An Answer to Some Complaints

[Rev Rico]

Panzer Campaigns is a very good, if not great, game system. We all wouldn't be talking about it here if we didn't like the game! Being human, however, we often point out the flaws, annoyances, mistakes, or bugs in the system :hissy:; some are valid, some are perceived, and some are merely differing opinions about how something should be modeled. The recent thread on ZOCs illustrates this, and the wisdom of HPS providing an editor once again shines.

Nonetheless, I believe there is a point we tend to gloss over when faced with these "realism" issues. I've said this before, but rarely has anyone responded so here I go again... :soap:

It is easy to become so enamored with the detail presented in the game that we forget that even with all the individual guns & tanks & men accounted for, we are still left with an abstraction. For example, that 1 vehicle armd car unit that is blocking your advance with its ZOC may not actually be just a single armd car (Don't tune me out just yet) because, except for maybe N44, the OOBs in the game are not comprehensive and complete. There are combat units and rear area units NOT represented; BTW some Designer's Notes actually admit this.

For instance. here are some specific examples:
1. If that armd car unit is from the 9th SS PzDiv in MG44, it actually includes a few hundred panzergrenediers not shown by the single unit of 30 vehicles.
2. B44 has US and German recon units that consist just of vehicles, yet everyone of them had at least a coy of combat inf and usually a btl. as an inherent part of them.
3. StuG Bgds and Tiger Btls throughout the game are represented by vehicle only units. What about the inherent infantry, pioneer, and AA assets?
4. Maybe that small AA unit that just cut off your two btls is more than a few vehicles but actually includes the Divisional or Corps Escort Coy/Btls usually ignored in the game, but were used in both offensive and defensive ops.
5. The vast numbers of Allied AA units are ignored or absorbed into units.
6. What about all those cooks, butchers, bands, and the like who we read about getting thrown into the front lines to fight? Sometimes we see them in the OOB, most times not. Who's to say they're not supporting that HQ holding up your attack?
7. Sometimes ATGs are thir own unit and sometimes they're assumed to be in an infantry unit. (Think about how that affects the ATG retreat dilemma that critcis bring up!)

I could go on.

My point is that I had to come to the place of accepting the "realism anomalies" because the system is more abstact than I'd like to admit; I won't be seduced by the great detail represented. As a result, I no longer grimace, gripe, or complain when my opponent cuts off retreats with lone vehicle ZOCs, holds up my advance with lone guns, leads an advance with AA or AT guns, uses HQs at the front, when ATGs can't/can retreat, etc..... It's all a matter of perspective. I breathe easier; life is good. :)

I hope I make sense.

Enjoy the game,
Bob

[fastphil]

Very Good Summation. Any time you need an opponent, let me know.


The greatest urge is not to create but to edit.

anonymous

[Mr Grumpy]

Excellent post Bob! :bow:

I agree with all that you say, but i also think that understanding the "abstact" side of the game system comes with experience of playing the titles and creating your own scenarios really does open your eyes as well IMO. :smoke:

So it is often the newer players who post these type of points (i think complaints is a little harsh) as they don't fully understand the issues that scenario design and the workings of the engine produce. :chin:

So i like to see these issues discussed (in an calm adult way) as i think it helps the poster and many others who read the post gain a better understanding of the titles as a whole. :)

But again, a great post..................

[Marquo]

>Sometimes ATGs are thir own unit and sometimes they're assumed to >be in an infantry unit. (Think about how that affects the ATG retreat >dilemma that critcis bring up!)

As the culprit who was most vociferous about this, and who actually discussed this with JT and GS at the 1st TILLERCON, allow me to respond. All the points you brought up are good, but at some point one has to assume that all the "what ifs" are somewhat evenly distributed and perhaps affect all units in the OOB. The operational scale of PzC does not really need to account for the heroism of cooks and bakers; IMHO a recon unit is a recon unit; and if the one remaining vehicle really represents 1 vehicle and 20 scouts that's okay; it is "1" recon unit represented by a vehicle icon.

The AT issue was spawned by those of us who were disheartened to have 3 disrupted Inf Bns of 1400 men pinned by 2 ATs of 1-2 guns/unit.

Anyway, on the operational level each icon represents a unit that functions in a scripted manner; and IMHO the system works well and is fun without being overly complex and detailed.

Marquo

[Dog Soldier]

The following is my personal opinion as a player. :soap:

Well said Rev Rico.

The key to understanding the system is that the abstractions are evenly balanced for both sides.

While some moves can be made that were not possible historically, esp. in the larger CG scenarios, equally ahistorical responses can be made. As long as both sides have that flexibility, then the game system produces enjoyable games.

In designing and play testing HPS has put the emphasis on historical maneuvers yielding historical results. In that regard, the system succeeds more than it fails. Where the system has had faults, these are addressed by HPS. Many of the changes in the updates has come from this and other forums.

As Foul mentions in his post above, give yourself some time to explore the intricacies of the game design. Not every thing that actually happened can happen at the right time in any one scenario, but many things do happen that could have happened. The unexpected is what makes playing the game a challenge and just plain fun.

Anything more precise is just a mathematical exercise.

Dog Soldier

[Zemke]

I agree, and I am still adjusting myself, learning. I notice as I learn my thinking changes, hmmm just like with everything else. But, I have fallen in love with the game and the system, and no game is perfect.