What's next for Panzer Command?

[Toozasl]

Any future expansions planned? Hope so![&o]

[junk2drive]

It's Space Lobsters since BFC dropped the ball on that one.
 
You will like it as I assume in your screename asl means Tooz anything space lobsters [:D]

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: junk2drive
It's Space Lobsters since BFC dropped the ball on that one.

You must of read the flyer/[:D]
For a joke about 15 years ago I made up flyers for a game convention announcing a spoof game Lobstertron 401K.

[benpark]

It would be good to get a little news about where the next title might be headed, and what year period (if still WWII).

Also info about what the next patch might cover and when it will arrive would be greatly appreciated.

[Mobius]

I think the next full game will be ETO.  Probably 6/44 to the end of the war. 
I don't know what is to become of 1943-45 Eastern Front.  Probably that will be partially filled in with mods once the ETO engine expands the map size and adds new features. 
 

[Toozasl]

"It's Space Lobsters since BFC dropped the ball on that one. You will like it as I assume in your screename asl means Tooz anything space lobsters [:D] "--junk2drive
The ASL represents Advanced Squad Leader. I did a lot of research and scenario design for that game system. PC games have diminished my enthusiasm for boardgames but I'll still play once or twice a year. Still a great game.

[Erik Rutins]

Yes, but I can't discuss much in the way of details or timing yet. We're still working all that out. In the meantime, there have been some excellent additions to the vehicle pool and the ongoing work with the Map Maker is quite astounding, in my opinion.

[Mraah]

ORIGINAL: Toozasl
The ASL represents Advanced Squad Leader. I did a lot of research and scenario design for that game system. PC games have diminished my enthusiasm for boardgames but I'll still play once or twice a year. Still a great game.

Toozasl,

I'm glad to hear that someone as arrived with ASL background ... a welcome addition.

Did you do any work on the Solitaire ASL Module by chance?

A long time ago I posted that I'd like to create a random campaign based on the 14 missions from the solitaire module ...
... here's the old link ... tm.asp?m=1790175 .

Your input would be most appreciated. Most of the work appears to be done already with the RCG of the Infantry Divisions camps they have now ... representing a company size battle. I haven't done any work on it since but I'm slowly making my way back to the project.

Rob

[Toozasl]

"Toozasl, I'm glad to hear that someone as arrived with ASL background ... a welcome addition. Did you do any work on the Solitaire ASL Module by chance?"--Mraah
Thanks Mraah, but I have not contributed one iota to Solitaire ASL. To be honest, playing a solitaire board game did not appeal to me with the onset of pc games. My latest contribution with ASL was with their last module: Armies of Oblivion (five of the eight scenarios were of my design).
However, I'd be more than happy to assist you with any effort that enhances Panzer Command.
I was an absolute Combat Mission fanatic until they discontinued the series to give us the egregious (IMHO) CMx2. Now that Panzer Command is here I have channeled all of my gaming to this system. I love it and hope it prospers and becomes what Combat Mission should have been.[:@]

[pad152]

I hope we see a better infantry model!

It would be great if maps and vehicles would carry from release to release, increasing the value of each new release. Too many games today make pay for the same thing over and over again.

[rickier65]

ORIGINAL: pad152

I hope we see a better infantry model!

It would be great if maps and vehicles would carry from release to release, increasing the value of each new release. Too many games today make pay for the same thing over and over again.

If I recall, that has been the case with this series. The owners of the previous release OWS, not only got a discount for purchase of PCK, but their existing OWS scenarios were brought up to the level of the latest release. And I'm pretty sure both maps and units can be used with PCK.

Rick

[benpark]

Yes, everything carried from the first release over to the second. A trend that I hope will continue in the next release, but we will need to hear that from Matrix and the developers.

[madorosh]

ORIGINAL: Toozasl

However, I'd be more than happy to assist you with any effort that enhances Panzer Command.
I was an absolute Combat Mission fanatic until they discontinued the series to give us the egregious (IMHO) CMx2.

Imagine how I felt, actually pouring hours of my life into the scenario design and beta testing of CM:SF and seeing the final product...what a waste.

Looking forward to seeing PC grow and develop.

Still keeping my nose poked into the ASL community - there is an active forum at gamesquad.com with lots of discussion there. Some of it is even about ASL.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Michael Dorosh

ORIGINAL: Toozasl

However, I'd be more than happy to assist you with any effort that enhances Panzer Command.
I was an absolute Combat Mission fanatic until they discontinued the series to give us the egregious (IMHO) CMx2.

Imagine how I felt, actually pouring hours of my life into the scenario design and beta testing of CM:SF and seeing the final product...what a waste.

Looking forward to seeing PC grow and develop.

Still keeping my nose poked into the ASL community - there is an active forum at gamesquad.com with lots of discussion there. Some of it is even about ASL.

Hi Michael,

Several days ago, I was perusing one of the BF forums, and came across your thread titled, The Wrong Left Turn and the Uncanny Valley. I was actually searching for references to what I've always considered to be the board-gaming antecedent to Combat Mission, Avalon Hill's ghastly, old Tobruk game. Having wrestled with all the die-rolling and chart-referencing associated with the latter, all I can do is PTL for Combat Mission, at least at the scale of fighting that the two games depict. Obviously, CM goes a lot farther, what with FOW and simultaneous movement (although, given the snail's-pace at which even armour moved in Tobruk, any effort to incorporate such a device into the boardgame would have been more trouble than it was worth). Anyway, it's great to have you around. Your genius is providing a useful context for discussion, something that's frequently missing in internet forums, your aptitude for discerning the forest from the trees.

Salute!

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Toozasl]

GROG DOROSH IN THE HOUSE!!! [&o] Outstanding. yep, I wholeheartedly agree about the disaster that is CMSF!!![:@]

[spellir74]

Pad said:
>>It would be great if maps and vehicles would carry from release to release, increasing the value of each new release. Too many games today make pay for the same thing over and over again.
>>>

Yes!!

"Must have more polygons more polygon".

...Same five units over and over each release.

Silly waste.

Somebody in the dev business started that way of competing (for customer dollars/interest) and it just kept going.

-------
ps. PzC:k didn't do this. I'm just meant generally in this vid game business.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
I was actually searching for references to what I've always considered to be the board-gaming antecedent to Combat Mission, Avalon Hill's ghastly, old Tobruk game. Having wrestled with all the die-rolling and chart-referencing associated with the latter,

Yikes! I wouldn't come within grenade range of anything the reminded me of that old game. Hated Tobruk and only played it a few times.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
I was actually searching for references to what I've always considered to be the board-gaming antecedent to Combat Mission, Avalon Hill's ghastly, old Tobruk game. Having wrestled with all the die-rolling and chart-referencing associated with the latter,

Yikes! I wouldn't come within grenade range of anything the reminded me of that old game. Hated Tobruk and only played it a few times.

Actually, if you look at the mechanics of "the beast," its a lot like PzC. But the similarities are less so than with CM. For instance, the casualty increment for infantry in Tobruk is 1-1. A squad or crew is represented by a counter that carries an adjustable firepower rating (up to three digits) that decreases as losses are sustained. If anyone is interested in checking out some of the values, you can find them here:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/294413

Then a die is rolled and the firepower value applied to yet another table, that can be viewed here:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/294419

Finally, the results are recorded as strikes on a page from a pad that was provided with the game. What's sort of interesting about the way that an infantry squad is handled is that it's all about firepower. What differentiates one type of squad from another is solely the sum of its weapons, rather than what the men in the unit are doing with the weapons. In other words, there's no apparent attention to the relative effectiveness of one doctrine over another.

BTW, the game is actually named Tobruk: Tank Battles in North Africa 1942. The import of the title is readily apparent when one observes the attention that's devoted to armour in the game, relative to the handling of infantry briefly described above. The focus of the game was clearly on tanks, and Hoch took us to the desert to make it so, as this was the element in which AFV could best display their mobility and firepower.

Yes, the game was a mess. Too much die-rolling, too much record-keeping, utterly flat, featureless terrain, and a glacial pace added up to a long, tedious contest, the outcome of which was often ordained BEFORE the game pieces were even setup for play. But Tobruk did one thing very well (for it's day), and that was to depict AFV v AFV combat, all the way down to where a shell impacted a vehicle and whether or not a penentration occurred:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/294394?size=large

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/294392?size=large

And I remember thinking to myself, one of those main-frames at the data center could do all the die-rolling and other calculations for me, if only the University would free it up for so appropriate a duty. I was certain that one day it would be possible to play a game like this on a computer. I was less sure as to whether or not I'd live long enough to witness it. As fate would have it, providence in this regard was on the side of the believer. [;)]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
BTW, the game is actually named Tobruk: Tank Battles in North Africa 1942. The import of the title is readily apparent when one observes the attention that's devoted to armour in the game, relative to the handling of infantry briefly described above. The focus of the game was clearly on tanks, and Hoch took us to the desert to make it so, as this was the element in which AFV could display their mobility and firepower.

Yes, the game was a mess. Too much die-rolling, too much record-keeping, utterly flat, featureless terrain, and a glacial pace added up to a long, tedious contest, the outcome of which was often ordained BEFORE the game pieces were even setup for play. But Tobruk did one thing very well (for it's day), and that was to depict AFV v AFV combat, all the way down to where a shell impacted a vehicle and whether or not a penentration occurred:

As I had one of the earliest numbered and autographed copies so the game may have changed in later editions. But I was undersold with what I had and could not get anyone other my first opponent to play it.
I think the turns were something like 3 or 5 minutes and when a unit moved under fire you had to resolve firing at each hex the tank moved into. An 88m might get 18 shots at something in a turn. Also, each gun vs armor combination had its own table. You couldn’t add another gun or vehicle to the game without AH making tables for all possible combinations with other units in the game. Thus the number of tables would grow progressively as new units were added to game system.
The game did remind me of STRAT-O-MATIC for tanks.

And infantry rostering. Mercy!

It did have its good points. Beautiful and well made counters.

But you were far thinking. I at the time was thinking more in the lines of I could be doing anything else and having more fun.[:@]

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
BTW, the game is actually named Tobruk: Tank Battles in North Africa 1942. The import of the title is readily apparent when one observes the attention that's devoted to armour in the game, relative to the handling of infantry briefly described above. The focus of the game was clearly on tanks, and Hoch took us to the desert to make it so, as this was the element in which AFV could display their mobility and firepower.

Yes, the game was a mess. Too much die-rolling, too much record-keeping, utterly flat, featureless terrain, and a glacial pace added up to a long, tedious contest, the outcome of which was often ordained BEFORE the game pieces were even setup for play. But Tobruk did one thing very well (for it's day), and that was to depict AFV v AFV combat, all the way down to where a shell impacted a vehicle and whether or not a penentration occurred:

As I had one of the earliest numbered and autographed copies so the game may have changed in later editions. But I was undersold with what I had and could not get anyone other my first opponent to play it.
I think the turns were something like 3 or 5 minutes and when a unit moved under fire you had to resolve firing at each hex the tank moved into. An 88m might get 18 shots at something in a turn. Also, each gun vs armor combination had its own table. You couldn’t add another gun or vehicle to the game without AH making tables for all possible combinations with other units in the game. Thus the number of tables would grow progressively as new units were added to game system.

And infantry rostering. Mercy!

It did have its good points. Beautiful and well made counters.

But you were far thinking. I at the time was thinking more in the lines of I could be doing anything else and having more fun.[:@]

Actually, I believe that the turns were 30 seconds a pop, which introduced a perceptual incongruentcy into the game.

IIRC, the fastest vehicles could travel but five hexes per turn. So you have a game that's supposed to depict armour's mobility, but much of the countermix appears stuck in the sand, with a Matilda traveling but two spaces per turn, and infantry moving one space, every other turn.

IMHO, Tobruk really wasn't a game at all. It was a tool of sorts for simulating what was really going on when AFV were chucking rounds at one another, and why certain outcomes occurred. For instance, the game clearly illustrates the limitations of the Brit 2lb-AP/.303 AFV versus German AT elements. As soon as a the Grant appears, with it's 75mm-HE rounds, the interaction changes dramatically.

While other boardgames were able to demonstrate these relationships, I think that Tobruk did it more clearly, certainly for its time. And it certainly demonstrates the desirability of dealing with this level of data on a computer, rather than a board or tabletop.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)