Alt or Stock scenarios: Which tend to be better? (newbie question)

[monkspider]

Hey guys,

I am a newbie to the Panzer Campaign series, I only have one game so far (Budapest '45). I have downloaded Volcano Man's mod which adds so much to the game through it's improved art assets. I have to ask you guys though, overall, do you think the alt scenarios or stock scenarios tend to be better? Would you say that one or the other tends to focus more on historical accuracy? Does one tend to focus more on play balance? I realize the two things are sometimes in conflict with each other. Thanks in advance for educating this newb.

[Mr Grumpy]

Hello Dustin,
Welcome to the OpS ladder, hope you have some fun here.

As you might guess that is a difficult question to give a definitive answer too, but it really comes down to taste, some players like the default stock scenarios, some players like Volcano Man's (VM) _Alt versions and some players play both! :)

VM scenarios are an edited version of the stock scenario and use a different set of OOB and PDT files which are designed to work with a unique set of combat values he has created, another thing you get with VM _Alt scenarios is continuity as no matter which title you are playing the scenarios use his PDT/OOB files and the same set of optional rules, this is not true of the default stock scenarios which were created by various designers and use different opt rules as default, also _Alt scenarios are always aimed at the PBEM community with play against the AI not a priority.

VM is always on hand to receive feedback from players and so all of his scenarios are a WIP really, if a fault is found he updates his art/scenario packs to fix that issue.

VM would never claim that his scenarios are any more historical or more balanced, they are his take on the same situation, however many of his scenarios have been tested at the Blitz H2H section and i can say from personal experience always provide a great game.

So the best thing is to try both out and see what you think? ;)

[monkspider]

Thanks Foul, I greatly appreciate the highly informative post. :)

[monkspider]

I guess, one other question on this subject, after searching this forum a bit, I read accounts of systemic issues in a couple games Normandy '44 (it sounds like the stock scenario has lots of issues modeling this battle) and Kursk '43 (apparently there is an "exploit" in the stock game that allows the German player an easy win in the early turns of the game). I don't have either of these games yet, so I can't comment myself, but are there any other examples like this of specific games that are clearly better in either alt or stock?

[Dog Soldier]

I don't have either of these games yet, so I can't comment myself, but are there any other examples like this of specific games that are clearly better in either alt or stock?

These are opinions rather than facts. Any campaign game can be exploited by full knowledge of the fixed units release time tables, moving the battle out to a historically "quiet area" of the map, etc. Some players will say it is gamey, others will claim it is a test of skill to react to a very different than historical situation. Neither approach is better or worse, just different. It really comes down to the type of play style you are looking for. You will find both and many others here at the blitz.

With the many scenarios included in each game such a general statement is way off the mark. Check the scenario DB here at the blitz. For both K43 and N44 you will find many scenarios in the game (both stock and _alt) are quite balanced and exciting.

Dog Soldier

[monkspider]

I don't have either of these games yet, so I can't comment myself, but are there any other examples like this of specific games that are clearly better in either alt or stock?

These are opinions rather than facts. Any campaign game can be exploited by full knowledge of the fixed units release time tables, moving the battle out to a historically "quiet area" of the map, etc. Some players will say it is gamey, others will claim it is a test of skill to react to a very different than historical situation. Neither approach is better or worse, just different. It really comes down to the type of play style you are looking for. You will find both and many others here at the blitz.

With the many scenarios included in each game such a general statement is way off the mark. Check the scenario DB here at the blitz. For both K43 and N44 you will find many scenarios in the game (both stock and _alt) are quite balanced and exciting.

Dog Soldier

My apologies for the blanket statements regarding those games, I guess the particular threads I was reading might have unfairly skewed my opinion. I am glad to hear that the impressions I got were false.

[Sch]

I always play the alt version of a screnario.

The combat values used by VM seem to more realistic than the ones in the stock game.
(especially in the case of vehicles)

And yes many titles of the stock game are rather unbalanced and even ahistorical.

Like Moscow '41 and Kursk '43. I have played the 'grand campaign' of both of them.

In the Typhoon campaign Russia is so strong (thx to to the high number of B and C morale units) that it can counterattack after the 20 th turn, way before the weather turns bad (which worsens the situation of the germans even more)

In the Kursk title its quite the opposite. The soviets are swept away without much effort.

I dont know how smaller screnarios play out but if you intend to play the campaigns id go with VM's mod.

[Jazman]

A shame VM hasn't modded the Moscow scenarios yet. I too ran into trouble as the German early in Typhoon.

[Volcano Man]

A shame VM hasn't modded the Moscow scenarios yet. I too ran into trouble as the German early in Typhoon.

Its on the list of things to do... so many projects, so little time.

[James Ward]

I like the art better in Volcano Mans work so it's worth installing the mods just for that for me.