Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: jjdenver
Erik, my main problem with Pz General was that it was so scripted. I never felt like I was an actual commander, instead I got more of a space invaders feel with wave after wave of unexplainable enemy units appearing and attacking.

So, my question is - will/does this game feel like an actual operational wargame or like a scripted/puzzle-based game?

As others have posted above - I think it's a mix. The more historical focus on maps and orders of battle means that it feels more operational than other Panzer General style games. However, the scenario design and mechanics for these kinds of games means that there is always a puzzle element to figuring out how best to succeed in a scenario. That's honestly the same to a degree in any wargame, there are either strategic, operational or tactical puzzles to figure out - that's part of the fun. We did try to keep the scenarios interesting and dynamic, so in many cases you have more than one way to achieve victory and several different victory levels.

Some scenarios have additional reinforcements that can be triggered by events, but the focus is on keeping these historical or at least plausible for the "what if" scenarios once you go off the strictly historical path. That's part of the style of these games - if you really disliked Panzer General, this is certainly more historical, but the gameplay is quite similar. The scenario design is focused on historical or plausible forces and does not use unlimited forces, but I don't know whether that's enough for your preferences or if you would be happier with a more hard core and more strictly historical operational wargame.

Regards,

- Erik

Since this title has artillery units, do they function as in Panzer Corps with a more than 1 hex range and can support on defense?
Thanks.

Yes, they can function at long ranges and can support on defense. However, support on defense is not guaranteed. They have to pass a check based on the historical artillery doctrine and equipment in order to provide support. Upgrades can improve the responsiveness of an artillery unit.

I'm one of the very few people who never took to Panzer Corps. One main reason was that after playing a large number of scenarios PBEM with a long time gaming buddy we cane to the conclusion that they were balanced for play of one side vs the AI and that made them very unbalanced for PBEM in our opinion.

So my question is; are the scenarios in GaW balanced with PBEM in mind or have they been tested and balanced for play vs the AI? Nothing wrong with the latter, it's just not what I'm looking for. Thanks.

Hello,

ORIGINAL: elmo3

I'm one of the very few people who never took to Panzer Corps. One main reason was that after playing a large number of scenarios PBEM with a long time gaming buddy we cane to the conclusion that they were balanced for play of one side vs the AI and that made them very unbalanced for PBEM in our opinion.

So my question is; are the scenarios in GaW balanced with PBEM in mind or have they been tested and balanced for play vs the AI? Nothing wrong with the latter, it's just not what I'm looking for. Thanks.

main testing and balancing was done with AI in mind. Though some maps seem to be balanced for multiplayer, we did not have enough different players and games with them to make a final verdict. This is definitly going to be adjusted/confirmed as soon as more data/feedback is available.

Regards,

When you state "Though some maps seem to be balanced for multiplayer" does that mean if one of those maps comes up in the Campaign vs. the AI it will be too easy against the AI? Extra hard is fine with me.
Thanks.

Hello,

ORIGINAL: stormbringer3

When you state "Though some maps seem to be balanced for multiplayer" does that mean if one of those maps comes up in the Campaign vs. the AI it will be too easy against the AI? Extra hard is fine with me.
Thanks.

no, this means we have a set of multiplayer maps that are based on single maps. We tested those during the beta phase and some were clearly unbalanced while others felt like both sides could win depending on the players.
But there were not enough matches to be sure.

Regards,

Looking at the designer's notes, when you adjust the AI from normal to hard etc. what will change?

Hello,

ORIGINAL: stormbringer3

Looking at the designer's notes, when you adjust the AI from normal to hard etc. what will change?

the AI is never changed - it plays always the best way it can.

You just alter circumstances with the settings.

Regards,

Thanks for your reply. What I'm looking to find is what you mentioned in altering circumstances with the settings. Some titles, when you go to harder settings, give the AI more resources or extra units etc. What circumstances can you change in this title?
Thanks again.

Hello,

ORIGINAL: stormbringer3

Thanks for your reply. What I'm looking to find is what you mentioned in altering circumstances with the settings. Some titles, when you go to harder settings, give the AI more resources or extra units etc. What circumstances can you change in this title?
Thanks again.

you are welcome [:)]

You can give either side more resources or more experience.
Experience can turn a battle in favour of unit that has inferior equipment - depending on several other factors. Just to give you the idea of the advantage.

Then you can turn on/off certain rules to simplify the game or if you e.g. at detailed supply to make it harder to deal with. The detailed supply is especially tricky for the Axis and it far more limited resources.

Regards,

ORIGINAL: Ronald Wendt

main testing and balancing was done with AI in mind. Though some maps seem to be balanced for multiplayer, we did not have enough different players and games with them to make a final verdict. This is definitly going to be adjusted/confirmed as soon as more data/feedback is available.

Regards,

OK thanks for the reply.