Compliments and Thoughts about the Allied campaigns
Posted: Thu Aug 11, 2011 3:41 am
I had Panzer Corps recommended to me by a friend. "Spiritual successor to the original Panzer General", he told me.
Happily he was right about this. I've only played through the tutorial so far and I can already see that the developers of this game took all of the improvements made between Panzer General and Pacific General and retro-fitted them. Thank God for that; 10 years is a long time to wait for a decent TBS successor to SSI's venerable titles.
So, before I retire to my computer to enjoy a simulated orgy of military aggression, I would like to say a few things:
#1) I tip my hat to you gents at Slitherine. Clearly you are wargamers of ye olde schoole.
#2) Offer some thoughts on what an "Allied Corps" campaign pack might look like for this fine game. Not that I'm taking for granted that you gents plan on creating one — though I hope you will.
---
The main problem with creating a Panzer Corps-style campaign played from the Allied side is the time frame. Perhaps YMMV but one of the most satisfying things I get from a game like this is husbanding an army through a long campaign of increasing challenges. In short, you get a small side order of builder-style play with your entree of warmonger. None of this meshes well with spending the first half of the game getting soundly pummeled from one set of ropes to the other by the German war machine, which is how things would have to play out if you wanted to follow the war from the outset yet not completely part ways with history.
The original Allied General got around this by simply starting the campaign a short time before the turn of the tide. I recall there being only 1 scenario that was a guaranteed loss for the British campaign and maybe 2 for the Russians. Reproducing this using the Panzer Corps engine is probably the easiest way to implement an Allied campaign. It could be produced as a campaign or expansion pack for PC, with no significant changes to the engine, and I would surely be happy to buy it.
That said, I would like to suggest a few refinements that could make a long (10+ scenario) campaign possible as any of the Allies. The primary change would be a new kind of scenario with more complicated victory conditions, mainly to accommodate scenarios where the player is strictly on the defense and is expected to lose. The end conditions could be, for example, Decisive Defeat, Tactical Defeat, and Heroic Defense. End results could be decided by the number of turns remaining when the last primary objective falls and the number of allied units still alive. Prestige and a small bonus to experience for surviving core units is awarded depending on how well the player resisted the German war machine. I can understand if this doesn't sound like a terribly fun time but imagine how engaging it could be to play a campaign that faithfully models the long twilight struggle of the Red Army stubbornly resisting an enemy that has them outmatched in every way but time and terrain; trading space for time, trying to limit the scale of the slaughter of allied troops, being rewarded based on the elegance of your stalling tactics, etc.
Or maybe I'm just a masochist.
---
A couple of examples of how I think this could work, in practice:
1) The Russian campaign could start with 2 conventional scenarios, Khalkin Gol 1938 and the Finnish Winter War 1939. The player gets 8 and 10 core slots, respectively. This allows him to build his core and get some experience before being on the receiving end of Operation Barbarossa. In Barbarossa, the player gets his 12 core units but also commands nearly 3-4x as many auxiliary units in pre-placed locations. More units will arrive at specified times, plus or minus a day or two. Every objective the Germans take gives them a chunk of prestige to reinforce their offensive with. If they seize every objective and destroy 75% of the non-core units with time to spare, you get a decisive defeat. If you run the clock out and still have 50% or more of your forces, you get a heroic defense. If the axis captures their objectives with less than 5 days left but the Red Army has suffered less than 50% losses, tactical defeat.
And so on for each of the major offensives the Germans launched, until it is time for the Soviet Winter Offensive (and then maybe back on the defense again after that).
2) The campaign for the western allies could be designed in a similar fashion, starting the player with a small/slowly expanding core of British units that doubles in size abruptly when the Americans join the war. Or the British/American campaigns could be made separate. Either way, the earliest scenarios as the Brits could put the player on the defense in the Low Countries then France, with the accompanying retreat at Dunkirk.
---
Anyhow, thanks for your time and thanks again for making this game.
Happily he was right about this. I've only played through the tutorial so far and I can already see that the developers of this game took all of the improvements made between Panzer General and Pacific General and retro-fitted them. Thank God for that; 10 years is a long time to wait for a decent TBS successor to SSI's venerable titles.
So, before I retire to my computer to enjoy a simulated orgy of military aggression, I would like to say a few things:
#1) I tip my hat to you gents at Slitherine. Clearly you are wargamers of ye olde schoole.
#2) Offer some thoughts on what an "Allied Corps" campaign pack might look like for this fine game. Not that I'm taking for granted that you gents plan on creating one — though I hope you will.
---
The main problem with creating a Panzer Corps-style campaign played from the Allied side is the time frame. Perhaps YMMV but one of the most satisfying things I get from a game like this is husbanding an army through a long campaign of increasing challenges. In short, you get a small side order of builder-style play with your entree of warmonger. None of this meshes well with spending the first half of the game getting soundly pummeled from one set of ropes to the other by the German war machine, which is how things would have to play out if you wanted to follow the war from the outset yet not completely part ways with history.
The original Allied General got around this by simply starting the campaign a short time before the turn of the tide. I recall there being only 1 scenario that was a guaranteed loss for the British campaign and maybe 2 for the Russians. Reproducing this using the Panzer Corps engine is probably the easiest way to implement an Allied campaign. It could be produced as a campaign or expansion pack for PC, with no significant changes to the engine, and I would surely be happy to buy it.
That said, I would like to suggest a few refinements that could make a long (10+ scenario) campaign possible as any of the Allies. The primary change would be a new kind of scenario with more complicated victory conditions, mainly to accommodate scenarios where the player is strictly on the defense and is expected to lose. The end conditions could be, for example, Decisive Defeat, Tactical Defeat, and Heroic Defense. End results could be decided by the number of turns remaining when the last primary objective falls and the number of allied units still alive. Prestige and a small bonus to experience for surviving core units is awarded depending on how well the player resisted the German war machine. I can understand if this doesn't sound like a terribly fun time but imagine how engaging it could be to play a campaign that faithfully models the long twilight struggle of the Red Army stubbornly resisting an enemy that has them outmatched in every way but time and terrain; trading space for time, trying to limit the scale of the slaughter of allied troops, being rewarded based on the elegance of your stalling tactics, etc.
Or maybe I'm just a masochist.
---
A couple of examples of how I think this could work, in practice:
1) The Russian campaign could start with 2 conventional scenarios, Khalkin Gol 1938 and the Finnish Winter War 1939. The player gets 8 and 10 core slots, respectively. This allows him to build his core and get some experience before being on the receiving end of Operation Barbarossa. In Barbarossa, the player gets his 12 core units but also commands nearly 3-4x as many auxiliary units in pre-placed locations. More units will arrive at specified times, plus or minus a day or two. Every objective the Germans take gives them a chunk of prestige to reinforce their offensive with. If they seize every objective and destroy 75% of the non-core units with time to spare, you get a decisive defeat. If you run the clock out and still have 50% or more of your forces, you get a heroic defense. If the axis captures their objectives with less than 5 days left but the Red Army has suffered less than 50% losses, tactical defeat.
And so on for each of the major offensives the Germans launched, until it is time for the Soviet Winter Offensive (and then maybe back on the defense again after that).
2) The campaign for the western allies could be designed in a similar fashion, starting the player with a small/slowly expanding core of British units that doubles in size abruptly when the Americans join the war. Or the British/American campaigns could be made separate. Either way, the earliest scenarios as the Brits could put the player on the defense in the Low Countries then France, with the accompanying retreat at Dunkirk.
---
Anyhow, thanks for your time and thanks again for making this game.
