CMx1 vs PCK

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
It's kinda funny how one group wants realistic spotting, but, don't care for the realism of 1:1 encounters and statistics. Yall sorta pick n choose your realism settings instead of going for the whole pie.

I think its funny that some people want health bars on the tank armor and gun penetration values but want to digitize infantry squad health.

I didn't see anyone propose "health bars" - let's just agree to disagree on this, ok Rav and Mobius?

That is because the forum only keeps 1 year of posts. The thread on that was on the Winter Storm board but was over a year ago so I couldn't link to it. My memory is longer than the boards.

[ravinhood]

I still want borg spotting I think the way the spotting is now just makes the game more "complex" and less fun to play. I'm playing my nth card on realism here. Why not use also like Perfect General "A hit equals Kill". I mean let's make it real simplistic and FUN right? Just bang hit kill don't have to program armor penetration values then either. I think it's rather funny to represent a squad of infantry and nothing happens to it until it is completely destroyed in the way of eye feedback. Even in a board wargame you get counter flips for step loss. Oh well that's in another game that's right...it wasn't "important" enough for this one.
 
Nice Example: I have 10 animated units in my squad....bang bang they take a step loss I still have 10 animanted units marching forward...bang bang they take another step loss, but, I still have 10 animanted units now running for cover or retreating....then bang bang...the unit is broken, but, there's still TEN animated units now shouting from memory of Monty Pythons Holy Grail "Runaway Runaway".....then one final bang bang....and my 10 animated lil figures finally do something....they ALL fall down dead. lmao. I'm sorry, but, I don't care what version the game is that's just silly rediculous modeling of infantry. Even minatures don't play like that when there are unit reductions you REMOVE some unit PIECES from the stand.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
I still want borg spotting I think the way the spotting is now just makes the game more "complex" and less fun to play.

Tell me that's a joke? If not, I just really have to disagree. The relative spotting to me is a huge part of Panzer Command's fun. But, you haven't played it in Kharkov yet. In Winterstorm, it wasn't easy to "see" what each individual unit was actually seeing. In Kharkov it is - I think you'll find it more fun and less complex in this release.

I'm playing my nth card on realism here. Why not use also like Perfect General "A hit equals Kill". I mean let's make it real simplistic and FUN right? Just bang hit kill don't have to program armor penetration values then either. I think it's rather funny to represent a squad of infantry and nothing happens to it until it is completely destroyed in the way of eye feedback. Even in a board wargame you get counter flips for step loss. Oh well that's in another game that's right...it wasn't "important" enough for this one.

[8|]

Nice Example: I have 10 animated units in my squad....bang bang they take a step loss I still have 10 animanted units marching forward...bang bang they take another step loss, but, I still have 10 animanted units now running for cover or retreating....then bang bang...the unit is broken, but, there's still TEN animated units now shouting from memory of Monty Pythons Holy Grail "Runaway Runaway".....then one final bang bang....and my 10 animated lil figures finally do something....they ALL fall down dead. lmao. I'm sorry, but, I don't care what version the game is that's just silly rediculous modeling of infantry. Even minatures don't play like that when there are unit reductions you REMOVE some unit PIECES from the stand.

It has nothing to do with the _modeling_ of infantry. It has everything to do with additional _animation work_. I guess it may be the same thing to you, but the actual modeling is sound, it's just the one visual element that you feel is unacceptable. Fair enough, but as I already said, not in for this release, on our list for the future. Note that the icons for that unit do show its losses.

Regards,

- Erik

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

I'm sorry, but, I don't care what version the game is that's just silly rediculous modeling of infantry.

I don't see the graphics that are used to depict an infantry squad impacting the unit modeling at all. In the same vane, do you consider NATO symbols to be inferior to drawn figures on cardboard counters? It almost sounds like you're pestering Erik over an eye-candy issue.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[ravinhood]

Note that the icons for that unit do show its losses.

 
Wait a minute are you saying some units will fall or disappear as the whole unit takes step losses? Or are you just resaying what I've said above that yeah the unit shows losses when the WHOLE unit is destroyed?? Because that's been all I've been asking for in the first place is that the unit shows losses of lil men as it takes step losses?? Is this what will happen?? IE: Unit has 5 men it takes a step loss will 1 of those men look like it's been killed and lay dead on the ground or will the unit still have 5 men represented after a step loss? Describe what the unit will look like after each step loss please. I may be using the word animation in the wrong sense. I just want a man or two to either disappear or show dead on the ground after step losses. That's all I've ever been asking for.

[Stridor]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Note that the icons for that unit do show its losses.

Wait a minute are you saying some units will fall or disappear as the whole unit takes step losses? Or are you just resaying what I've said above that yeah the unit shows losses when the WHOLE unit is destroyed?? Because that's been all I've been asking for in the first place is that the unit shows losses of lil men as it takes step losses?? Is this what will happen?? IE: Unit has 5 men it takes a step loss will 1 of those men look like it's been killed and lay dead on the ground or will the unit still have 5 men represented after a step loss? Describe what the unit will look like after each step loss please. I may be using the word animation in the wrong sense. I just want a man or two to either disappear or show dead on the ground after step losses. That's all I've ever been asking for.

The squad stays "3D model graphical whole". When you select a depleted squad you can see in it's icon box (bottom left) it's *exact* status. So this doesn't impact upon gameplay at all.

RH, I agree that it would be nice to see a 3D representation of men down, however this simply won't happen for this release. An update or sequel sure, but not for *this* release.

We are however working hard to improve the random battle / random campaign system something I know you will be pleased with [;)]

[ravinhood]

Ok thanks for clearing that up Stridor I'll drop it now since it's rather useless for this version. I guess I'm just surprised as you guys or the KOIOS guys rather are minature modelers that they wouldn't show some sort of graphical representation for step loss as a top priority thas all. Erik confused me when he said that it does show reduction, but, he didn't tell exactly how it worked as you did.

[Mobius]

Somebody obviously doesn't play miniatures. The figures on the stands are fixed. You don't break them off to indicate casualties. You mark casualties with pins, markers or on paper. NEVER harm the miniature stand!

Also, real men don't use bases on their AFVs.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

Orthodontic rubber-bands (1/4") work nicely to show a casualty.

You just slide it over the figure's weapon.

And no, players don't remove figures from their stands to denote a hit/kill.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Mad Russian]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

Somebody obviously doesn't play miniatures. The figures on the stands are fixed. You don't break them off to indicate casualties. You mark casualties with pins, markers or on paper. NEVER harm the miniature stand!

The most miniature intense game of all ASL didn't do squad reduction either. You didn't take an infantry squad counter off and replace it each time with one showing less men.

Also, real men don't use bases on their AFVs.

ROFL!!!!!

AFV's don't need bases on the board..you can actually SEE them...that might be why...

Try making them the size of a pinhead and then put them in the forest and trees on the map and see if you can find them.

Try to glue the penny sized coins on them so they can then be seen.

That's what you want us to do here......[:D]

All in good fun Mobius, not all of us will agree on any one issue at any given time.

RH has a preference for the 1:1 modeling but apparently not many others do. Alot of the rest of us seem to want bases but you don't seem to want to.

It's okay. The game mechanics are generally the most important. I don't think from what I've seen of RH's posts that if he wasn't interested in the game he would be making requests on how to improve it.

If the game mechanics was iwere bad and nobody was interested you wouldn't be getting requests for more and better graphics.

All the attention to the game series is a good thing I think. Whether we all agree what we want to see or not.

Good Hunting.

MR

[ravinhood]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

Somebody obviously doesn't play miniatures. The figures on the stands are fixed. You don't break them off to indicate casualties. You mark casualties with pins, markers or on paper. NEVER harm the miniature stand!

Also, real men don't use bases on their AFVs.

Well both of you obviously never played with the minatures we played with. There were 8 figures you PUT IN the stands and when the reduction called for elimination you removed a figure. Yup we made our own stands and figures bases for them so don't go thinking cause mainstream minatures only uses pins and markers (and rubber bands haha what a lousy elimination system) that that was the only way to play with minatures. Man some of you guys have no creative minds at all have you always lived in the retail world? lmao

[Erik Rutins]

Hey folks,

Just keep in mind that reasonable people can disagree - we're listening and we'll do our best to take all feedback into account for the next release, as we did for Kharkov with the Winterstorm feedback. There are always lots of ways to improve any game and we value all of your participation in that process.

Believe me, we are well aware and thankful for the fact that you all care enough about the game to post here and give us your suggestions and comments.

Regards,

- Erik

[jamespcrowley]

ORIGINAL: Stridor

We are however working hard to improve the random battle / random campaign system something I know you will be pleased with [;)]

Just in case any one missed this. Possibly the most exciting development in the PC saga.

[Grell]

Hi James,

Yes that is the selling point for me.

Regards,

Grell

[Erik Rutins]

... and that's exactly what we've been spending all this extra time on (the random campaigns) to make sure they are as good as possible since they were the last feature added. Thanks for your patience, we are really burning the midnight oil and working to wrap this all up ASAP.

[Staggerwing]

Erik,
What is the difference between a DX Edition and an ST edition?
Both style seem to be available in D/L and physical shipment.
For example, SPWOW (General edit) is a DX and OAOW3 ia an ST.

[Erik Rutins]

Because our catalog has a mix of games with and without printed manuals, we came up with edition logos to give our customers a quick way of finding out what a game includes. We've also added info to the game data regarding the manual and supported resolutions.

The Editions tell you what is included in the boxed version.

Digital Express Edition = Box + CD and PDF manual (NOT printed)
Standard Edition = Box + CD + Printed Manual (and PDF)
Collector's Edition = Box + CD + Color Printed Manual (and PDF)

Regards,

- Erik

[jamespcrowley]

Hi Grell

I'm an old (in every sense of the word) CM'er from way back when.

I've played countless scenarios solo; I've PBEM'd lots, done HtoH and some TCIP. But I've always gone back to Quick Battles. Random map, random units for both sides; do the best you can with what you've got against whatever the enemy has. You can't beat it!

Sometimes the random maps were poor, mostly average but some times really good. Sometimes the force mix was bizzare or dowright one sided (Romanian Infantry attacking German armour; was only going to end one way) but sometimes you got a really good fight, even with an indifferent A.I.

Realy looking forward to the PC iteration; I'm sure it's going to be excellent.

[madorosh]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Again, the biggest issue I see as a scenario designer is no map editor. I have at times spent months making historically accurate maps for my scenarios. Those that know of me in CM know my attention to details. That starts with a map. So far that is the only thing about PC that I don't really care for.

That's entirely understandable. It won't change for this release, but it will in the future. As I said above, in the meantime a SL/ASL design mindset is the one to use. There are a fair number of maps and when you look at them from different angles they can fit a remarkable number of situations closely, though of course not as precisely as a custom-made map. In testing the random battles though, with different orientations and force mixes on maps I thought I knew well, I keep finding new details and tactical considerations each time. I think there's a lot of replay value even with the set maps - enough to keep folks busy until we finish a map editor for the next release.

Regards,

- Erik

I've been thinking about this over and over - up until you compared the reuse of maps to SL/ASL, the random scenario generator and reuse of stock maps in the game made little sense to me, but I suppose since you express it in these terms, it makes a little more logical sense. Perhaps I'm thinking too much of my experience with Close Combat, whose maps and force mixes were tiny, but I never got very enthusiastic about reusing their maps in that manner since there was little you could do with them. Panzer Command maps are definitely bigger but also seem to have a fair bit of open ground (i.e. they are realistically modelled, unlike Squad Leader maps which were designed for effect and had 'unrealistic' concentrations of terrain, as I might add Combat Mission's randomly generated maps tend to).

The advantage of Squad Leader's geomorphic maps, aside from the closer concentration of cover terrain, was that you had a library of 51 different maps to choose from and could put them together in seemingly infinite combinations, so while the maps never changed, the ways you butted them together were quite creative.

Not to try and be argumentative. I'll be eagerly purchasing PC:K and trying the new scenario creation tools, given the larger force mixes, weather conditions, etc. With 2,000 ASL, PB, PG, Panzer (Yaquinto) and other scenarios sitting on my shelf I am thinking there should be some inspiration somewhere for one or two decent and reasonably well researched scenarios using the editor.

[thewood1]

Hey Michael, Is Steve from BFC going to chase you over here and berate you.
 
I am very interested in PCK, but saw that the ranges had been altered for tank guns at longer ranges, is that true, or were they refering to the miniature rules?