|
Fallschirmjager -> RE: HPS France '14 (6/28/2010 7:31:02 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: UniformYankee
quote:
ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager
Does anyone have it? Looks interesting but also uses the dinosaur Panzer Campaigns engine so I am wary. The game also includes campaigns. Are these branching campaigns like the American Civil War and Napoleonic series?
Looking at the limited screenshots it looks like the game has a good mix of maneuver warfare and siege/defensive scenarios.
The game is certainly based on the PzC engine, though does have some code mods like patrolling capability for cavalry and plotted indirect fire for heavier artillery. Map graphics are fresh as well and the 3D zoom out view is very useful as not being too tiny (like the 2D zoom out view is) and also offering a better view of the terrain.
Cavalry and MGs are squadron/company level, though cavalry can build-up to regiments and break-down to squadrons. Infantry and Artillery are battalions. Engineers seem to be either company or battalion, at least some of them are rather small and some are larger - but have not compared game OOB to real OOB.
The designer seems very focused on reproducing historical outcomes so the "campaign" is broken down into sub-campaigns, early, middle and late. The early campaign starts August 22 and ends 10 September. The middle camaign runs from 17 September through 17 October and the late campaign runs from 18 October and ends 10 November. In addition to these "campaigns" there are numerous smaller scenarios such as "Marne" and Ypers".
So far, playing the early campaign as the Germans against the AI, the turns are very long, first turn not as long as WITP or AE, maybe only 4 hours of actual moving. But subsequent turns, I think will be at least 2 hours, so longer than WITP or AE. Just watching the replay on "Fast AI" takes over 15 minutes (not sure exactly as I walked out of the room). Stacks of like units can be moved together with no penalty, so this is an accelerator, but having to plot much of the artillery through the cumbersome "artillery dialog" is a decellerator.
My primary "issue" is the lack of a more complete campaign scenario starting from the beginning of the war. The designer says he did not do this because it would not evolve as the historical campaign evolved. I'm fine with designers give us scenarios that represent their vision. But can we not have it both ways? How much additional incremental effort would've been required to provide the "at start" positions and allow more turns? Well, it would be a considerable effort, I admit, but given the effort that was already required to give us what we have, perhaps not so great, incrementally.
All, in all this looks like a more polished and complete effort, than a number of the more recent PzC or Modern Campaigns, so I suspect I will play it longer as well.
Very nice info, thank you!
|
|
|
|
