JTS PzB Kursk Released

[ComradeP]

How different is gameplay vs Panzer Campaigns titles?

A bit more fast-paced as there are no recovery periods due to there being no replacement or refit mechanic. Engagement ranges are longer, particularly for armour. Direct fire does a bit more damage as well, because units are smaller even minor losses can matter.

The Soviets being mostly C quality in many sectors also substantially increases resistance. They don't disrupt after a few shots like a D quality unit. There being no Low Ammo mechanic for non-artillery units also helps units in bunkers survive when isolated.

[Fonebone]

Some of you guys seem very familiar with Tiller's games. So I thought I would ask...

I only have PzC Tunisia 43 and don't care for it much. I really want to be a fan, but I'm having a hard time. My main problem is just how slow and sort of uneventful it is. I'll try to be brief.

1) In this game, most infantry units move 1-2 hexes per turn even in the absence of enemy units (seems a little slow for the scale, even given soft ground conditions). Lots of scenarios feature long columns of unengaged units, making Movement Phases a rather dreadful prospect. Perhaps the game would be more interesting with longer than 2-hr turns, I dunno.
2) Combat results are a little bland -- a one-hex retreat, followed by a one-hex advance. No overrun combat etc.
3) Battalions begin most scenarios broken down into company and sometimes even platoon components, resulting in unit overload. Combined with 1, this makes for quite a bit of tedium.
4) AI is inadequate in most situations, in Tunisia 43 at least.
5) UI is a little click-heavy, can probably live with this though if some of the other problems didn't exist.

My intention is not to bash PzC. As I said, I really want to love it. But since nobody reviews wargames much or does Youtube Let's Plays and the games are a little pricey, I thought I'd ask here before taking another plunge. My questions are these:
Does PzB have any of these problems?
Are all the other PzC games this slow?

Thanks!

[ComradeP]

Well, I'd say many PzC are "slow" in the way you mention, aside from the summer ones with clear terrain. In Moscow '42, most infantry units can only move 1 hex per turn. The PzC series has some issues with scale and balance of scenarios compared to balance of the campaign (for example: a guaranteed 1% replacement rate in a campaign means units that "should" be weak can regain strength over time).

In Panzer Battles, the scale is 250 meters per hex with half hour turns. Infantry units can move 3-4 hexes in normal ground conditions and 2 hexes or so in soft ground conditions. Motorized and (half)tracked units can move a substantial distance each turn.

The Corps-sized scenarios in Panzer Battles have a lot of counters, similar to some of the larger PzC scenarios. However, as I posted earlier, the smaller scenarios are genuinely small to medium sized this time, with 50 or so units at most and often far fewer. It's indeed a mix between Squad Battles and PzC from that perspective. I can normally play a turn in 5-10 minutes even in medium sized scenarios, it depends on how many units I want to move and how often the units fire.

It's much less of a "monster game" in terms of number of counters than PzC full campaign scenarios. Corps sized scenarios are still big, but also still manageable.

[MengJiao]

Some of you guys seem very familiar with Tiller's games. So I thought I would ask...

I only have PzC Tunisia 43 and don't care for it much. I really want to be a fan, but I'm having a hard time. My main problem is just how slow and sort of uneventful it is. I'll try to be brief.

1) In this game, most infantry units move 1-2 hexes per turn even in the absence of enemy units (seems a little slow for the scale, even given soft ground conditions). Lots of scenarios feature long columns of unengaged units, making Movement Phases a rather dreadful prospect. Perhaps the game would be more interesting with longer than 2-hr turns, I dunno.
2) Combat results are a little bland -- a one-hex retreat, followed by a one-hex advance. No overrun combat etc.
3) Battalions begin most scenarios broken down into company and sometimes even platoon components, resulting in unit overload. Combined with 1, this makes for quite a bit of tedium.
4) AI is inadequate in most situations, in Tunisia 43 at least.
5) UI is a little click-heavy, can probably live with this though if some of the other problems didn't exist.

My intention is not to bash PzC. As I said, I really want to love it. But since nobody reviews wargames much or does Youtube Let's Plays and the games are a little pricey, I thought I'd ask here before taking another plunge. My questions are these:
Does PzB have any of these problems?
Are all the other PzC games this slow?

Thanks!

  The PzCampaign games are slow and extremely so for large scenarios.  However for certain campaigns (I'm thinking of France 1914 here), these games are really the only good computer games for that campaign.  So for that one (France 1914), I got a good book or two, put on Rokmaninov's all-night vespers and camped out waiting for von Kluck to move the 1st army for Pete's sake.  It was quite an experience.  Though one I am not anxious to repeat now that I have stopped drinking large amounts of vodka.

   The Panzer battles version of these games is pretty different though as ComradeP says.

[Al]

I've mentioned before that IMO the Panzer Campaign series is really well suited to First World War action.  Just hope that France '14 isn't the first...and the last of the series.  About the Tunisia game you're probably seeing movement rates about right.  The terrain was awful and the weather sucked.  You should try playing an eastern front game that takes place during the winter.  Then you'd see some really slow movement.

Panzer Battles is really good.  I like the scale, the graphics are a lot better and the research is, as usual, very thorough.  I'd like to see a title other than eastern front, however.

For those interested, there's a podcast tonight at 8Pm eastern with JT himself.  Here's the linky...

http://the-strategy-wargamer.tumblr.com/

[MengJiao]

I've mentioned before that IMO the Panzer Campaign series is really well suited to First World War action.  Just hope that France '14 isn't the first...and the last of the series.  About the Tunisia game you're probably seeing movement rates about right.  The terrain was awful and the weather sucked.  You should try playing an eastern front game that takes place during the winter.  Then you'd see some really slow movement.

Panzer Battles is really good.  I like the scale, the graphics are a lot better and the research is, as usual, very thorough.  I'd like to see a title other than eastern front, however.

For those interested, there's a podcast tonight at 8Pm eastern with JT himself.  Here's the linky...

http://the-strategy-wargamer.tumblr.com/

  I agree.  France 14 is an awesome game.  Playing it was the first time I began to see what von Kluck was trying to do and why it was not such a bad idea, given his other options.  Plus of course, he thought he had knocked the British Army clean out of the war, whereas in reality they had gone so far as to bring in another whole Corps and were (at that point anyway) building up fast.

[Boggit]

I've mentioned before that IMO the Panzer Campaign series is really well suited to First World War action.  Just hope that France '14 isn't the first...and the last of the series.  About the Tunisia game you're probably seeing movement rates about right.  The terrain was awful and the weather sucked.  You should try playing an eastern front game that takes place during the winter.  Then you'd see some really slow movement.

Panzer Battles is really good.  I like the scale, the graphics are a lot better and the research is, as usual, very thorough.  I'd like to see a title other than eastern front, however.

For those interested, there's a podcast tonight at 8Pm eastern with JT himself.  Here's the linky...

http://the-strategy-wargamer.tumblr.com/

  I agree.  France 14 is an awesome game.  Playing it was the first time I began to see what von Kluck was trying to do and why it was not such a bad idea, given his other options.  Plus of course, he thought he had knocked the British Army clean out of the war, whereas in reality they had gone so far as to bring in another whole Corps and were (at that point anyway) building up fast.

+1. As usual well said MengJiao! :)

[JudgeDredd]

So I don't know how to use bridging units. I've tried and nothing can cross when I get them next to a river. I can't find anything in the manual except a mention of them. So any idea how you get bridging units to be useful?

[jomni]

So I don't know how to use bridging units. I've tried and nothing can cross when I get them next to a river. I can't find anything in the manual except a mention of them. So any idea how you get bridging units to be useful?

There should be some bridging action in the menu. I need to test first.

[ComradeP]

In my version of the manual, it's on page 53 to page 56 (including pontoon bridges). The process is the same as in PzC: move a bridging unit to a hex with a hexside that can be bridged, initiate bridge construction and wait.

[JudgeDredd]

Thanks. I probably wasn't thorough enough in my search. I looked for 2 phrases, one of which was bridging.

How do you know a hexside can be bridged? Purely that it has water? I don't see anything in the side details when selecting a hex that say whether it can be bridged or not.

I'll check the manual out tonight. Thanks for the pointer.

[ComradeP]

Search for "Bridge building" and you should find the right paragraph.

River, stream, gully, canal and anti-tank (presumably: ditch) hexsides can be bridged.

However (and it's an important "however"), I'm guessing the "when an engineer unit has less than 100 men, the probability of completing the bridge is reduced proportionally. In addition, an engineer platoon will have a probability of bridge completion 1/3 that of an engineer company" still applies which makes bridge construction rather slow when all you have is a platoon.

Generally speaking, the shorter scenarios where you have to bridge a river to be able to move tanks to the other side were presumably balanced to make it impossible to do so at least in a timely manner. A German A quality bridge engineer platoon would have something like a 3% chance per turn of completing a bridge.

[DicedT]

My look at Panzer Battles: Kursk. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/45f4bde00ec3

Michael

[Sir Slash]

Great review Michael. Thanks for the info.

[TacticalWargames]

Easy the best JT series so far.