No Invasion of the US Please

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: James Ward

There are two Sea Lion scenarios included. Both are pretty much 'fantasy'. They don't seem to ruin the game.

I don't know to what degree a cross channel invasion of Britain would have been plausible or not but Germany sending transports across the Atlantic ranks up there with Buck Rogers and Red Dawn. Personally I'm not really in favor of a Sea Lion scenario either but I can at least find some small degree of plausibility in it. An invasion of the US is really pushing it though. Granted PC isn't much of a simulation of combat reality but there's a point where fantasy can get pushed too far and for me invading the US tips the scale. I mean, if that's what you guys want then knock yourselves out. I'll probably pass on the last couple installments if that's the case.

[HansHafen]

ALL computer games are fantasy. There is no blood, pain, death, dirt, broken bones, severed limbs, decapitated rotting bodies, brain gore and bodily fluid sprayed all over you, no vomit inducing stench of death. No real morale, strategy, tactics, supply etc issues that are remotely the same as reality. No fog of war remotely approximating real life. No bonehead NCO yelling at you to do something that absolutely doesn't need to be done. So, go ahead with the scenario which is the same as the rest, fantasy.
 
And why couldn't Beria assasinate Stalin and give Germany european russia and bide his time behind the urals? Didn't happen, but could have. What if the Germans got a little luckier in 41 and did take Moscow? Stalin sues for peace and bides his time behind the Urals?
 
Thus Germany has a huge increase in resources and a one active front war. Maybe also Hitler didn't mistreat the Balts and the Ukrainians? Thus more soldiers. What if Hitler died and someone more sensible took over?
 
I suggest that they label this scenario as "fantasy" so no one will be confused and think it actually happened.

[El Condoro]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: AbeSimpson

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress





I thought this was Panzer Corps not Fantasy Corps. [:D]

Damn, and I thought this was a game were you have the choice to alter history. If you can´t stand the heat, keep out of the kitchen.

Maybe we should have Germany invading Australia then. We can alter history and have Germany take over the entire world. Then the space lizards descend and all havoc breaks loose. There's "altered history" for you. [:D]

Already done! "Invasion Australia"

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: HansHafen
ALL computer games are fantasy.

This is something I've stated before myself in relation to other games. Even War in the Pacific is Fantasy, though it purports itself to be a "simulation". It pretty much comes down to how much fantasy one is interested in playing. On the one side of the spectrum is a wargame which follows the historic course of the war. To the other extreme is invasion of the space lizards. Somewhere in between there is invasion of the US. Granted I might still play invasion of the space lizards if that was what Slitherine offered but I would be much happier personally with a game that followed the historic course of the war.

And why couldn't Beria assasinate Stalin and give Germany european russia and bide his time behind the urals? Didn't happen, but could have. What if the Germans got a little luckier in 41 and did take Moscow? Stalin sues for peace and bides his time behind the Urals?

Thus Germany has a huge increase in resources and a one active front war. Maybe also Hitler didn't mistreat the Balts and the Ukrainians? Thus more soldiers. What if Hitler died and someone more sensible took over?

I suggest that they label this scenario as "fantasy" so no one will be confused and think it actually happened.

There are a LOT of what ifs in the above. You basically come to a point where you are no longer playing a "World War II" game if you completely rewrite history. What if Slitherine decided to follow your alternate history above? Would you be as happy with PC if there were no Russian front? Since as you say "all computer games are fantasy" then I assume it makes no difference to you?

Anyway, here's an idea for a compromise. Since Matrix and Slitherine are selling these DLCs, why not make more than one for the last couple years of the war. For 1944 and 1945 create a standard "Panzer General" version where America is invaded AND a version where Germany fights out the historic war to the bitter end. I assume since these DLCs are being sold that Matrix and Slitherine would therefore profit more from creating two different installments instead of just one.

[AbeSimpson]

No two versions needed. Just lose some key battles or win them minor. This should be enough to go down the "historical" road.

[Tac2i]

If playing 'historical" means Germany wins because they last until June 1945 vice May 1945 (or the Soviets win because they defeat Germany in March 1945 vice May 1945),  no thank you. What fun is that? For me, not much. I really like playing wargames but the whole point is that a game puts you, the player, in control so that you might effect a different outcome. I suppose you could say I'm a "fantasy" wargamer within the WWII technology era.

I'm really enjoying Panzer Corps and have purchased both DLCs. Its a quick 'beer and pretzel' game for me yet has some depth to it. The best example of what I like in a wargame, however, is a random generated game of Advanced Tactics Gold. I've been playing this game, first AT and now ATG, since 2007.

[James Ward]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

ORIGINAL: James Ward

There are two Sea Lion scenarios included. Both are pretty much 'fantasy'. They don't seem to ruin the game.

I don't know to what degree a cross channel invasion of Britain would have been plausible or not but Germany sending transports across the Atlantic ranks up there with Buck Rogers and Red Dawn. Personally I'm not really in favor of a Sea Lion scenario either but I can at least find some small degree of plausibility in it. An invasion of the US is really pushing it though. Granted PC isn't much of a simulation of combat reality but there's a point where fantasy can get pushed too far and for me invading the US tips the scale. I mean, if that's what you guys want then knock yourselves out. I'll probably pass on the last couple installments if that's the case.

I agree that crossing the Atlantic is different than crossing the Channel but both are 'what if's'. If you're going to have what if's then why not have a bunch?

[blastpop]

Invading the US was not plausible. An extreme number of things would have had to go right for the Germans as well as a lot of luck. There was a chance of Sealion as the Germans were preparing for the eventuality in an operational way.

I'm not really interested in Alt history. No Texas Tea, Tomorrow the World or Nato Nukes and Nazis...

That said why not:

Why not accommodate both camps. Some sort of setup option to allow or not the Germans to proceed past England as an example in the West...

[AbeSimpson]

PG had those choices, you could choose between Balkans and North Africa or opt for Gibraltar...
but once you´ve chosen a certain path you had to conquer the States in 45 (Major in Moscow 42, Major in UK 43 and then US 45).

[GaryChildress]

ORIGINAL: Webizen

If playing 'historical" means Germany wins because they last until June 1945 vice May 1945 (or the Soviets win because they defeat Germany in March 1945 vice May 1945),  no thank you. What fun is that? For me, not much. I really like playing wargames but the whole point is that a game puts you, the player, in control so that you might effect a different outcome. I suppose you could say I'm a "fantasy" wargamer within the WWII technology era.

The fun is in playing the game, not in some percieved "reward" screen at the end which says, "you've conquered the world". Code Name Panzers is one of my favorite games of all time. The German campaign ends in Stalingrad with the German player winning a tactical victory for the day but it still doesn't have any effect on the overall outcome of the war, you know the Germans are still going to lose Stalingrad. General Paulus simply hands you a box of cigars in the victory cut scene. Not much of a reward but I really don't care what the victory screen says once I've finished all the scenarios. I still had the most fun I've ever had in a game playing it.

In gaming there is only 1 tangible reward that counts and that is the opportunity to play another level after winning the previous one. Whether or not your final victory screen says, "you conqured the world" or "you lost the war but you played a good game" is irrelevant. Just about every game and it's sequel has a "you conquered the world" victory at the end. Wouldn't something different be nice for a change?

Anyway looks like the votes are in favor of Fantasy Corps. Enjoy your fantasy. Say hello to Tattoo for me. [:D]

[James Ward]

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

In gaming there is only 1 tangible reward that counts and that is the opportunity to play another level after winning the previous one. Whether or not your final victory screen says, "you conqured the world" or "you lost the war but you played a good game" is irrelevant. Just about every game and it's sequel has a "you conquered the world" victory at the end. Wouldn't something different be nice for a change?

What do you suggest could be made different? They all end sometime and the real classics, well I just don't ever want them to end [:)]

[KerenskyLI]

ORIGINAL:
Anyway looks like the votes are in favor of Fantasy Corps. Enjoy your fantasy. Say hello to Tattoo for me. [:D]

[Johnus]

Gary Childress:

Are you trying to say that Red Dawn is not historically based?

[gradenko2k]

It's not like the creation of an Invasion America series of scenarios is going to take away from development time on everything else, right?

[Texican]

Agreed. The branching campaigns ought to be stuff like Russia, Balkans, or Africa, and not Moscow or "invade the U.S.".

There just wasn't the German Navy to do this, and had they conquered the Brits, the latter surely would have scuttled their own fleet or sent it to base in Canada in order to carry on the fight.

Now, stuff like Britain, the U.S., or Russia suing for peace would definitely be "in the cards", but the Germans doing cross-Atlantic invasions... heck, they couldn't even do that now.

[Moltke71]

ORIGINAL: Texican

Agreed. The branching campaigns ought to be stuff like Russia, Balkans, or Africa, and not Moscow or "invade the U.S.".

There just wasn't the German Navy to do this, and had they conquered the Brits, the latter surely would have scuttled their own fleet or sent it to base in Canada in order to carry on the fight.

Now, stuff like Britain, the U.S., or Russia suing for peace would definitely be "in the cards", but the Germans doing cross-Atlantic invasions... heck, they couldn't even do that now.

No, but they may try to buy us like they are the Eurozone.

[Ralle]

I would say...let the wehrmacht go to direction near east...and after that to the usa