The elementar PROBLEM with the game

[2-81 Armor]

I always felt that something was wrong with how the Tiller Operational Campaign games.

They look great (if modded), the rules are easy to learn and understand, the scale is huge and the details are great...BUT
Playing anything bigger then the "Getting Started" scenario usually gets me frustrated and bored after a few turns...why ?

The reason is that 75% of the time i spent ingame is either me "shooting" at the enemy hoping for a disruption or me enduring the "return fire" of the enemy...

What are we doing when we "Fire" ? We are not assaulting, its basically some kind of "attrition" that happens.

Now, in my opinion, the Tiller Operational Campaign Games would be vastly more "playable" if this "attrition" of troops in contact would be abstracted...possible by giving the player the option to choose "stances" for each division like -> No action ->Harass  ->Aggressive Attacks

...or something like that. The player could concentrate on movement and assaults and would not be forced to fire 100 units manually and wait 5 seconds each time for the "return fire". Most of the time seeing results like "2 Men"...

I like such details but on this scale it makes the games borderline unplayable most of the time. More something to "look at" then to actually play.

Funny, you've hit right on the head at least as far as I'm concerned. Over the last few years I've been playing these games less and less. Not because they are bad designs (in fact they are some of the best researched and presented I've ever seen) but just because of the "shooting" aspect.

While firing individual units makes perfect sense to me at platoon and company levels (tactical), when the base unit and hex size goes above that threshold, as you say, it becomes more like work than anything else especially with larger scenarios. 

The fix (again my opinion only) might involve having artillery still be able to shoot in it's own phase (airstrikes might be included also), and as suggested, have combat become a function of movement with units fighting in a way we now know as "assault". It simplifies the mechanics yes, but users could now concentrate on maneuver, rather than endlessly "firing" dozens and even hundreds of units before doing anything else. I agree, it's too much at times, and can get pretty boring after a few turns.

Tiller games appear to be all based on the same system overall with adjustments made to adapt to a particular era or scale. For Napoleonics, ACW, and similar eras this makes perfect sense, and as I said before at the tactical level for more modern titles it also works well. Anything above that (Panzer Campaigns, Modern Campaigns, WW I, etc) needs a new or revamped engine. I really doubt anything like this is going to happen anytime soon, and most likely never.

I just last week uninstalled my last remaining PzC and MC games, and kept the Napoleonic/ACW ones installed. While I really admire the dedication of the designers and developers of the PzC/MC series, with the considerable attention to detail, respect for history, and much improved graphics of late, I have no further intention of purchasing any more games in the series. I'd just be collecting rather than playing, and it just doesn't make any economic sense to me.

To each his own of course. I'm not trying to start any arguments or controversies here, and all opinions stated are mine alone. Everyone is free to pick and choose what works for them. I've made my choices, and I respect everyone else's even if they might differ. We're all members of the same Club after all.

Soapbox Mode is off now!