GMT Panzer

[Bison]

Anyone playing this game?  I spent a few, and yes I'm ashamed to admit, hours watching some guy play a solo game on youtube.  Looks like a fun armor based game that is solo friendly.

[Double Deuce]

Is that a remake of Panzer that was originally made by Yaquinto? I have it packed up somewhere but if its a new game or quality remake I might look into getting it at some point.

[Ubercat]

Sounds interesting. I'll do a search on Google and check it out.

[Bison]

Is that a remake of Panzer that was originally made by Yaquinto? I have it packed up somewhere but if its a new game or quality remake I might look into getting it at some point.

Yes it is a remake. 

[Ubercat]

I found the game and will have to look into it some more. Here's a link http://thegaminggang.com/2012/10/tgg-video-review-of-panzer-from-gmt/ to a video review. They gave it 8.7 out of 10.

[GJK]

I P500'd it and have the game here.  I've yet to play it however because of various reasons but namely just because it isn't Panzer's turn to be played yet.


The components are typical GMT top quality stuff.  Nice 1" counters for the AFV's, glossy, high quality paper for the rules and a nice touch was the extra thick cardstock for the AFV data cards.  However, if there was one area that was skimped on a bit, it was the map.  It's a single map sheet to play all of the scenarios (plus any that you make up) on.  If you want the geo-boards, you'll need to get one or both of the expansion packs.  I think that playing this game as mini's with micro-armor on a table would be the best way to play anywho.


The rulebook is available from the GMT website and it comes in at a hefty 70 pages.  I've only skimmed it thus far but the comments that I'm reading on CSW suggest that it's an easy read and that the rules flow together nicely.  Still - it's 70 pages - but it is programmed instructions meaning that there's Basic Rules and then you can add on whatever Advanced or Optional Rules you want. 


I had the original Yaquinto Panzer and though I didn't play it to death way back then, I was always impressed by the detail of the data cards.  I have the Excaliber version as well that I picked up cheap and was dissapointed by the side-view counters (for Panzer, really???!!!!) and so never even played it.  I recently broke through the learning curve and figured out how to fully play AFV's in ASL and doing so takes that game to a whole new level - so I'm really in no rush to break out Panzer and try to learn it.  It may go unplayed for years, it may get sold or I may get an urge and start putting it on the table this month, dunno.

[Bison]

NWS has the base game and both expansions for $99 which is a good deal.  Save maybe 20-25 bucks after shipping compaired to Amazon.

[Bison]

The components are typical GMT top quality stuff.  Nice 1" counters for the AFV's, glossy, high quality paper for the rules and a nice touch was the extra thick cardstock for the AFV data cards.  However, if there was one area that was skimped on a bit, it was the map.  It's a single map sheet to play all of the scenarios (plus any that you make up) on.  If you want the geo-boards, you'll need to get one or both of the expansion packs.  I think that playing this game as mini's with micro-armor on a table would be the best way to play anywho.

I actually downloaded the rulebook to my iPad and have been reading through it, but what you mention about the maps is one of the things I noticed on the gameplay/unboxing videos I watched.  Honestly it confuses me.  The gameplay IS the map and counters.  Why go cheap on the map?  I can understand nice data cards, but why not make a solid map and offer a little more variety within the base game too.

[ABD]

The system has gone through major revisions since the first 1970's Yaquinto versions, it is more akin to the final Avalon Hill MBT/IDF editions. And Jim Day absolutely hates the Excaliber version he doesn't want his name associated with it in anyway.

Eric Walters review (long but excellent, you may want to copy&paste into a text file)
by the way the system is easy to learn, I played the original MBT/IDF when I was 14.

I remember when I first bought Yaquinto's venerable Panzer game. Must confess I was generally predisposed to liking it, having lost myself in Hal Hock's Tobruk: Tank Battles in North Africa 1942 when Avalon Hill published it back in 1974. Played that game to death, even given the heavy dose of wristage. In 1979, AH's Squad Leader and Cross of Iron were dominating my tactical gaming, but I had problems getting other people to play given the heavy investment of time in doing the Programmed Instruction to get to play with those cool armor rules. The Yaquinto game just seemed to fill the bill for quick entry into maneuvering mighty masses of mobile metal on the Russian Front. We had many a beer-soaked adventure with this game, in 2-player but ideally multi-player venues with non-wargamers. I have a lot of fond memories about that.

I sold off my beat up copy of that old Yaquinto game when I got heavily into Advanced Squad Leader. When Excalibur (Boardgame Pub) republished it, I confess I picked up a copy, only to immediately sell it given the atrocious graphical treatment (the infamous side-silhouette counters instead of the overhead depictions in a game where facing mattered!). Lost Battalion Games had their miniatures rules set of the same name but I didn't go for that either. I figured I'd simply moved on.

Sure, I had Jim Day's other designs for AH that were similar--MBT and IDF (Israeli Defense Force). I played them and I loved them. Having been a former Marine armor officer, I so much wished I had them when I was a lieutenant trying to teach my charges tank tactics. They were perfect for that.

When GMT announced they were streamlining and updating the original game and would include two expansions, I was seized with nostalgia. But after the initial rush of emotion subsided, I thought better of pre-ordering these games. After all, I thought I'd outgrown them. Sure enough, I followed the discussions on the game, saw the new graphics, appreciated the changes. But I wasn't willing to commit to it. I was playing all the other squad-level/individual vehicle games...why did I need to take this giant step backward into a 1970's era miniatures-based tactical simulation? I didn't.

GMT has to be marketing geniuses because eventually all the gouge they were publishing--plus some of the playtester discussions and fan buzz--got me to plop down my credit card for the pre-order offer. I thought I could always sell them if I wasn't all that thrilled with them; besides, the pre-pub price was a steal. Why not, I thought.

Then, the games arrived. I don't think I'll be selling these. Nope. Now I suppose I need to explain why.....

Panzer, the "base game" comes in a box that is heavily evocative of the old PanzerBlitz box art that Avalon Hill published. Okay, they got to me right there with that. But it was opening the box and perusing the components that drew me in.

This is definitely a 1970's era game here. The "base game" comes with one map--that's it. It's suitably generic and very reminiscent of old SPI generic terrain maps for their tactical game series. Okay, GMT provides a lot better color than those old SPI graphical treatments, but the flavor remains the same. Sigh. Gone was the moveable woods, hills, and buildings of the original game.

The large counters are gorgeous overhead full-color depictions of common AFV for both the German and Soviet armies. Easy to read and easy to handle. One side has one vehicle, the back side another. No problem given that the game system provides status markers (particularly wrecks for "Knocked Out" tanks and flaming wrecks for "Brewed Up" AFVs) so that you have no need to flip these counters for any reason. The accompanying data cards are actually cardboard and not cardstock--and lavishly illustrated with larger top view diagrams of the AFV on the counters. Wow. The data cards are quite functional, very legible for these middle-aged eyes even at a distance, and easy to use. Okay, I'm liking this.

The rules are lavishly illustrated and in full-color, as you'd expect from GMT. I'll get into the system aspects in a bit. But you'll find these easy to read and get into. The basic rules are only 17 pages and very intuitive. Players can get into the action quite quickly. Thankfully, the LOS rules are quite easy to absorb. Facing and fire are simplified--it's pure AFV combat here, folks, and nothing else.

The Advanced Rules (40 more pages!) are what people will itch to get into and feature most of what tactical wargame aficionados expect. If you've played any armor heavy tactical systems, you'll have little trouble getting through them. What discriminates this game is a focus on specialized units that perform command and fire direction functions--headquarters, recon, and Forward Observers. Additionally, there's an overall Force tactical proficiency Grade (governing the entire side in the scenario), a specific Formation tactical proficiency Grade (generally governing specific companies), and individual Unit tactical proficiency Grade. Grades run the gamut from Elite to Veteran to Seasoned to Regular to Green. The better the overall Force Grade, the more likely it is that the side will possess the initiative every turn. Better Formation Grades help in C2 tasks, better Unit Grades help in individual unit actions/morale events.

Initiative is a huge deal in this game. Players allocate commands to their units before knowing who will get the first and second moves in a turn. Commands include "Direct Fire," "Move," "Split Fire/Move or Short Halt," and "Overwatch." Firing can only be done against units already spotted. When one wins initiative in a turn, deciding whether to be the First or Second Player in firing/moving is crucial. Firing first means that enemy targets may be Damaged, Knocked Out, or Brewed Up before they even get a chance to fire back. Firing and moving second might allow a player to blow a hole in an opposing line and maneuver through it before the enemy can do anything about it. "Overwatch" is often good insurance against this, but fire capability is degraded, especially outside the frontal firing arc for turreted and 360 degree weapons. "Short Halt" may seem like a good compromise, but fire capability is heavily shortchanged and moves are half of what they otherwise would be. Player decisionmaking can be quite nail-biting and often what seemed to be prudent when assigning commands turns out to be disastrous when the command finally gets to be executed, depending on how the initiative roll and First/Second Player determination is made.

The tank/anti-tank armor game is fairly streamlined so that combat adjudications are handled with a minimum of fuss. Just about all the impacts you'd expect in such combats are taken into account. Checking out various weapon Armor Penetration values versus target AFV armor characteristics is a must prior to play to formulate effective tactics for a particular scenario. It's pretty clear what the probabilities are and percentile dice make such calculations easy (especially compared to games like Advanced Squad Leader and Advanced Squad Leader Starter Kit which use 2d6).

Infantry, crew-served weapons, indirect fire, engineers and obstacles as well as airpower are all here, but the tanks nevertheless take center stage in the scenarios. Optional rules (12 more rules pages) will seem de rigeur to treadhead grognards like me, as they cover Morale, turrets, C2 and radios, tank fright, mines, counter-battery fire, and more.

The command and control rules--coupled with initiative--really define how play unfolds on the gameboard. Better quality formations have more commands they can execute and they can afford to spread out more compared to their "Regular" and "Green" opponents that must clump together and aren't as agile. Couple superior AFVs with better force/formation/unit proficiency and a small but high quality force is going to tear through a much larger but poorer quality one.

There are 10 scenarios in the playbook, but it feels more like 8; Scenario 1 and 2--involving only armor--are repeated in Scenario 3 and 4 which add a smattering of infantry, prime movers, and anti-tank guns. Really, these are designed to get players comfortable in the system. The time frame is 1943-1944, so the early war romps by the Germans are not portrayed in the "base" game. Equipment-wise, the scenarios are reasonable match ups and lead to tense contests.

For those who already have squad-level WW II tactical ground games, it's reasonable to ask what is special about this title? For one, most of the games in the genre have been infantry games since the venerable Squad Leader family came out in 1977...such games were infantry centric with only a few guns and vehicles. Not so Panzer. Here, the armor takes center stage; it's all about the AFV, baby, and there's lots of them with comparatively little in the way of infantry and non-AFV support.

I also hesitate to judge this game and game system purely based on the "base" title. The expansions do a great deal to enhance the gaming experience and will be reviewed separately. But at the end of the day, the grognards among us will be hearkening back to those 1970s era armored slugfests, since that is what this system does best.

Is this game/game system for you? That depends. I'd hesitate to recommend it to gamers already deep into their favorite WW II tactical ground system, particularly those with individual vehicles/squads. Panzer is such a retro title, such a throwback. But if players don't know those earlier heavy-metal centric games from a bygone era, this title may seem very fresh and new. Will it replace your favorite tactical system? Probably not. But it might provide an entertaining alternative.

For those gamers who love Jim Day designs, you will definitely love this treatment. It's a definite improvement over what's come before. I'd only hope we see expansions that cover the same ground that the old Armor and 88 games do. And dare I hope for an update to MBT and IDF (Israeli Defense Force)? A man can dream, can't he?

Die-hard Advanced Squad Leader and Advanced Squad Leader Starter Kit players will likely pass this game by, as will hardcore Advanced Tobruk System aficionados. The benefits in better C2 modeling won't make up for the losses in "design for effect" and random chaos/friction those games provide to the tactical combat experience. That's okay. To each their own. Even Lock 'n Load and Valor & Victory players will likely cling to the narrative power their particular tactical systems engender.

I'd think, however, that GMT's Panzer might appeal to the Conflict of Heroes and Band of Brothers: Screaming Eagles player who wants to "level up" into something more hardcore, or the Combat Commander Series series guy who longs for tanks in his tactical recreations.

This game is really for the treadheads, the tank warfare buffs, the hardware geeks who will argue over hit probabilities and armor penetration. Sure, the other stuff is there in the box, but we all know what lured most of us to hearken back to our teenage wargame years--hell, it's why GMT did that box art the way they did! GIVE ME TANKS! LOTS 'O TANKS! I WANT TO BLOW UP TANKS!

For me, I can't help but wish I had this game back in the early 1980s so I could have trained my Corporals and Sergeants in tank tactics on the gameboard, even if using WW II Russian Front AFVs. The game is just that suited for it. The basic game is just so ideal to teach to non-wargamers and the action is fast, furious, and tense.

[GJK]

This is still on my "to play" list.  The article is probably spot-on: I'm heavily into ASL at the moment and can't even think about wrapping my head around another set of tactical WWII rules and thus it sits on the shelf for now.  Some time soon though, I'll look for something that's a bit different than ASL to see how it plays and the tread-heavy Panzer looks like it will fill that niche.

[Bison]

I'm seriously looking at this game.  I really like what I saw for the basic rules on youtube, which could be a nice lite solo tank combat game.  Eventually I'm sure once you've played the basic rules that one would want to add in some of the advanced and optional rules to increase variety.

[bayonetbrant]

I know Eric Walters (you should see a pic of his 'war room' some time - holy crap!) and I would absolutely trust his recommendations/reviews.  The guy knows wargames and he comes at it from the same professional perspective that I do. :)

[ArizonaTank]

I have a copy of the Yaquinto game, and it's sibling '88.  But I am a sucker for an update, so am going to take a hard look at this series.