|
TheWombat_matrixforum -> RE: Panzer Battles (3/2/2016 8:03:51 PM)
|
Panzer Battles Normandy is the second in the series, after the one of the southern flank at Kursk. I like the game system quite a bit; it's low-level enough to showcase differences in tactics and equipment, but high-level enough to simulate formations and organizations with some fidelity. You can do some pretty large operations (Goodwood, Epsom, the landings, etc.) in whole or parceled out over several scenarios, and yet still have a very tactical feel, with tank engagements over four to ten hexes, that sort of thing. There are, as noted, disagreements about how the game system deals with fortifications, something that has always been an issue with Tiller's games. But many of the comments are really about whether you want a combat system that is fully exposed in its mathematics, so you can min/max each engagement, or whether you are ok with having your combat decisions be more impressionistic. It's sort of a philosophical debate more than an issue of bugs, though of course there may well be oddities in the system in either case.
I have not played TotH. It's a single-vehicle, single squad/fire team level game, and one that is built around abstraction to the extent that it can simulate any number of battles. PB:N is a platoon/company level game that is focused on one specific set of battles with very specific terrain and TO&Es. It isn't as flexible or universal but it's also less abstract, and operates at an entirely different level of simulation. Neither is "better," but they certainly cater to different tastes and expectations. I will say, too, that the Panzer Battles games are technically very solid and work with with a very wide range of computers, for what it's worth.
|
|
|
|
