cdbeck
Posts: 1374
Joined: 8/16/2005 From: Indiana Status: offline
|
From the PC:Winter Storm demo, I can tell you that the AI is rather good. I was doing really well, killed tons of soviet tanks and men, until at the very end a hidden Anti-Tank gun wiped out my entire armored force. I ended the demo with a marginal loss. Blast! I hear people are even having trouble beating the AI in the PC:Kharkov TUTORIAL, so there is some quality AI there. If you like Close Combat, I would say that Panzer Command is right up your alley. To me (and I don't own either PC yet, going from WS demo) it looks like Combat Mission but plays with some of the simplicity of Close Combat. I did not care for Combat Mission, I found it slow paced, tons of micromanagement, and unwieldy. The WS demo is not like that at all. With the addition of smoke in Kharkov, the tactical movements and options are now going to be rather similar to CC. The only major difference is that your artillery and mortars are off-the-map assests (at least in WS demo) that you have to use on-map troops to sight. Another nice CC-like element is the campaigns, where your forces survive from one to the next. JD may be in the minority regarding Advanced Tactics, but his objection is relatively valid. With the random maps of AT, you will find that there is very little direction other than self-set goals. If you want a clear order of battle, a pre-defined force, and realistic, scenario set objectives, AT is NOT the game for you (so, as a CC fan, this may be the case). It plays more like Civ (or Empire from the old days), where you get to set research goals, war goals, decide the composition and manufacture of EVERY force on your side, and have to deal with supply and command logistics. SoM
_____________________________
"Neca eos omnes. Deus suos agnoscet!" (Kill them all. God will know his own.) -- Arnaud-Armaury, the Albigensian Crusade
|