Slitherine

I have seen a few posts recently that state things like "I only play single-player" or some variation of the person's preferred way to play Panzer Corps.

I am curious to know what people think about the various ways to play Panzer Corps and why.

I have listed:
Single-player campaign
Single-player scenario
Multi-player
Hotseat
Other

Please leave your comments and reasons as well as posting a poll result.
Cheers

I prefer SP.
No special reason, in case of Panzer Corps. I just like to play in SP. I just feel more "comfortable".
The only game I play in MP is ArmA.
One of the main reasons why I like SP, is the campaign mode. I always tend to like games with certain RPG characteristics.

Ya, I also like playing Panzer Corps and other TBS games in SP campaign mode. I just don't seem to have the patience for PBEM style games. Of course, my favorite TBS is Panzer Corps. For RTS games, I like to do SP campaign and co-op against the AI. Company of Heroes is my all time favorite RTS. My main MP focus, though, is FPS games, primarily the Battlefield series. Bad Company 2 is my current FPS favorite, but it should be surpassed by BF3 once it comes out. That game looks amazing!

For AI games I like ones that can think more like TOW or GG War in the East.

Single-player campaign for me also. I'm trying to get a friend interested so that we can try PBEM. Unfortunately, he's not interested. I think a lot of players play SP due to time constraints ie. working life, not having to wait for your opponent to move in MP, different time zones. In short, its the most convenient as you can get SP up and running quickly and re-try different tactics and strategies within the same scenario.

For me it's single player campaign with PBEM++ as a very close second. Building up your forces over time is fun, but PBEM++ is the real challenge. No crippled and exploitable AI there.

Have to say I have become more of a multiplayer gamer of late mainly, I suspect due to time constraints and the whole work life balance thing. Sadly gone are the days of spending hours on end toiling through the single player campaigns of Company of Heroes or Rome Total War (pre the days of living with partner )....

I normal game on a few weekday nights and the odd Saturday afternoon and Panzer Corps is the perfect title for that lifestyle, as it is very quick to get into and fire up a campaign, especially with no 3rd party DRM, i.e. no log into Steam or anything else to play. However, I am also loving the multiplayer side to Panzer Corps, the PBEM system is great and the fact that it is turn based actually really suits multiplayer gaming. i.e. you play a turn forget about it and come back the following day.

I'd say I play about 70% SP and 30% MP with Panzer Corps, so I would love to see a co-op campaign and more multiplayer maps in future content.

Panzer Corps is pretty much the only single player campaign(s) I am playing at present.

Otherwise currently I am mainly playing Red Orchestra 2 and CoD Black Ops, all primarily multiplayer.

I like the single player campaign most and I am waiting for the day the Grand Campaign is released.

Second comes the modded campaigns.

I consider Multiplayer as "nice to have" but actually I didn't really use it.

... and when it comes to AI exploits: it is up to us all wether to cheat ourselves or not

Single player campaign all the way for me, I love nurturing my core force and slowoly buildinmg them up to an elite fighting force!!!

Favorite ways to use the game:
1) Designing scenarios (option not listed)
2) Single player campaign (I chose this option)
3) Single player scenario
4) Hotseat

Hopefully this tells the dev team we want an AI patch
(Nothing fancy, just the minimal effort required to make the computer execute attacks in the right order. Things like moving airborne troops or naval units or purchasing stuff based on what the enemy is using are definitely not expected at this stage. Even the way AI units jump out of entrenchment on wild goose chases isn't strictly necessary. Making the AI do supportive fire BEFORE attacking is.)

For me multiplayer is the best and most challenging way to play.

Multiplayer is the most enjoyable for me. Human opponents are endlessly inventive, and it is interesting to observe many different strategies employed. Plus it is the only real opportunity to engage in some interesting play, like encirclement tactics, tank traps, and deep penetration strikes.

My favorite way to play is in my pajama's.

I really need to spend more time with the single player but so far I have been almost exclusively playing multiplayer...I'm only in Norway on the campaign. I like the challenge and the inventiveness of a human opponent as well as the oppotunity to learn from them and to utilize those lessons in upcomming games. The PBEM++ really makes mulyiplayer a breeze.

El C, I voted"other" as I equally enjoy the SP campaigns as well as MP. I will say that lately I've been doing more MP than SP, but that will certainly balance back out once the DLC campaigns are released.

At the time of this post, there are only 36 votes, and I know that does not make a valid consensus but…

So far, it seems to prove out what I’ve always thought about these type of games. That is that multi playing is a must have; but not at the expense of a very excellent AI for single playing.

I voted as single player scenario. That is only because I have not enjoyed the early war parts of campaigns since early war armor is not so interesting to me. Currently I am working on a custom Eastern Front campaign series that will take Germany from post Stalingrad through to the Urals if successful and back to Germany through Belarus, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Latvia, Memel, etc. if unsuccessful. There are a plethora of good battles and armor engagements that have never been covered in PZC on the Eastern Front. I will be including them with historically feasible/plausible (believable) and theoretically possible victories in the East post Kursk. The losses on the campaign tree are based on the actual battles as the Germans retreated back to the West.

Typically my maps are around 90-130 hexes on either side (from 5 KM to 7 KM per hex) and will allow for both German and Soviet as the attacker and are all based on historical relevance and Google Earth Satellite images. I have completed three of them and expect to do another 8 or maybe even 10 of them if I don't burn myself out making them. Three of them will be my versions of Moscow 43, Kursk and Bagration. I will also have one map of the breakthrough of the siege of Leningrad by Army Group North and the Finns. My maps are all based on Google Satellite pictures and to be honest most of the hexes in each one are some sort of physical characteristic besides "clear". In other words 95% of the hexes have something put in them. This may be too much detail for some people, but it makes the battlefield look quite good during play. The individual scenarios have usually 60 or more core units for the Axis and 80 or more for the Soviets. I believe with enough equipment tweaking and prestige tweaking, a person can reach the historically accurate 2 or 3 to one ratio of Soviet Armor over German armor and still have the Germans able to manage a victory of some sort.

As a single player on these maps and scenarios, I can fight with my Tigers, Panthers, Stugs, PzJagers, PzIV's, JS2, JS3 and T34's until they all reach the Urals or the Brandenburg gate and I can take as long as I like getting to either place. I just finished my Ural map and am very excited about exploring the scenario variables for "TANKOGRAD" as I have named it.

single player just like to play against the ai this way i can save it when i want to.play when i want to.my only mp is mohaa.Also in sp you can continue the battle in a senario its over.but no all games are like that ive played blitzkrieg and your doing good winning and then because its historical you cant win.panzercorps is what if kinda game loves these type.

I voted single player campaign, but, I would likely prefer it was a multiplayer vote

Single Player,when life lets me