Slitherine

The recent news of the Panzer General browser-based game has sent me through a roller coaster of emotions. While I'm happy to see SOMETHING, anything, I think the Panzer General series is officially dead, and here's why:

1 - Panzer General is for men. Men made of hardened steel and iron. Browser based games are for children. Children who cannot comprehend the raw, brutality of war. The browser-based genre is for games like Farmville and all those crappy Facebook games that I have blocked.

2 - Some would say that Panzer Corps is the successor to Panzer General. I say hell no! Slitherine and Matrix are nice companies, and I own many of their games. I applaud them for being a reasonable outlet for many small game developers who would otherwise never be published. With all due respect to Slith/Matrix, their games are not breaking any graphical barriers - Germany at War: Barbarossa 1941, eeeek. While I tend to play games for gameplay and content, sometimes I just want a nice looking, visually appealing game like Wargame: Airland Battle or Company of Heroes (Blitzkrieg Mod)

3 - Ubisoft owns the rights to Panzer General. This was news to me, and frankly I'm shocked that there was someone in the Ubisoft organization who was smart enough to buy the rights to PG. I dont see Ubisoft as a game developer, I see them a corporation that is looking to make tons of money. Ubisoft will NEVER publish Panzer General. Mark my words! PG just isnt the type of game that fits the Ubisoft bill; It will never make a 7-figure profit like the Assassins Creed, or Tom Clancy franchise of games. Therefore I dont see Ubisoft having any interest in spending money to develop a Panzer General.

4 - Whatever this 'game' is, it is not Panzer General.


Your thoughts?

Wargaming isn't dead, but, give it enough time I eventually will be. I was in my teens when I started, and wargaming began as something played on a table be it miniatures or pieces of card board.

The thing is, I am a wargamer, and wargaming is meant to entertain me, and if I want my son to be a wargamer, I need to entertain him, or the inevitable will happen, the hobby dies with me.

I like wargames to look like wargames. And Battlefield and Call of Duty and just about anything that looks like Command and Conquer regardless of whether you ever need to farm resources or not, is not a wargame as I know them. If the game has a health bar, it isn't a wargame. In the 80s we called them arcade games. I loved playing arcade games in the 80s by the way.

I like PG and I was happy to see them rebuild it as PC ie Panzer Corps. but really, as easy to play and as elegantly simple looking as it is, it is only really part of the way to being a true wargame. Because true wargames are not about playing the idiot AI. I think it is unfortunate that so many demand an AI opponent. Myself, I'd rather just accept there is no one playing against me, and to play both sides, like I do with my board games.

I still prefer ASL over any form of squad level computer wargame simulation.
I still prefer Panzer Leader over anything platoon level.
I have oodles of operational level board games that are actually more fun.
And I have yet to see a single game of grand strategy even get close to Advanced Third Reich.

I recently read a comment on the Matrix boards that has me wondering, if I should just stick to my Europa board games instead of Gary's design. Because regardless of how much of a nuisance the map is in Fire in the East, my opponent will not be pulling any cheesy crap on me due to a design gaffe in logic no one was able to see during the play test mainly as beta testing monster games is nearly impossible (within a years time at least).

As for the comment PG is for men, speak for yourself sunshine I personally think real wargamers, are likely well versed in running VASSAL software and don't even play computer wargames.

Lately I have been wondering, if I should actually be playing table top and just might invest in going with a 72nd scale approach, as I am also a very skilled model maker.

Well I wont buy wihtout an AI..the whole reason I got into PC games in the early eighties was that you didn't need someone else to play against. I could play games I had an interest in wihtout needing it find a like minded person. Also I'm one of those people who gets beaten by the AI in many games. Wihtout an AI I would no longer buy or play wargames..simple.

That is essentially a sad thing, because some of the best in wargaming, has nothing to do with the AI.

Everyone for instance will agree on how much we want Steel Panthers reborn, and yet the AI in the long campaign portion of the program is retarded. As the German player, you buy 150mm arty, and you buy 88s, and the infantry in the tracks is really just maid service. You buy a few tanks for the fun of driving them around, but the 150s kill everything in general with the 88s able to kill virtually anything that gets through. And as these two options are available in 39 and all the way through, well there is no time when you can't recreatively wipe out anything and everything. It's dreadfully boring.

Close Combat, easily a fanatic favourite, with an AI though that is a moron. Pathing that is predictably useless.

Combat Mission the third of the perfect trio, and the AI in it is also known for being lame.

Those games are only famous from their human vs human battles. No one is every going to call these games 'great' because of the AI.

I grew to love Battle Academy ONLY because in the beginning, the player vs player environment was so superior to anything I had experienced before. Turns take about 3-5 minutes, and the only thing preventing you from playing a game to conclusion in an hour is if you or the other person refuse to actually sit for an hour and actually play the game. If for instance I insist on cleaning my house at the same time, the game could take hours longer to play.

The only reason I play computer wargames, is they don't occupy a table for the duration of the game, and in the 70s, that might mean days weeks months who knows.
I have never once played a computer game or even non wargame type games based on the AI meaning I didn't need someone else.

But being a long time wargamer, and having played games since Tactics II and used to being both sides and casually perfecting my style of play, I have never really needed an AI even if playing solo. I prefer a real opponent of course, as spontaneous is not easy to do to yourself

But some gamers are obstinate about the darndest of things. Some refuse to play without hexes or turns (like me), some refuse to buy full price, some are diehard must have an 'official' cd mailed to them types, some have obsessions with manuals. To me, a great game must be capable of mimicing a board game, or I will stick with the board game. I measure ALL squad tactical against Squad Leader. I measure all platoon tactical against Panzer Blitz/Leader, and I measure all operational against games like Fortress Europe and Russian Campaign. Grand Strategy has to be as good as Advanced Third Reich or I lose some interest.

In the end, I require a game that can challenge me, feel like the real event, be about the game mechanics not the game components and have realism without an obsession with visual appeal. I don't need animations, and I don't require 3d, and I don't need a pretense of real time which won't be because as I recall, WW2 took 6 years measured from 39 to 45, and occurred in actual minutes and actual days with actual day time and night time portions. Thus in real time, you actually have two phases per increment, that each last 12 actual real life hours. There is no speed up function and no days off. If you played a real time strategy, that portrayed WW2 and lasted a day's playing, you were playing a lie.

Panzer General isn't dead. It isn't for men, I was a teenager when I started wargaming, not an old person.
Tactics II was immensely fun, took minutes to understand, and can still run circles around War in the East for value.

Wodin, you are not a wargamer by the sounds of things no offense meant. You description matches an arcade gamer.
I own Company of Heroes. Nice game. Wish I had the eyesight to enjoy it better. Not sure why I bought it. Likely more money than brains that day Probably the same reason I bought War in the East.

I am currently hearing a voice I have not heard since the 90s bugging me to stop playing computer wargames and go back to real ones.
They don't have opponents provided in the box, but they also don't rely on stupid AIs either.

Hi!

I think PG is not dead but alive along with the other Generals. OpenGeneral, for example, not just a reborn of PG but the base of endless possibilities! It even have lots of game aspects of the PeG game!
And the best part that it came with an editor and free!

And there is Panzers: phase one & phase two. They are good WW2 games (though RTS not TBS games). But true, in game feeling nothing could even close the original Panzer General 1&2! They were the bests! Etalons!

Or at least this is my opinion...

I've enjoyed Panzer General and if they'd port Panzer Corps to Mac I'd probably enjoy it as well. I don't remember PG as being a simulation of the brutality of war. I remember it as a race to see how fast you can beat a map. It was great!

I don't think it's dead at the moment, though. I think it was dead or nearly dead for a while, but it looks to me like it's back.

There've been some sweeping statements about game AI in this thread, but I don't have those issues myself. I like playing against the AI, just like I like playing my friends, and sometimes I even enjoy playing all sides. I've yet to encounter a computer wargame without imbalances. They aren't like chess and knowing how to exploit a game doesn't mean you have to exploit that game and I certainly wouldn't (and don't) if it would hurt my own enjoyment of the game. Some can't help themselves when they know something is "not right" it drives them nuts and that's cool. Happily that's just not me. And perhaps that makes me easier to entertain and that's not a bad thing in my book!

The new Civil War II game by AEGOD has some decent AI tweaking and ability.

Most games rely on AI-Cheat to make it a "challenge." Cheating AI bores me.

I also grew up as a teenager in the 70s playing real wargames - boardgames and even miniatures.

I enjoyed PG, AG, PGF, SP, the Jane's Combat series and CFS2. PzC is also fun.

Then multiplayer came out for other games which I tried, but too many 12 year olds joined and I found I preferred playing against the AI. Besides, the AI never quits, doesn't complain when I feel like cheating, is always ready to play when I want to and doesn't need an online connection.

I find the SSG series most enjoyable because of the AI. Their older series of The Ardennes Offensive 2.04 is challenging (runs only on win98, so you need microsoft VM) as well as their dos version of Complete Carriers at War

Yes, graphics are crap, but the immersion is fabulous.

Wow, I come onto Slitherine forums after like years, and one of my first views is a 5 year old necrothread

Dude, what inspired you to resurrect this thread?

I was browsing through the various threads and came across this one that was interesting.

The first post ended with this question: Your thoughts?

Since this was the first time I had read it and the thread appeared to be timeless, I responded.

MikeAP wrote:Panzer General series is officially dead

MikeAP wrote:Your thoughts?

Yeah, well...

ab067 wrote:I was browsing through the various threads and came across this one that was interesting.

The first post ended with this question: Your thoughts?

Since this was the first time I had read it and the thread appeared to be timeless, I responded.

Well, when you consider all that is Panzer Corps Gold, and they are working on PC2, I think if Panzer General is dead, so what is an acceptable response.

I also have no desire to play Civilization 1 and Heroes of Might and Magic 1 as well. Both fabulous games in their day.

But their day came and went and have been gone for a very long time too.

so what is an acceptable response?


When it is deleted from your HD and you don't play it anymore.

MrsWargamer said,“That is essentially a sad thing, because some of the best in wargaming, has nothing to do with the AI.”

The situation with wargaming is because it’s almost esoteric that is not everyone wants to play them especially with a convoluted/extensive rules booklet.

This is/was why Avalon Hill designed the “play by mail system” so there would be other players, when computers came out there was no (not including bbs) internet so games were developed with al/two player with same computer or solitaire...when internet finally arrived it opened international play but with having a computer playing the game when no one else is around can add to utilizing different strategies when offline...al is important in that way.