Compare this game to others like it

Ask, comment, read.
thunderlizard2
Newcomer
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 10:57 pm

Compare this game to others like it

Unread postby thunderlizard2 » Wed Nov 13, 2019 12:57 am

Have a bunch of WW2 games including Panzer Corp, Strategic Command WW2 and Order of Battle. How does this compare?

Spaceman95
Colonel
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:31 pm

Re: Compare this game to others like it

Unread postby Spaceman95 » Wed Nov 20, 2019 11:58 pm

thunderlizard2 wrote:Have a bunch of WW2 games including Panzer Corp, Strategic Command WW2 and Order of Battle. How does this compare?


I also have a lot of both computer and board games on operational combat for WWII.
Full disclosure: I was part of the Beta on UoC II and thoroughly enjoyed the experience and the game they built!

My brief summary:

UoC is inspired by Panzer General, but much deeper. The nearest direct comparison at the moment would be Allied General DLC of the Panzer Corps reboot I guess - rather than all the DLC. Panzer General was a classic, and a lot of fun, but in the most recent iteration Panzer Corps is also quite repetitive, and seems far less historically accurate. UoC i, and especially UoC ii, is a much better simulation of operational combat in my opinion, because it nails the importance of supply, use of assets, and headquarters.

I am interested to see what PG II will bring when they release it soon. A lot of the games in the branch have actually been inspired by UoC's novel approach. But just as no other game has been able to improve on UoC I, so I don't expect anything to surpass UoC ii for the foreseeable future.

I have not played that much of Strategic Command, because I found it more abstract, and of course it is a different scale (Corps level, so strategic, not operational). The graphics of course do not compare.

OOB is a fun game and of course covers a much wider spread of theatres (including many forgotten battlegrounds), but it less detail, and is much easier. I think OOB does do pacific gameplay quite nicely, but it really is a different sort of game. A casual wargame.

As for some others:
I am a great fan of MMP/The Gamers Operational Combat board wargames. Not a lot of games are as good as that series, even played solitaire via DOS box...

Disregarding the bazillion mobile games and poor clones of classics:

Decisive Battles of WWII was my previous favourite PC game (over on Matrix) - they did a lot of good things, but lost me a bit when they drifted towards grand tactical rather than staying at operational.
Operational Art of War is a classic and it's also been given a new makeover at Matrix, with the strong feature being all the user made scenarios. But, it's mostly a graphics makeover; it has balance issues in many scenarios, inferior graphics, and really does not give the same level of satisfaction as UoC.
Gary Grigsby's War in the East and War in the West are the opposite - very detailed simulations, that cost ALL of your €€ (unless on sale), and very thorough. But as a gaming experience? Less playable (War in the East) than UoC i, and War in the West is nowhere near as enjoyable as UoC ii (the overfocus on air was unique, but crushed the gameplay for me)
HPS appears to have died a long time ago?

I would summarise the uniqueness and enjoyment of UoC in 5 ways:
*Excellent supply abstraction with a large degree of control.
*Interesting metagame encouraging you to plan assets and resource use.
*Smart use of suppression of steps rather than 'live or die'.
*A challenging computer opponent.
*Excellent and engaging graphics

These all add up to the best operational wargame to date, in my opinion - it puts you more thoroughly in the shoes of the commander, in a playable way, to solve the detailed puzzle that is operational combat. The learning curve is quite steep, but the reward is that much greater for figuring out how to play well.
Last edited by Spaceman95 on Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Stahlgewitter
Major
Posts: 92
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 4:22 pm

Re: Compare this game to others like it

Unread postby Stahlgewitter » Thu Nov 21, 2019 6:52 am

Other than being hex-based and turn-based with a WW2 theme, UoC was a near-total departure from the clapped-out Panzer General model. That's what makes it so good.

Both Panzer Corps and OoB were insulting and overpriced rehashes of a concept that reached its fullest potential with Pacific General over 20 years ago. OoB in particular is an exercise in attritional tedium. Panzer Corps brings nothing to the party and is, in terms of a series that emerged around the same time, as if Civ 6 had been released as Civ 1 reskinned with Civ 3 graphics.

Spaceman95
Colonel
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2019 5:31 pm

Re: Compare this game to others like it

Unread postby Spaceman95 » Thu Nov 21, 2019 7:36 am

Stahlgewitter wrote:Other than being hex-based and turn-based with a WW2 theme, UoC was a near-total departure from the clapped-out Panzer General model. That's what makes it so good.

Both Panzer Corps and OoB were insulting and overpriced rehashes of a concept that reached its fullest potential with Pacific General over 20 years ago. OoB in particular is an exercise in attritional tedium. Panzer Corps brings nothing to the party and is, in terms of a series that emerged around the same time, as if Civ 6 had been released as Civ 1 reskinned with Civ 3 graphics.


You are of course correct. Panzer General is not Panzer Corps. My post corrected