ORIGINAL: Rick
Mobius,
You aren't getting many specific answers - interesting.
Mobius will need to get used to it, especially as Panzer Command gets more and more open ended. I contributed 15-20% of the scenarios on the CM:Shock Force campaign release disc. I pretty much predicted before release that feedback would be minimal once people in the community got their hooks into the editor and started making their own. I thought there would at least be a "sweet spot" of a month or so where people would all be playing the same games and talking about the scenarios. Naturally the scenario designers were hoping to get some feedback - it's what scenario designers live for. But the poor state of release aside, we got a few one-liner comments, and mostly the community moved straight to making their own and talking about other things. I can't speak for the others, but I was disappointed not to have received much in the way of commentary on my scens - did get a couple of nice comments in passing, mostly noting that I had avoided using a lot of armour and focused on infantry, which made my scenarios stand out in a traditionally AFV-heavy CM line-up.
I don't think it is realistic to expect much in the way of raves regarding scenarios for games like PC. They simply don't happen, unless there are truly outstanding scenarios. To be honest, the PC scenarios all seemed a little too bland to be eye-catching. Solid work, to be sure, but nothing that would stand out as extra-ordinary. (I would rate my scenarios in CM:SF as bland and not eye-catching as well. Perhaps "workmanlike" is a better term.) And if there were true stand-outs, there are so many scenarios on the release, particulary if bundled with Winter Storm, and so many other random play options, that a small proportion of the community would likely have looked at any particular individual scenario, and an even smaller proportion would be predisposed to post in public about it, either because they don't bother with the forums at all, or because while they do post here, they don't feel inclined to talk about games they've played.
From long, hard experience, getting people to talk about "favourite scenarios" (i.e. fish for feedback) is like getting blood from a stone. It is frustrating, but it's the way it is.
Suggestion for future releases - have one "monster" map with some incredible eye-popping historical feature. The Grain Elevator in Stalingrad, or the Reichstag or the bridge at Arnhem. Even if it bends the capabilities of the game. Even if the scenario doesn't work that great. Guarantee yourself at least one scenario people will definitely be talking about. Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin did that with To the Volga - a Stalingrad scenario that was so huge it broke people's computers due to the number of units involved. And it's not like a Stalingrad map will ever be anything to write home about (not as it is rendered in CM where all the buildings look alike, especially once rubbled). I don't know anyone that actually played it to completion, but it created a lot of buzz and people still talk about it. Maybe set out to have at least one memorable scenario like that in the next release. Make a map that's only 400 metres wide, but 3 kilometres long for example, for another idea - like scenarios 11 and 12 from Squad Leader, fighting on a broad front or a narrow corridor. A stand-out or two like that would be fun, and moreover, memorable. I think the ability to have truly unique terrain features would be your greatest asset here - a Grain Elevator towering over the scenery in one scenario, even if the scenario was hugely unbalanced, would be something people would talk about - of course at risk of pushing the rest of the workmanlike scenarios even further into obscurity.
But that's the perils of releasing games with on-the-fly campaigns and random scen generators and map editors. I think the average CM player tried maybe 10% of the premade scenarios on the disc and immediately started hunting for user-made stuff that was more to his taste, or else just played quick battles. I did it myself, too. I think I played maybe 5% of the CM scenarios on any of the 3 releases, preferring random battles to premade ones. Don't know why, exactly. I think there are so many variables - don't want this amount of armour, don't like that nationality or troop type, that map is ugly, don't want to play in snow, etc. that gamers get picky.
CM also made titles memorable with their demo scenarios, hint hint. [:D] And I'm not lobbying for a demo so much as saying that playing Chance Encounter dozens of times waiting for release really soaked it into the public consciousness. I don't recall the names of a lot of CM scenarios, but some titles do stand out, and Chance Encounter is definitely one of them. I'd even recommend you take a brand new scenario and turn it into a demo rather than simply lifting from the existing scenario mix. Even better, once you have a way to provide a map editor - make it a contest. Let the community submit ideas for what they feel a perfect demo scenario would be, within the parameters you define, and see who can come up with something "catchy".
