Sgt Barker Wrote:(Opinion time here.)

:soap: Because CM is not a PzC game. CMx2, even the WWII version, is doomed because it cannot work with the business model they’ve set out.

PzC works because they can sell the “same” game over and over, based on engine upgrades and in depth research and scenario design and development. Those two things alone make each game worth the purchase price. There’s never a “where’s the beef” question with a PzC game, because they know what the value add is and make it happen for each title.

While in theory available to any game system that model is not workable with a tactical level game. No matter what anyone says about campaigns and scenarios, tactical level games live or die on their “quick battle” platform. That is what gets buzz going, and that’s what attracts people to a tactical game. Without it people simply will not shell out their $40.00, no matter how good a value it is in dollars-per-hour-played terms. Maybe not rational, but reality.

But good “quick battles” demand a robust, user driven, force build system. And that kills the ability to sell the “same game” next time. If the system is truly robust, then it’s replayability is very high. And if a game is replayable, well, that’s what you play. And you don’t go buy a new version of it.

In summation, my paying $40.00 for Operation Typhoon, then $40.00 for Operation Mars, then $40.00 for the destruction of Army Group Center, works, even though it’s all the “same game.” Trying to recreate that with squad level action won’t.