Next Achtung Panzer DLC- 1969 China/USSR border conflict

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

The next DLC for Achtung Panzer (I guess it's called Graviteam Tactics now) will be Zhalanashkol.  The map looks interesting but I'm not 100% sold on the dev's decision to make this one's OOB completely historical.  That means it's going to be a 5 hour campaign with about 50 Soviet border guards with a few APCs and a helo mixing it up with around 120 Chinese PLA infantry with no vehicles at all.

I don't know why they decided to go the completely historical route this time.  Maybe too many people complained about the alternate history in the Aghan DLC or maybe they just didn't want to model a bunch of Chinese vehicles.  Too bad because I think a larger "what if" scenario pitting late 60s Soviets against a massive Chinese onslaught would be pretty cool.

[Gusington]

Cool, even if not that historically sexy. I would like to see a Super Deluxe edition of the game with all DLC released so I can avoid the unfortunate patching and expansion deal.

[mikeck]

Ok, I have to ask: how do these games stack up against combat mission/shockforce?  Looks similar in that you plan your moves and then hit "go" right? I don't hear a lot about them. I could t care less about Angola, afcrapistan or the Chinese border but I will give credit for not just pumping out Ww2 games.

So what's the attraction? If I wanted to play a WW2 tactical game, why would I want AP over CM? Or would I???

I'm kind of looking at the Shield of the prophet game for example. Looks cool but what's the catch?

[jomni]

Yay hills!

[Staggerwing]

Yay hills!

Lol!

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Ok, I have to ask: how do these games stack up against combat mission/shockforce?  Looks similar in that you plan your moves and then hit "go" right? I don't hear a lot about them. I could t care less about Angola, afcrapistan or the Chinese border but I will give credit for not just pumping out Ww2 games.

So what's the attraction? If I wanted to play a WW2 tactical game, why would I want AP over CM? Or would I???

I'm kind of looking at the Shield of the prophet game for example. Looks cool but what's the catch?

The biggest thing that the APOS games offer over the CM series is the operational gameplay layer.  You've got to push your units around on the operational map before you drop down to the tactical battles so you have to contend with fuel/ammo consumption and resupply; vehicle and gun damage and repair, unit morale and fatigue and just the overall conservation of force.  It doesn't do you much good to fling your best units at the enemy en masse on the first turn.  You're almost guaranteed to win that initial battle but  if you take heavy casualties doing so, you'll never be able to withstand the counter-attacks, let alone seize the operational objectives.

Some other interesting features include tactical battle maps that are much larger in size than you find in the CM games.  This allows for more options as to what tactics to employ.  Terrain and structures are deformable and the maps are persistent so if you blow a building apart or knock out an armored column on a bridge, the building rubble and burnt out vehicle wrecks will still be there should you have to fight on the same terrain again during the campaign. 

I also like that the battles are dynamically generated so you'll never fight the same battle twice no matter how many times you replay a campaign. 

[Tinkershuffle]

Ok, I have to ask: how do these games stack up against combat mission/shockforce?  Looks similar in that you plan your moves and then hit "go" right? I don't hear a lot about them. I could t care less about Angola, afcrapistan or the Chinese border but I will give credit for not just pumping out Ww2 games.

So what's the attraction? If I wanted to play a WW2 tactical game, why would I want AP over CM? Or would I???

I'm kind of looking at the Shield of the prophet game for example. Looks cool but what's the catch?

Big difference is also that AP plays in realtime, of course with an option to pause and give orders and the game speed is also adjustable. You don't maybe want AP over CM but you want them both because they approach the same thing from different angles which are both great. :)

[Nefaro]

Ok, I have to ask: how do these games stack up against combat mission/shockforce?  Looks similar in that you plan your moves and then hit "go" right? I don't hear a lot about them. I could t care less about Angola, afcrapistan or the Chinese border but I will give credit for not just pumping out Ww2 games.

So what's the attraction? If I wanted to play a WW2 tactical game, why would I want AP over CM? Or would I???

I'm kind of looking at the Shield of the prophet game for example. Looks cool but what's the catch?

The biggest thing that the APOS games offer over the CM series is the operational gameplay layer.  You've got to push your units around on the operational map before you drop down to the tactical battles so you have to contend with fuel/ammo consumption and resupply; vehicle and gun damage and repair, unit morale and fatigue and just the overall conservation of force.  It doesn't do you much good to fling your best units at the enemy en masse on the first turn.  You're almost guaranteed to win that initial battle but  if you take heavy casualties doing so, you'll never be able to withstand the counter-attacks, let alone seize the operational objectives.

Some other interesting features include tactical battle maps that are much larger in size than you find in the CM games.  This allows for more options as to what tactics to employ.  Terrain and structures are deformable and the maps are persistent so if you blow a building apart or knock out an armored column on a bridge, the building rubble and burnt out vehicle wrecks will still be there should you have to fight on the same terrain again during the campaign. 

I also like that the battles are dynamically generated so you'll never fight the same battle twice no matter how many times you replay a campaign.

This.

The extra 'dynamic' campaign layer is a big plus.

[Rayfer]

Cool, even if not that historically sexy. I would like to see a Super Deluxe edition of the game with all DLC released so I can avoid the unfortunate patching and expansion deal.

A big +1....I've read about it on other threads on these forums, a quite complicated process to add dlc's, patches, updates, etc.  Those with good computer skills say it isn't all that complicated, but in my 62 year old mind it is and it has kept me away from these games. 

[Con]

The patching is different...which does not necessarily mean difficult just not what you are used too.

There are a couple of threads that walk you through it quite well.  The key is like building IKEA furniture.  You have to follow the instructions and sequences exactly and you will be OK.

I wouldn't let the patching hold you back from what is for me a very fun game

Con

[Gusington]

There is no deluxe version available with all DLC yet though, is there?

[Jarhead0331]

There is no deluxe version available with all DLC yet though, is there?

No.

[mikeck]

Anyone try the Iran v soviet one yet???

[sandman2575]

Speaking of Iran v. Soviet "Shield of the Prophet" --  I'd be interested to hear how the overall gameplay compares with the Op Star World War II-era games.  I'm wondering what (if anything) makes Graviteam's handling of modern warfare different from ww2 - ?  Or is it just pretty much the same, with T-72s instead of T-34s and some Hind helicopters thrown in -- ?

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Anyone try the Iran v soviet one yet???

Yes.  I posted an AAR of my playthrough of the Soviet campaign in the Digital AAR forum.

Here's the link.  http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=6015.0