Slitherine

As the beta for the first round of DLC campaigns winds down, I'm curious to see what my fellow testers feel regarding favorites out of the two.

I'll start by saying I'm hard pressed to pick which one is "better." They're both excellent in their respective ways. It has been a lot of fun (and an honor) testing both of these campaigns.

I like DLC 1941, but I'm hoping 1942 or 1943 will be the crowning achievements when they're ready.

Those years are the technological sweet spot of the war. There's enough equipment for lots of choice, where 1939 and 1940 are a little short in terms of amount of equipment, and 1944 and 1945 become slightly lopsided with the introduction of 'super' equipment like King Tigers, Jets, and things of that nature.

I like DLC 1941

I'm going to guess that campaign is already being developed.

BTW, 1941 was a pivotal year in the war. Considering the invasion of the Balkans, the arrival of German forces in North Africa, and of course the events of Barbarossa, how much coverage of the year's actions will fit into the 1941 DLC? Will it be a single campaign or perhaps two? Seems like there's an awful lot to fit into the existing 14-scenario DLC structure.

Afrika is not planned to be developed as part of the Grand Campaign DLCs. I don't have any information about Afrika to share at this time.
DLC 1941 focuses purely on the Balkans(4 scenarios) and Barbarossa(11 scenarios).

DLC 1941 focuses purely on the Balkans(4 scenarios) and Barbarossa(11 scenarios).

Sounds very promising... thank you for sharing this info, I can't wait to see what's waiting for us down the road.

Russia is big, it seems to have a problem with a lack of paved roads, and T34s, KV1s, and KV2 are tough nuts for early Panzer IIIs and IVs to crack.

Personally, i prefer DLC 39 .
1) I prefer a long campaign. If you start later, you lose x number of missions.
2) In Poland you can only capture one piece of artillery, but it is very interesting to include foreign equipment in the core group.
3) I can shape my core group more personal, and i don't like the core composition in DLC 1940.
4) The number of kills also count, the earlier you begin, the quicker they'll receive heroes and trades.

After playing Warsaw, I can't wait to see Stalingrad :p

On topic, I didn't vote as I have not finished the 1940 DLC

Warsaw makes other cities look like farms, Moscow will make Warsaw look like a village, and Stalingrad will look like a fitting grave for the German 6th Army.

That's the plan anyways.

Kerensky wrote:Warsaw makes other cities look like farms, Moscow will make Warsaw look like a village, and Stalingrad will look like a fitting grave for the German 6th Army.

That's the plan anyways.

I was wondering if some missions during operation Barbarossa will include axis minor units?

I like them both equally!

Early war 1939-1941 has always been better for me than late war - looking forward to the 1941 DLC and hope I get to be part of that too!

All will be revealed in good time.

Russia is big, it seems to have a problem with a lack of paved roads, and T34s, KV1s, and KV2 are tough nuts for early Panzer IIIs and IVs to crack.

I'm looking forward to traveling down those Russian roads!

Both campaigns are great.

1940

I think Kerensky explained nicely the "technological sweet spot" of the war.
1940 features more tanks and enemy airforce, the Polish selection of units can't compare and Panzer I/II aren't epic either.
It's actually a miracle that the Polish scenarios are that good given the very limited selection of units and lopsided situation.
1944 and 1945 will be indeed like an entirely different game due to uber tanks and fighters, and every unit being so damn expensive.
I often think the relative Prestige balance for objectives and victory hexes (50/100) is best in the 1941-1943 period.

So I agree, the mid war years have indeed the most gaming potential. Also historically the most interesting period.
1944 and 1945 will potentially be tough and defensive. Given how the French mauled me already I am kinda scared.
Market Garden and the Battle of the Bulge could be split in several scenarios, I think most will agree that the active/attacker role in Panzer Corps is a lot more fun against the AI. Kerensky did a wonderful job with the AI counterattacks in Poland and France. It's quite hard to set up such scenarios and even more so if the AI is supposed the attacker, we know how the AI liked to kill its army in Panzer General's defensive scenarios.

I liked the 1940 just a little more because of the naval units. Both are great. Can't wait for the mid-war scenarios.