Slitherine

OK, played the demo and it looks a lot like PG (which I played obsessively when it came out nearly 20 years ago), so I have to ask:

1) Is it TOO much like PG?

2) Are the scenarios too often a case of "attack, attack, attack" without having to respond to enemy moves like PG - are there also challenging defensive battles?

3) Does the AI do the things that it did in PG, that is: buying the cheapest-ass things it can, garrisoning the map from left-to-right, not attacking hard enough?

4) Do any of the AI problems that existed in some of PG's sequels (most notably, not moving artillery units in Pacific General and PG II) exist in PC?

Basically I want to buy this game and the DLCs, but I'd like peace of mind about the above.

Hi Fanboi,
What are you waiting for??? Panzer Corps is the only game I've ever bought that I still play practically every day 18 months later. I also used to enjoy PG, and graphically the games are similar. The answers to your specific questions, in my opinion, are:

1. It is like PG, but probably more in terms of graphics. The designers have pushed the boundaries a whole lot further that the original game.

2. While it is true that there are probably more attacking scenarios, there are also some very tough defensive scenarios. I've only played the Balaton scenario once, and that was on Lt. level, but I got absolutely thrashed.

3. No, the AI is much more sophisticated. It is still somewhat predictable, but still plays a challenging game.

4. Not that I've noticed, but don't take my word on that.

Buy the game and the DLCs, check the forum for extra mods and campaigns (most notably those by nikivdd, although there are many others - check out the stuff at Design Mod Project also) - it's the best money you'll ever spend!

If you loved PG, you will probably love PzC. You might find the main ("vanilla") game too reminiscent of PG (I did), but the longer-form DLCs are another matter altogether. They are extremely challenging and, as yo move through the series, you find yourself increasingly on the defensive against hopeless odds. Even early on, there are quite a few pitched battles that involve hang-by-the-nail defense for much of the scenario. Another poster some time ago put it very well, along these lines: "In the vanilla game, the enemy's goal is to prevent you from reaching your objectives. In the DLCs, he is out to destroy your forces."

Thanks a lot for the feedback guys, one more question - if Afrika Korps is a stand-alone game, does that mean it includes everything Panzer Corps vanilla does? Or should I get both Afrika Korps and PzC?

As someone else who played PG obsessively for many years I wouldn't hesitate to reccomend buying PzC and associated DLC.

1. It is alot like what a sequal to PG *should* have been, but weren't. In otherwords where changes have been made they have generally been improvements: adding PGII recon movement while reducing air recon for example increased the viability of recon units. Giving the 88 the option to switch between AA and AT modes makes it a usefull addition to the core. Captured units, medals, minor stat bonus granting leaders, etc have all served to increase the flexibility and immersion of the basic game.

Having said that the "perfect" computer game hasn't been created yet. There are 4 fairly different campaigns (Vanilla, Afrika, East, West) so far which vary in scale and scope - they may not all be your cup of tea. For example I felt the vanilla campaign followed the original PG campaign too closely and rather than being bigger and better was smaller and more bland IMO. Conversely the Eastern DLC has finally supplanted the original PG campaign as my favorite 5-Star experience. The DLCs tend to have more varied goals above and beyond simply capturing cities including destruction (or preservation) of specific units, capturing enemy officers, escorting friendly forces, moving sufficient troops to a given locations, etc.

Keep in mind the game still relies upon cumulative core strength deployed into fixed scenarios with detrimental impact on late campaign balance. Fortunately the ability to mod difficulty has been added which give greater scope to keep the game challenging/interesting.

2. Depends on the campaign. In the DLC East at least there is usually 1 defensive scenario per year until 43 when the number increases to 50%+ defensive battles. Generally even in many of the offensive scenarios the AI will counterattack somewhere, forcing you temporarily on the defensive in part of the map. Similarly in the defensive scenarios achieving a Decisive victory will frequently require counter attacking to recover lost objectives.

3. & 4. What computer game has truly competant AI? Like any AI it has it's "strengths" and weaknesses. It's better on defense than on offense. It does have a certain predictability about it and given that PzC still relies upon premade scenarios subsequant playthroughs are unlikely to offer much in the way of surprises. It doesn't spam spawn quite as badly as PG did and in the DLC the designers have had the ability to specify AI reinforcements to give a more realistic mix. This is used to best effect by supplying continual air reinforcements to keep your fighters and AA occupied compared to PG where once you dealt with the original wave you owned the sky for the rest of the game.

It does move it's artillery and can use it to effect... or not. Likewise it doesn't maximize the potential for the mass combat bonus. It is somewhat vunerable to ambushes, or trapping it's own units and occasionally does stupid things like moving out of ammo units ajacent to enemy units instead of resupplying them.

On the otherhand given that the appeal of the game is to grow and develope your core force having a ruthless AI using the *current permanent death mechanics* would probably not be most people's idea of fun.

It *can* deliver a reasonable challenge as long as you're aware that it's ability to do so relies in part upon what your core consists of - i.e. if you're going to use an all Tiger/Panther core then expect the game to be easier *unless* you mod the difficulty to compensate.

FOARP wrote:Thanks a lot for the feedback guys, one more question - if Afrika Korps is a stand-alone game, does that mean it includes everything Panzer Corps vanilla does? Or should I get both Afrika Korps and PzC?

If your goal is to play AK and the DLCs, you can skip the vanilla game--AK includes the basic game engine required for the DLCs. AK is more PG-like than the DLCs, but less PG-like than the vanilla game, so that might well be a good place to start.

Definitely. I decided to buy Panzer Corps vanilla, at the beginning of January. I am now on the 1941 DLC. Thoroughly enjoying the experience. I will also be buying Afrika Corps. Best money I have spent on games.

just for the PBEM++ it is worth it. It allows to play against other humans in very convenient way.

wait till you learn how to play against a Human, that's where true skills are.

http://www.panzer-club.com/haupttabelle ... index.html

FOARP wrote:Thanks a lot for the feedback guys, one more question - if Afrika Korps is a stand-alone game, does that mean it includes everything Panzer Corps vanilla does? Or should I get both Afrika Korps and PzC?

I'm not sure if you get to play the vanilla campaign if you *only* have AK, which otherwise is IMO the better choice if you have to decide between the two. Maybe ask the devs.

Or make everyone happy and buy both vanilla PzC and AK to circumvent the prob

If you buy AK but not the main game, you can play AK and the DLCs but NOT the main (vanilla) campaign, nor the tutorial that comes with it. Given that the OP is a PG veteran, however, the tutorial would be little more than a refresher (personally, I never finished it), and he can always purchase the main game later if he wants to. I suggested "AK first" merely as a way to save a few bucks when testing the waters.

A minor correction: PzC tutorial IS available in Afrika. Only the vanilla Panzer Corps Wehrmacht campaign is not included in AK (which is logical).

FOARP, I recommend the 1940 DLC.

It's one of my favorites, you are invading France and it is not yet THAT difficult but you have really amazing cool battles. Wassigny and Arras were mentioned a lot in this forum, very cool scenarios with interesting objectives.

AfriKa Korps has very cool scenarios right from the start and is more difficult than the Panzer General style campaign of Panzer Corps.

You will notice that the team behind Panzer Corps not only copied the original maps but really improved them. But the quality and detail of the DLCs and AfriKa Korps really puts the default campaign to shame. They take Panzer General to the next level. I loved Panzer General but Panzer Corps is WAY better and eliminates many flaws of the original.

The AI doesn't spam cheap units, mostly because there are not really super cheap units. The AI isn't too good, but it knows how to kill a unit when the opportunity arises. With scripting in some scenarios it gives you a very good challenge, especially in the DLCs.


I would start with Panzer Corps default to get a feeling, then download the DLCs or Afrika Korps to learn the hard way that you are not as good as you think you are! That's what happened to me, hehe...

@FOARP
I guess nearly every person on this forum who is over 30 is/was huge PG fan, myself including. For me the original PG game was the greatest WWII strategy game ever and that was the main reason, for me, behind purchasing PC (I just couldn't play PG on Vista or Win7). PC turned out to be far beyond any expectations I have ever had before purchasing this game and DLCs just make it sooo much more fun! I play it since October 12 and can't stop having at least 1h daily with my PC game , so to sum it up if you are PG fan you will enjoy playing Panzer Corps!

piotrekxg exactly, my Allied General/Panzer General for Windows stuff didn't run on Windows 7 and I was desperate.

I was highly sceptical of Panzer Corps and overjoyed as it turned out so good!