Matrix Games Forums

1) it is first of all a campaign game. The 3D battle's main purpose is to resolve unit status to advance to the next battle with.

2) yes - in the 3D part it looks like CM. It is a 3D representation of tanks rolling over terrain. Like CM it uses realistic scales (unless the compressed terrain that RTSes use). How else can it look like?

3) 3D combat plays out very different, because...

3a) .. it's mostly for campaign gaming anyway, PZC's tactical battles follow a much simpler set of rules, all of them clearly layed out in the manual. The game is "snappier", more direct with big delays in movement, turning, artillery etc.

3b) it has 40+40 second turns with action and reaction phase, an entirely different artillery model and a whole host of other play details that don't show in the screenshots. So the comparision with CM, while it appear valid now, will appear less valid after you play it

3c) movement is platoon oriented with pretty decent pathfinding. Much less TacAI involved. Paths chosen by the TacAI are shown when the command is plotted to the platton leader, and you can re-plot if you don't like it. Re-plotting a path works for individual platoon members, too, as long as the command is similar to what you gave to the platoon leader

4) it allows the owner to redefine pretty much all combat parameters. Instead of bitching about T-34s not penetrating the Pz IV front, just edit it in the XML file (don't do that in PBEM, though)

5) simultaneous PBEM mode. 2 mails per turn, not 6. Trusted mode of course


That should about cover it.

As you see, don't be fooled by the fact that the screenshots look alike. These are two entirely different games.