Slitherine

Hi guys! As I did before in the PzC beta, I'll use this thread to report my experience with the new DLCs. I'll start with the 1939 campaign, then move on to the 1940 set afterward.

Installation was trouble-free. I brought up the menu and selected the '39 campaign, colonel difficulty. A question for the future: when the DLC is released, will it be available from the current menu like the original campaigns are?

I played through the Poznan scenario. Won a DV in 13 turns. I really like having the secondary objective attached (capture 3 airfields), as this gives the scenario a more historical feel as well as providing an additional challenge. (I wonder, if you don't manage to capture the airfields, are there consequences in later scenarios -- i.e., the Poles have more air power?) The scenario is a good opening to the campaign -- a decent challenge but not too difficult. Only one thing on the map seemed wrong: one of the Polish-held cities at the start of the game is Wroclaw. Wroclaw is in modern-day Poland; however, at the beginning of WW2 it was in Germany (called Breslau). Otherwise everything seems in order.

I moved onto the Danzig Corridor scenario next. Alas, I had to go to work so I was unable to get past the deployment screen. However, I did notice two typos in the briefing:
1. Near the beginning of the second paragraph, the word "it" should be inserted as follows: "...advance into Poland, it is vital..."
2. In the next sentence, remove the comma between the words "rail crossings."

I plan on setting aside as much time as possible this weekend to get in as many games as possible. At this point all I can say is that the new campaign looks great and I am very eager to get into it as far as I can. (And also, thanks to the development team for including me in the beta test. It is an honor and privilege to test out the new content for PzC. )

Looking forward to getting more playtime this weekend.

I just finished the Danzig Corridor scenario. Thoughts... a very good challenge overall. I won a DV in 10 turns. I think making the river crossings as objectives was great, it really gives the scenario focus (i.e., secure the Vistula). I wonder if capturing the river crossings should be made a necessity for a decisive victory (much as capturing 3 airfields was required in the Poznan scenario). It would help stress the importance of taking all the river crossings and reward a player who manages to get his forces across the Vistula.

The AI put up a credible defense. I like how it uses the Polish cavalry, both defensively (holding the river crossings) and offensively (uses them as "mop-up" against weaken units). In fact I lost my first unit of the campaign to a Polish lancer unit (ironically it was my single cavalry division -- interesting to see a cavalry vs. cavalry fight in WW2). I notice the Polish air force is absent in this scenario; is this hard-wired, or is it a result of the decisive victory in the Poznan scenario?

Tomorrow I'll tackle Lodz. So far, I'm very impressed with the two maps I've played; looks like a lot of outside-the-box thinking going on regarding design. I hope this continues through the campaign.

I finished Lodz with a DV in 11 turns. No units lost, although I nearly lost a recon at Kutno when I ran headlong into the Polish counterattack force. I like how the forces there are a set-up for the next scenario... initially I thought all of those forces up north were a waste, but having them instead be a preview of the next mission is rather clever. I think the rescue mission is a bit too easy; my recon force was never in any serious danger, and in fact might have made good headway going west to meet up with my core forces. Perhaps a few more Polish units between the recon force and the core set-up area; or perhaps have the recon forces start with lower supplies and/or strength to represent their being cut off from the main body of forces.

I also liked how the scenario briefing suggested that taking the rail route north of Lodz might be a good way to hit the town from the rear. I advanced cautiously, with one infantry unit entrained, another on foot, and an artillery unit for support. I'm glad I was slow, else I might have railed my unit right into the teeth of the Kutno pocket! It is nice to see that the scenario briefings aren't always the best information... I like that even my superiors can be surprised sometimes!

I like how the campaign is progressing so far. In fact, with the Kutno carry-over to the Piatek scenario, it almost feels like a narrative developing. I do feel like I'm getting drawn into a storyline. It's nice having multiple scenarios in one front, as opposed to jumping from country to country as in the original 1939 campaign. I'm finding myself thinking, "what's going to happen next? What other surprises do the Poles have in store?" Again, nice touch.

One typo in the Piatek briefing. In the first paragraph, remove the word "up" from the sentence: "...enormous pocket up of Polish..."

Hope to get Piatek in latter this afternoon.

Wrapped up Piatek this evening. DV at the end of 20 turns. This was an interesting scenario. After the first wave of Polish attackers near Piatek, I figured the AI had shot its bolt and was pretty much finished. Imagine my surprise when I advanced in the west up to Leczyca, and was hit by another wave of Polish armor and cavalry! For the first time I had to restart a scenario in this campaign. I soon realized there were "pockets" of Polish forces scattered around the map, all ready to move on the Bzura bridgeheads. I wonder how these forces are "triggered." For instance, I moved forces in the east up toward Sleszyn and noticed another concentration of Polish forces. However, this time the forces there largely remained static, and I was able to eliminate two infantry units before this group was "activated." Do these forces move based on a certain proximity of German forces, or instead are hard-wired to move on a certain turn?

Also, I noticed an odd AI behavior at the Bzura bridge (17,10). No less than three times (on three straight turns), three separate Polish tankette units attempted to move into the hex and were ambushed (and subsequently destroyed). I wonder if there is a way to make the AI more cautious with moving into a hex (especially an objective) if it is ambushed once? Otherwise the AI's offensive behavior seemed pretty good. Units attempted to cross at various points on the river rather than bunched up at bridgehead hexes. Only once did I see the old "hop in the transport and ride straight up to enemy lines" routine; otherwise, the AI was good about using its units as best as possible. (And may I say the Polish cavalry units near the center north portion of the map were KILLERS... I attempted to send some forces up that way for an offensive, and promptly lost two core infantry units and an auxiliary artillery unit.)

I found a couple of typos in the Kampinoska Forest briefing, but I'll post them in the typo thread that Kerensky set up.

Much appreciated, and grats on the new avatar!

Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't noticed!

I finished the Kampinsoka Forest scenario today. DV in 14 turns. I earned my first hero, as well as my first elite unit for the next mission (Modlin). However, I suffered another core loss, my cavalry unit (again). I like how this scenario utilizes cavalry, as they are good for forest movement/combat and recon, as well. Even though the cavalry unit has been present since PzC's release, it feels like a "new" unit since I rarely bothered with cavalry in the vanilla campaigns.

Overall this was a decent scenario. It felt a bit on the easy side, since (a) the troop trains are fixed in place and (b) many of the Polish units were understrength. Not sure how the trains could be made more difficult to catch (I assume they are "fixed" in place); perhaps more Polish units as "escorts" to defend them? And are the Polish unit values set in stone, or is it a function of how you did in the previous scenario?

One graphic point I noticed in this scenario... perhaps at some point a tile could be designed to represent cities with rivers running through them. This seems to be a more prominent terrain feature in the '39 DLC, so it might be worthwhile to create just such a tile set.

I did encounter an AI "dumb" move in this scenario that I've not yet encountered in the other games in the '39 campaign -- namely, twice during the game the AI moved infantry units out of perfectly good defensive positions in cities to engage German units at suicidal odds. The two cities were north Wyszogrod (11,6) and Grodzisk Mazowiecki (23,19).

Finally, seeing the 20-strength Polish infantry outside of Warsaw was quite a shock! Does this mean the "ceiling" for unit strength has been lifted (I assumed it used to be 15 for AI units at Manstein level)?

That's all for now... on to Modlin tonight.

BTW, a note to the devs: I hope my scenario reports don't sound like I'm repeating what others say in their reports -- I'm purposely not reading anyone else's comments on scenarios I've not played until AFTER I'm finished that scenario. I just read several of the other beta testers' comments on Kampinsoka Forest (nice job all around, guys!) and noticed that much of what I said had been mentioned already. I wish I could play this faster, but work/family/health/etc. make this difficult at times. Please know I'm expressing my own thoughts and not trying to just repeat what has already been posted (and again, there are MANY fantastic reports on the beta so far, they are a joy to read).

Redundant reports only serves to reinforce the need and urgency to have issues addressed and resolved. If 1 person complains about a problem, maybe it's not a problem just that person's preference. If EVERYONE complains about it though....

Please continue.

dshaw62197 wrote:Finally, seeing the 20-strength Polish infantry outside of Warsaw was quite a shock! Does this mean the "ceiling" for unit strength has been lifted (I assumed it used to be 15 for AI units at Manstein level)?

That's all for now... on to Modlin tonight.

This is the campaign's way of saying:

Hi, yes you've reached the outskirts of Warsaw. No you're not right to fight Warsaw just yet. Please come back later after you finish Modlin. Thank you.

This is also spelled out in the briefings/debriefings for further clarification:

<p>The Polish trains have been destroyed or surrendered, and Warsaw has been cut off from the West and the South. Well done, Herr General, but this campaign is far from over. There is another obstacle you must tackle before we will be able to successfully siege the Polish capital. To Modlin!</p>

Hi, yes you've reached the outskirts of Warsaw. No you're not right to fight Warsaw just yet. Please come back later after you finish Modlin. Thank you.

Ah, makes perfect sense, thanks for the explanation. I consider myself warned!

Finished Modlin with a DV in 15 turns. No unit losses, no leaders created, but I did receive a second elite unit (another infantry) for the next scenario. This is a pretty straightforward scenario, and I liked it. In some ways it was a primer on PzC/PG basics -- how to cross rivers against enemy opposition, how to properly reduce forts, etc. I liked it, the only issue I had was figuring out that the Polish radar/HQ was in fact the second "fortress." Honestly I think this map is fine as is, a good challenge and well designed.

I chose North Warsaw for my next mission. Looks interesting!

The Radar Station will be removed and replaced with another fort with the name Modlin Fortress Headquarters.
Just to let you know.

Ah, makes sense. Thanks as always K.

Finished Warsaw North. DV in 11 turns. Won my first two medals (both for my pair of Ju-87s), and received a second hero. Lost one core infantry unit and two auxiliary infantry units.

I really enjoyed this scenario! The city battle for Warsaw was intense. I was expecting a few more fort hexes (not to mention those 20-strength units, where did they go LOL), but the AI did well with what it had. Of course the best part of the scenario was capturing the Polish artillery units, an excellent pick-up from PGIII. I hope to see a lot more of this in the future, perhaps as random rewards for capturing out-of-the-way cities and towns. One small issue -- it was hard remembering over the course of the scenario what the artillery bonus towns where. Maybe put the towns on the victory conditions screen that appears at the beginning of each turn, or maybe even giving the hexes themselves an 'secondary' objective indicator much like the major objectives have.

Two small issues.
1. The hex at 29,9 needs a road junction tile.
2. I encountered another instance of infantry leaving a city to attack at hopeless odds, at Gadka (23, 23). Interesting side note: I had Gadka surrounded by a Panzer and recon unit for several turns; it was the last of the "bonus" towns that I had to capture. For the duration of that time, the Polish infantry unit sat in the town with moving or attacking. However, I moved one of my captured Polish artillery pieces two hexes away in order to bombard Gadka the next turn, and that's when the AI decided to pull the unit out and attacked the artillery piece.

Looking forward to Spoils of War next, should be interesting mixing it up with the Russians.

I've just finished Spoils of War. DV in 11 turns; no medals or heros; lost three core units -- one elite infantry, one recon, one Ju-87.

This scenario is... interesting. I like the premise behind it -- I don't mind alt-history scenarios, and in fact it's interesting seeing 1939-vintage German and Russian units go at it. However, there were a few things that prevented me from really liking the scenario. In no particular order:

1. It is alt-history -- the DLC campaigns seem to be based on following a fairly strict historical sequence of events, and this is obviously a sidestep from that sequence.
2. It seems too easy. The Russians don't seem to make a great effort to capture the objective hexes; in fact, the AI seemed more content to send a few units out to the neutral-flag cities, then sit back and wait for the Germans to show up at Brest.
3. The concept behind the scenario (a semi-friendly "skirmish" between the Germans and Russians) doesn't hold up too well. If this is only a contest of sorts between the two sides, then by definition no units should really be "destroyed." Yet, I lost three units (two of which, the elite infantry and Ju-87, were quite experienced) that I had depended on in previous scenarios, and which I know I'll miss in the upcoming Norway scenarios. For something that is portrayed as a contest of sorts, it was pretty bloody for being a non-conflict.
4. It seems a bit much to have the Germans take all of the neutral towns AND beat the Russians out of Brest. It makes sense that Warsaw and Brest are respective "capitals" of each side on the map, but it doesn't hold to the idea of seeing which side gets the "spoils" when you have to take the other side's main city. That seems to be more aggressive than what this scenario is trying to portray.
5. A note on the AI: on three seperate occasions, the AI drove transports right up to my waiting forces, all of which were promptly dispatched. All three instances occurred as I approached Brest.

My final thought? I think this would make a delightful MP scenario, much like the Frozen North and Hyland Valley scenarios. Or, if you really like the idea of having the Germans and Russians duke it out, offer this scenario as a "choice" between the historical path (going on to Norway) and an alternate campaign where the German player basically says to hell with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact and attacks Russia after Poland's fall. I realize this latter option is probably outside of the design goal for the 1939 DLC; but otherwise, it's the only way that I think it would "fit" the larger campaign without seeming out of place.

Nevertheless, I've dusted myself off from the scrap with Russia, and now prepare for fun in the frozen north in Norway.

Interesting point, there is a conversion of Spoils of War to be a multiplayer map. (Both sides have drastically restructured starting forces, the map has changed slightly, and that kv2 is gone of course) If and how this ever gets implemented, we'll see. It's quite fun though.

German light armor (PZII and 38t) battling Russian light armor (BT7 T26) is actually an extremely well balanced battle.

Finished the Oslo scenario today. Won a DV in 11 turns. No losses, no heroes/medals gained.

A nice, straightforward scenario. The Blucher side-mission is a nice touch; these secondary objectives really are getting interesting. I managed to knock the fortresses out with the Blucher down to 5 strength points... wish I had invested in a level bomber or two, which would have greatly helped out reducing the strongpoints. Overall the Norweigan forces seemed to be about right regarding strength (since these are the first days of the German invasion, it would seem out of place to have the Norweigans too strong). However, I wonder if an air unit or two, or perhaps a British ship, might make an appearance later in the scenario as a reinforcement? This might push the German player to accomplish his objectives faster, since the longer the mission goes on, the more likely the intervening British/French forces are to show up.

Only one AI flub here -- the infantry unit in Tonsberg (13,15) marched out of the town and flung itself in a suicidal assault against one of my panzers. Otherwise AI behavior was good.

I did find a possible text issue in the post-scenario debriefing, I've placed it over in the apporpriate thread. On to Lillehammer!

Finished Lillehammer. DV in 11 turns. No leaders/medals; lost one core unit (gebirgjager).

Once again, a straightforward scenario. I like how this map echos the Lillehammer map in PG2 -- not sure if that was intentional, but I do like it and hope other revised PG series maps make their way into PzC. Lots of ambushes on this map; the Norwegian mountain troops can be pretty tricky (that's how I lost my lone core unit -- I was pushing my jagers too far north and they bumped into a patch of Norwegians). I like the structure of the map -- similar to Modlin in that it forces players to consider fundamental attack principals (keep armor out of woods, watch out for ambushes, etc.). I thought the Lillehammer forts could have been a bit stronger; likewise, the British units were a slight disappointment, in that I thought they'd be a bit stronger. However, I suspect that soon enough the British will be a lot more formidable, so perhaps this isn't a bad thing.

I assume the "Norwiegan towns" are not actually based on real locales and are intended as "bases" for units? Otherwise I imagine at some point they'd receive proper names.

I know the new beta build for the DLC has dropped today, but since I'm on the final scenario of the '39 campaign, I'll finish under the old build and start the '40 game with the new release.

Completed Narvik. DV in 11 turns (that seems to be an average number, the last five scenarios all took 11 turns to win). No heroes, three medals won, three destroyers lost.

Like the two scenarios before it, Narvik is a tightly focused map. I liked how the German player has the earlier invasion force available as help (although it seemed they were a little too strong for units that were cut off and ousted from their base). And of course the side objective of sinking the carrier Glorious was fun too. This scenario did bring up a few questions/points, however.

1. I expected the Glorious to be elusive and more of a challenge to find; yet it seemed the carrier (along with the other British ships) made a beeline for Narvik harbor. In fact, it practically ran into my sub, which I had shadowing ahead of my cruisers. I understand it was trying to move closer to the "action" so as to allow its plane to attack; however, it felt strange that I did not have to search for the ship, but instead it practically came to me.

2. The Seafire that accompanies the Glorious behaved oddly. In the first turn it appeared near one of my Stukas and attacked. On turn two, I moved my fighter next to it and attacked. At the same time my ground forces captured the neighboring airfield, and so I left both the Ju-87 and fighter there to recover. On the following turn (and several thereafter), the Seafire never moved or attacked. In fact, it stayed there until it ran out of fuel and crashed. (The hex in question was 23,8.) As it was obviously not attacking my forces I left it be. Not sure what to make of it, but the other two British planes moved and attacked fine.

3. I noticed that when my units were physically on a bridge and attacking an adjacent unit, there didn't seem to be an penalty for the attacker. I take it this is different from attacking on a bridge on a river hex, where the attacker suffers a loss of effectiveness in attacking and defending?

4. Finally, this is a small nitpick: in the scenario briefing the commander says it would advantageous to sink the Glorious and "her escorts." The actual scenario discription only mentions the Glorious as the objective. I sank all the British ships so I was wondering, is it only necessary to sink Glorious or all the British ships to gain a DV?