Newcomer: How is the AI ? and more...

[KarlXII]

Hi all !

I just stumbled across this one. I had no idea what it was and now saw it is practically Panzer General.

What I wonder is though is:

- Is it Panzer General II but with improvements ? More advanced ? More statistics or practically just the orginial with new graphics ?
- How is the A.I in current version and how does it compare to Panzer General II ?

Thank you for any input on this.

I hope it have the good things of Panzer General II which I have been a hardcore player of, and not only building on Panzer General I

And by the way, how many pages are the manual ? Is it good or only describing the interface ?
[update!] The manual could be viewed in this forum. Question answered.

[Toby42]

I've been wondering about this myself? I've had the original PG's and currently have PG Forever. All of them have some things that are really stupid. Such as a German Armor unit attacking a Polish Cavalry unit and getting a bloody nose. Stukas attacking or being attacked by an Allied fighter and slaughtering them? Too abstract for me!

[Grotius]

The A.I. seems decent to me, on defense anyway. It doesn't make many obvious boneheaded moves, but then it doesn't have to make many moves at all, as it's playing defense. I'm playing on the second-hardest of the original difficulty levels ("General"), and for my next game I'll choose the hardest ("Field Marshall"), which in turn can unlock three bonus difficulty levels. The biggest challenge for me hasn't been winning, but winning fast enough to earn a Decisive Victory. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't.

The game is indeed relatively abstract, but combat results generally seem plausible to me. Yes, fighters will generally win air-to-air matchups, but some fighter-bombers hold their own too, as was the case historically.

I think it's great fun, as long as you remember it's beer-and-pretzels, not "Gary Grigsby's War in the East."

[gchristie]

Just recently bought it and have won decisive victories in the first two scenarios of the 1939 campaign. It is fun and challenging so far. Having played PG but not PG II, I can't answer your question, though it feels familiar enough to PG to make me feel right at home.

AI is competent, but I've noticed that it has a habit of attacking out of an entrenched position or a key strategic location in order to score a cheap hit on a unit that is nearby and on a truck. This allows you to bait the AI into leaving a key city so you can waltz in unmolested the next turn. I'm not the first to point this out and I read that the developers/modders? are working on a fix for this soon.

Manual is mercifully short, 36 pages, but it could be a bit deeper in explaining things. But I've found that the forum provides all I need to know so far.

Hope you buy it and enjoy it. This company is worth our supporting them by paying full price for their products, IMHO. [;)]

[terje439]

I would say that the AI is alot better than in any of the other "General" series (panzer 1->, pacific, allied, fantasy) with the exception of the allready mentioned habit of moving out of entrenched positions.
Some of the scenarioes are bloody hard to get the Decisive Victory on.
Also unlike the previous games, you are likely to during the campaign to lose a core unit or two, and prestige is alwyas a problem/issue now.

I really enjoyed Panzer General I and II, Fantasy General and Pacific General, but now this game tops the list. Add to that that there are players making Mods, as well as a friendly forum that will enlighten you if you need help, this is a good buy imo (but then again others could be disappointed),


Terje

[jomni]

The game is more like an improved PG I than an improved PG II.  Which I think is better.

[KarlXII]

Thank you for all replies.

I wonder why they used PG 1 as foundation when PG 2 was superior in all aspects.

Nevertheless, I might buy this game anyway to support the effort if the A.I. is improved over that found in PG and will be continually improved by further patches.
I also hope for some kind of roadmap to develop this game if it sells good to improve it and not just add more theaters. Anyone heard news of that ?

[Greybriar]

ORIGINAL: karlxii

....I wonder why they used PG 1 as foundation....

Possibly because of all the work that had gone into PG Forever?

[Dragoon.]

Thanks Rudankort for developing PG Forever for free just out of love  and Slitherine for employing Rudankort to do a real successor to PG.

[KarlXII]

I give up! I just bought the game. Downloading in progress... [:)]

[HansHafen]

PG II was the one with the painted map and units right? I thought it was good, but I preferred PG I to it. I also loved PG III Scorched Earth.

[histgamer]

I definitely preferred PG I to PG II although I only played PG II on my friends PC I never bought it myself... 

[greykemp@gmail.com]

PG II seemed to easy and to cartoony for me. I LOVED PG III and still play it. JP's Panzers was a GREAT online resource and had many terrific PG III campaigns. Having the players develop and use settings like the "weak hand" army was brillant. This game is an EXCELLENT remake of PG one for the modern machines. I'm about to struggle my way through the entire 39 campaign to see what these Hero's are all about [&:]