Panzer Corps 2 Reviews

[Lifever]

If we look at reviews, we can't help but notice less than stellar reviews from various media sites.
i.e 75% is considered weak in our stuffed, sensation thirsty society.

Of course the media today is a shell of its influence and glory.
Of course it doesn't matter. People who want it buy anyways. Competition is barely existent. It can still be a moderate success - business wise - in its tiny little niche

We are aware and weary of that stance
It is a proven loser attitude on multiple accounts.

Also old news: games are not measured by equal standards.

Mindless mainstream game + new graphics = great new release
Stellar proven game + new graphics = old news right after release

We have to question if the media has been threatened properly by Slitherine brass

[nexusno2000]

I read some of these, and they were mostly positive.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/panzer-corps-2

Turn-based wargames aren't for everyone, but in many ways, PC2 is the most accessible such game there is.

[MickMannock]

Turn-based wargames aren't for everyone, but in many ways, PC2 is the most accessible such game there is.

I'd very much second that. If one would want to dip their toe into the genre (and doesn't mind the World War 2 setting), PC2 is a very good start.

[ahtf]

Well, its average is above 80% were most good-great games end up.
Over 90 is usually only games with unique storytelling and good gameplay. A ww2 war game will never end up there, and probably shouldn’t.

I think the reviews are really positive.

[Lifever]

I read some of these, and they were mostly positive.

https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/panzer-corps-2

Turn-based wargames aren't for everyone, but in many ways, PC2 is the most accessible such game there is.

Italian reports are good...
Even the aggrevated score in your intel is good.

Personally I just want to see this game as the pinnacle of its genre.
It is about the perception of that quality outside its peers.

It is also relevant for its success as esports platform. People hear of a game and google it.
If they see awards, they immediately think: Oh... I missed that. My bad...
If they see mediocre, they think: Ah, no wonder I didn't know. Not worth looking into.

The modest expectation hovers around 80-85%.

[Wodin]

We don't give a score over at AWNT. I see them as pretty useless to be honest. The review should tell you if it's a good game without need of a score. I mean what game are they comparing it to to give it say 75%??

[terje439]

I mean what game are they comparing it to to give it say 75%??

I think what some are reacting to (and is what made me no buy the game) is that it seems like PC1 and OOB had a baby. It is neither PC1 nor OOB but a hybrid.
Just my thoughts from the outside and after reading some reviews.

[Rudankort]

I think what some are reacting to (and is what made me no buy the game) is that it seems like PC1 and OOB had a baby. It is neither PC1 nor OOB but a hybrid.
Just my thoughts from the outside and after reading some reviews.

Could you please elaborate on this statement, because I'm really clueless every time I hear this. I did not look at OoB all that much while working on PzC2, and although they belong to the same subgenre (you know, WW2 turn-based hex-based operational level beer and pretzel wargames) I'm not sure why you think it's so similar, and also why it is necessarily bad.

[terje439]

Firstly;
I did not mean to say PC2 is bad, I just made a comment on what I have noticed from reviews and from youtube/twitch from PC2.

Why it is neccessarily bad;
-that depends on who you ask. Loads of people love OoB and for them it is certainly not bad. But for those of us that hoped for a continuation of the PC1 build, it is not stellar. And for those of us that does not enjoy OoB that much, it is not great at all.

What makes it feel like OoB in some cases?
-the surround mechanics
-the "3 tigers = 7 PzIIIs" system

are the biggest two for me.

If you look at PC1 and PC2 they are very different in many aspects, that is not neccessarily bad, however for those that wanted an enhanced PC1 this is not the game as it changes alot (like supression "only" AD and Arty) etc.
So, some people (me included) expected/hoped PC2 to be sort of a continuation of the PG -> PG2-3-etc -> PC1 line, wheras this from what I can judge (again from what I have seen in streams and from peoples comments) steps away from that line.

Not sure if that made it any clearer.

Terje

[PoorOldSpike]

Hi devs, the game runs fine for me but aargh, the Random Battle Generator sometimes gives us a computer opponent who's the same nationality as ourselves. (Pages 14/15 of the manual confirm this).
Suggestion- in the next version update please include an option that lets us choose what nationality we want the computer opponent to be.

[Kiane]

I think what some are reacting to (and is what made me no buy the game) is that it seems like PC1 and OOB had a baby. It is neither PC1 nor OOB but a hybrid.
Just my thoughts from the outside and after reading some reviews.

Could you please elaborate on this statement, because I'm really clueless every time I hear this. I did not look at OoB all that much while working on PzC2, and although they belong to the same subgenre (you know, WW2 turn-based hex-based operational level beer and pretzel wargames) I'm not sure why you think it's so similar, and also why it is necessarily bad.

You don't? I was sure you took inspiration from it!

As well as what was previously mentioned, the experience system works exactly the same as OOB. As in, no longer relevant to overstrength.

[Patrick Ward]

You don't? I was sure you took inspiration from it!

As well as what was previously mentioned, the experience system works exactly the same as OOB. As in, no longer relevant to overstrength.

lol.

Just because something is supperficially similar, doesn't mean its the same or that it was copied. If anything its a natural progression from Panzercorps 1.

If you know anything about the shared history of Panzercorps 1 and OoB you could also assume that OoBs implementation was likewise a natural progression from PzC1. Picture OoB and Panzercorps 2 as two branches from Panzercorps 1 and maybe you'll understand why there are similarities. However I can see more aspects of Civilization in PzC2 than I can of OoB.

No game is an island or develops out of nothing.

Pat

[Patrick Ward]

Reviews are essential for visibility and we always ask that you provide them.

But personally, they don't bother me too much. It's nice to get good ones ( though apparently I've never been able to handle a compliment ). While not everyones opinion is valid, the bad ones, often being more detailed and colourful, can be the most useful.

On the whole, the genuine reviews ( as opposed to the ones that look more like fake news stories - you know the ones ) for a niche, turn based wargame have been great and will get better over time as we add, improve and fix. The current 84 on Metacritic is awesome. A great start.

meta critic 84.JPG (17.9 KiB) Viewed 3606 times

Pat

[kissofpain]

First of all I am not sure why people compare this game with OOB and even PzC when the big elephant in the room is Panzer General 2? Besides some minor changes, it's exactely the same but with modern 3d graphics. The only major difference that I don't even really mind is we don't have range 2 tanks. Other than this, same old.

By this I don't mean it's bad, it's quite good actually. I loved PG2 and I love PC2. But please, don't pretend it's something else other than a reskin of an old game.

And this brings me to the next point. While PG1&2 have been amazing 10/10* games because they were so fresh at their time, PC2 is just a copy. Is it good? Yes. Do I recommend it? Yes. But can I give it 10 stars? No, because it's the same as a 20 years old game.

This being said, I would give PC2 a solid 8.

[Appren]

Steam sadly suffers from not being able to give a "neutral" review, so sometimes you just have to use negative if you want to show that you arent satisfied, even if you dont think the game is really bad. I haven't reviwed on steam yet myself, and not really sure whether I'd give a thumb up or down if I did, since I'm not really happy with it, but then again, I think it will be better in the future.

What am I not happy with?
- First off, the game for me generally feel too arcade'ish, but I'm sure thats a design decision to attract new customers, and not really a good/bad thing other than personal taste.
- Random battle: I love the addition, but the setup options are way too limited.
- Air changes: I am not really a fan, personally I'd either return to Pzc1, or just give fighters an intercept range and auto intercept ability within that, like some other games do.
- Crash bugs: I have a few, but I am sure these will be patched out soon, so not too fussed about it.
- User interface: Feels clunky, and the unit list? What is up with that? Why does it open automatically, and take up SO much space?
- Map sizes and force size: Incredibly small, makes a lot of the early battles seem very arcadey, and easy. I haven't got to the late game yet, I expect they will increase some.
- Force limit system: Not really negative in itself, but the limit increase on some of the overstrengths seem a bit harsh (no big dealbreaker though)
- Grand campaign for me seems far too short (from watching others play, not finished campaign), and its very obvious they want you to buy more DLCs soon to fleshen out the experience.

[Rudankort]

What makes it feel like OoB in some cases?

You don't? I was sure you took inspiration from it!

OK thx. I did not realize that changing certain mechanics to the way countless of games worked before either PzC or OoB even appeared would be considered a step towards OoB in particular, but at least now I know what you guys mean. Well this does sound like you are wary about changes. I can totally understand it. But I've made two games (PG Forever and Panzer Corps) with mechanics very close to Panzer General, and it was time to move on. You did not expect me to spend 10 years of my life doing the same game again and again? So, Panzer Corps has been changed in the way which I personally consider an improvement. Many people will disagree and it's fine, but I suggest to give it a try. I know very well from experience that it is hard to evaluate game mechanics theoretically. You need to try to play with them. So who knows? Maybe it won't look so much "OoB", after all.

[ErissN6]

I really like all the feature changes.
What I dislike is that it's more old PanzerGeneral3D : With PC2 I always plays in strategical map, as 3D map is both too small for strategic feeling and too I don't see well the units, blanding in landscape.
So, moreover than not very well conceived, it feels beta release as their are bugs with strategic map, like the one preventing from going to 3D view (with just zoom on the 'paper' map) or using planes.

So, if 3D view could be more unzoomed, with units far more visible, it should remove this bad conception.
However, it's theorically my prefered 'PG game', once patched.

[kissofpain]

You did not expect me to spend 10 years of my life doing the same game again and again?

Truth be told, you didn't change much, either.

[Kerensky]

So, if 3D view could be more unzoomed, with units far more visible, it should remove this bad conception.

Increase model scale in settings.
Options -> display/ui -> Unit Size

Default makes them tiny. I scale them up to 80 and it looks way better, definitely not losing any units in any terrain at those sizes.

[ErissN6]

Default model makes them tiny. I scale them up to 80 and it looks way better, definitely not losing any units in any terrain at those sizes.
Increase model scale in settings: Options -> display/ui -> Unit Size

Thanks. However it's still not unzoomed enough, I still play only in strategic map. I only go 3D when the game bugs and I can't choose terrain unit under a plane.