ship to be ready from the time it is commissioned.

That you get control of air units is an historical stretch as well, as Göring was very particular about their deployment. The Germans did have an aircraft carrier, all finished and furnished (the Graf Zeppelin), but it remained in dock because Göring refused to relinquish any aircraft to the navy.

TheGrayMouser wrote:
Too inneffective? play Norway and see what those Brits can do to your helpless ground forces! Also, not sure why a werhmacht Army/Army group commander would be able to "requistion" direct control over Naval units (which once you are in Russia would be waste of core slots anyhow)

Dont get me wrong though, if they redue a Pac Gen game , i would expect a more detailed modelling of ships.

When I tried attacking infantry with destroyers and light cruisers in the Norway scenario they barely did any damage or suppression. The Brits have lots of battleships and cruisers in that scenario, which may be why they are more effective.

That an army commander requisitions naval units doesn't make less sense than his ability to buy Luftwaffe units. In this game you end up commanding naval units anyway. They wouldn't waste any core slots according to the system Pacific General used (which had a different core slot type for naval units IIRC) either. Besides, the German navy also played a (limited) role in the invasion of Poland and in the Baltic. You could use naval units in scenarios from Poland to Leningrad, from Norway to France, in the Mediterranean and hypothetical scenarios such as Sealion or the invasion of the US.

Kissaki wrote: Well, you are the head of a Panzer corps, and not part of the Kriegsmarine, so it makes sense that you shouldn't be able to buy naval units. Besides, naval units are more expensive and time consuming to make than any land or air units, and it is likely that High Command has a spare battleship they can lend you in case you want another one. Hearts of Iron gives a more realistic feeling of this sort of thing, as it easily takes 2-4 years for a capital ship to be ready from the time it is commissioned.

That you get control of air units is an historical stretch as well, as Göring was very particular about their deployment. The Germans did have an aircraft carrier, all finished and furnished (the Graf Zeppelin), but it remained in dock because Göring refused to relinquish any aircraft to the navy.

Hearts of Iron is certainly more realistic, but I'm not really looking for realism with a Panzer General type game but more for fun in a somewhat plausible package (i.e. where your caveman can't defeat a tank a la Civilization)

Igorputski wrote:Well it's nice to read "I'm not in a MINORITY" as kissant would have me believe. I can wait and would definitely want on the beta team for Pacific General. It's the best Panzer General game made imho.

Sorry if I stepped on your toes, but Panzer General was considerably more popular (and still is) than Pacific General, which does indeed place you in a minority if you prefer the latter. I meant no offence by that.

Plus there's not enough games on the land based Pacific side of the war. We already have enough WW2 and Africa korp and Eastern Front. Those are the ones that should move to the minority column for future releases.

Are there really that many games dealing with North Africa? Also, the Pacific theatre is still WWII. Just sayin'.

@Mrfancypants -I'm finding my Cruisers more than adequate giving naval support in the Norway scenario....

As to the Brits being better in the same scenario with shore bombardment because of "lots of Battleships and cruisers?"

So far I've encounterd 1 Brit battleship and 2 heavy cruisers (as well as 1 french light cruiser) and I'll be surprised to find any more considering the satge in the scenario I'm at.

That weighs against 3 German Heavy Cruisers and 2 Light Cruisers......

Horseman wrote:@Mrfancypants -I'm finding my Cruisers more than adequate giving naval support in the Norway scenario....

As to the Brits being better in the same scenario with shore bombardment because of "lots of Battleships and cruisers?"

So far I've encounterd 1 Brit battleship and 2 heavy cruisers (as well as 1 french light cruiser) and I'll be surprised to find any more considering the satge in the scenario I'm at.

That weighs against 3 German Heavy Cruisers and 2 Light Cruisers......

I seemed to be swarmed with enemy battleships and cruisers in Norway. I believe 2 battleships, and at least as many heavy cruisers. They destroyed my fancy navy on my first attempt. On my second attempt, knowing what I was facing, I returned the favour. I fared much better with my shore bombardments than they did, though, and I was surprised that even my infantry was able to get some kills on destroyers in defence. That just shouldn't happen.

I loved both Panzer and Allied, but I had more fun with Pacific General than the previous games. The Pacific was a nice change of pace. Especially after the modding community started creating content. I enjoyed the naval core aspect.

Germany with a significant navy stretches credibility, but when playing a campaign with America, Britain, Italy or Japan naval core could add another fun strategic element. More options equals more fun.

Kissaki wrote:

Horseman wrote:@Mrfancypants -I'm finding my Cruisers more than adequate giving naval support in the Norway scenario....

As to the Brits being better in the same scenario with shore bombardment because of "lots of Battleships and cruisers?"

So far I've encounterd 1 Brit battleship and 2 heavy cruisers (as well as 1 french light cruiser) and I'll be surprised to find any more considering the satge in the scenario I'm at.

That weighs against 3 German Heavy Cruisers and 2 Light Cruisers......

I seemed to be swarmed with enemy battleships and cruisers in Norway. I believe 2 battleships, and at least as many heavy cruisers. They destroyed my fancy navy on my first attempt. On my second attempt, knowing what I was facing, I returned the favour. I fared much better with my shore bombardments than they did, though, and I was surprised that even my infantry was able to get some kills on destroyers in defence. That just shouldn't happen.

Maybe its a difference in difficulty levels? But thats all I've definately encountered.....
As to Infantry getting Kills on Destroyers, don't forget that at pretty much any scale other than 1 unit=1 company most infantry units would have some organic infantry guns (artillery) of a reasonable caliber, Destroyers just weren't that well armoured and 1 strength point doesn't nessasarily=1 destroyer sunk

I think an inclusion of critical hits,hangar for carriers, and few other unit stas (like torpedo attack and defense) in Panzer corps or one of the expasion, would be great!