Panzer Battles Kursk

Richie61 · (This post was last modified: 02-02-2016, 04:05 PM by Richie61.)

(02-02-2016, 03:50 PM)Don Czirr Wrote:
(02-02-2016, 06:40 AM)Richie61 Wrote: I have both and I am a Ost Front junkie, but Normandy is a first buy win and then Kursk. I think the next PB involving Russia should be better with movement and not battering good German armor into prepared defensive lines.

Right - I was a bit surprised that JTS did not go with a corresponding Kharkov 43 focus for Panzer Battles.

Much more fluid battles and Germans still get some good advanced equipment to play with ....

Oh well ... perhaps it's next in line ....

PBK is a good title, but it's frustrating to lose fights based on loses suffered very early in the fight and you can't do anything about it. You need to advance and break the Soviet lines to win Tank6

Kursk is a tough fight in any game that I have played. Squad Battles, CC, Panzer Commander or CMBB. You know going into Kursk that it's going to be a knock down, drag out fight Big Grin

Don Czirr · 02-03-2016, 03:47 PM,

(02-02-2016, 04:05 PM)Richie61 Wrote: PBK is a good title, but it's frustrating to lose fights based on loses suffered very early in the fight and you can't do anything about it. You need to advance and break the Soviet lines to win

Kursk is a tough fight in any game that I have played. Squad Battles, CC, Panzer Commander or CMBB. You know going into Kursk that it's going to be a knock down, drag out fight

This is not necessarily a bad thing.

The demo Mius Panzer Campaigns main battle was about assaulting a heavily fortified area with bunkers and mines etc and I thought that was quite enjoyable.

Depends on your mood however ....

There are times where a lighter battle with more fluidity may be more entertaining .. like some of the NGP or Smolensk scenarios.

Then there is also the psychological factor ... the idea of Kursk (outside the games), usually pisses me off to see such fine troops wasted in an effort where the plans were known and well prepared for ...

On the other hand, from a gaming perspective, JTS has always been good (IMO) in breaking off bits off battles and making them enjoyable even if the main campaign was based off of a doomed venture ....

Strela · 02-03-2016, 10:16 PM,

(02-02-2016, 11:54 AM)Pinetree Wrote: Any game set in the desert 1941-1942 would be instant buy for me

Anything is possible in this world....!!!

[Image: PB%20Graphics%20427.jpg]

David

Richie61 · 02-03-2016, 11:13 PM,

(02-03-2016, 10:16 PM)Strela Wrote:
(02-02-2016, 11:54 AM)Pinetree Wrote: Any game set in the desert 1941-1942 would be instant buy for me

Anything is possible in this world....!!!

David

Tease

**Compass Rose** · 02-04-2016, 01:19 AM,

David, where is the "Buy it Now" button located at? Mex Big Grin

phoenix · (This post was last modified: 02-04-2016, 06:11 PM by phoenix.)

Curious, David. What is - very roughly - the ETA on the next title? Will it be out quicker than it took to get Normandy out, following Kursk (I know you've hinted at more focus in future, so figured maybe it would be quicker - plus the desert map is just a blank page, so no work there.....;)

Xaver · (This post was last modified: 02-04-2016, 07:05 PM by Xaver.)

For me the problem with Kursk is the combat type with to many fortifications specially when they from lines because now game is not working specially well here, the other negative point is the scen selection that is more limited than in Normandy and well, here to in Normandy OOB has enough exotic formations to add an extra to the title.

I never was a big fan of Normandy like Kursk but between both i prefer Normandy.

Is not that Kursk be a bad title but for me Normandy offer more things... i want someday find time to try merge Normandy and Kursk OOBs to have combats with soviet infantry in bocage or if is possible WWIII in the bocage, i dont see if is possible have soviets in "axis" side hehehe.

Nice teaser??? it looks like Gazala battle because appear the french troops... maybe i prefer Crusader but at least is not El-Alamein hehehe, na is not i dislike El-Alamein but feels for me like the desert Kursk even when i know is the best battle to cover in the engine by map scale and has italian paratroopers... well, at least you add a new nation to the serie, Italy.

I like see miniflags in the unit box and unit portraits, specially i feel now like that maori soldier... but i say "i want it and i want it NOW!!!!" Big Grin

PD: its possible have early access???

Strela

(02-04-2016, 06:10 PM)phoenix Wrote: Curious, David. What is - very roughly - the ETA on the next title? Will it be out quicker than it took to get Normandy out, following Kursk (I know you've hinted at more focus in future, so figured maybe it would be quicker - plus the desert map is just a blank page, so no work there.....;)

Kursk was released in Feb 2014 and Normandy in Dec 2015 - that's 22 months. Keep in mind we had a head start on Normandy as some work had been done such as the map, but we ultimately redid the OB and many of the scenarios. That said Normandy was a huge title and though there was the same scenario count as Kursk, there was many more large battles included.

I have said previously that the quickest we could release a game was in 18 months and that would require a fully dedicated team and probably a full time project co-ordinator. We have neither and no head start.

Also keep in mind that you may think a desert map is blank, but I can tell you it would be far from that.

So if your doing the maths you can discount anything in 2016......

David

Don Czirr · (This post was last modified: 02-05-2016, 04:45 AM by Don Czirr.)

So I'm guessing that the business model would prevent some sort of "Battle Pack" that could leverage resources from a closely related existing title?

i.e. - Rather than a full game, could a Battle Pack be created off of Kursk but with battles from the Kharkov 43 period?

The release history seems to indicate full or nothing - 39.95 per product.

Is this set in stone or is there flexibility to try a smaller / less sweeping type of release?

Strela · 02-05-2016, 06:58 PM,

(02-05-2016, 04:44 AM)Don Czirr Wrote: So I'm guessing that the business model would prevent some sort of "Battle Pack" that could leverage resources from a closely related existing title?

i.e. - Rather than a full game, could a Battle Pack be created off of Kursk but with battles from the Kharkov 43 period?

The release history seems to indicate full or nothing - 39.95 per product.

Is this set in stone or is there flexibility to try a smaller / less sweeping type of release?

As the designer that did both PzC Kharkov '43 and PzB Kursk, I can say there is little interchangeability other than some elements of the OB from Kursk and a small section of map.

PzB Kharkov '43 would be a full title (and a big one at that) and wouldn't fit into the concept of battle packs. Battle Packs should probably be thought more as extensions to released titles with further depth of the existing battle rather than new titles. An example might be more campaigns for either of the released titles.

The question is would anyone pay for further campaigns? Even if they were at a nominal $9.99 or even $19.99 dependent on the additional content?

Maybe this is a series of questions for a different thread.

David