I'll start by pointing out that I don't even have the full game yet. I can't find it anywhere! I have played the demo though, and since I've played all of the previous versions, I think I can make a reasonable review based on that.

First off with PGIII we get a real 3D interface. They claimed that PGII was 3D, but in fact it was simply pseudo-3D like the original sim-city - you couldn't look at the map from different angles or anything, it was just "3d like" drawings. What was particularly frustrating about PGII was that in order to get these graphics they were willing to sacrifice map size. Here I find the maps are similar in size to the original - you can see a good portion at once, and the 3D effects do not distract at all from the game - far from it, I quite like the effect.

In addition we see the continuing improvement of the game engine itself. Unlike the earlier versions where experience was basically the entire game, here the system instead gathers experience into the leaders of the units instead of the units themselves. In addition they have natural skills and abilities that make them suited to one particular type of unit, but they don't have to be used that way. In many cases I found myself taking an experienced artillery officer to command a fighter unit, simply because there were no dedicated fighter commanders left. However, since the experience is a part of the leader, I can easily switch him to an artillery unit in the future, if a good fighter commander were to come along.

And I _love_ the system for moving from one battle to the next. While even the earliest games had a minor amount of branching, the system used in PGIII of picking your movements on the strategic map strikes me as a huge change for the better.

And finally the unit strengths and abilities seem fairly well matched. They got this right in Pacific General, but in most of the other games in the series certain units were way too powerful or too weak - most games degenerated into waves of A-26's for the US, or Tiger II's for the Germans. In PGIII, as well as PacGen, the need for a balanced group including artillery and troops is important.

The Bad

Actually I pretty much liked everything that was new. My only complaints were the same as for all previous versions (except PGII, which I simply hated): the rear areas are poorly controlled in terms of supply lines and communications.

In all of the PG games the units draw a basic amount of supplies, which are used up in movement and combat. Running out of either is bad news, although it seems that running out of fuel didn't effect combat, which strikes me as an obvious one to fix.

The problem here is that there is an unlimited amount of supplies in the rear, and you can receive them anywhere. So basically if you send that Tiger II racing across the map, he'll run out of fuel as you'd expect. But a simple click of the supplies button, and he's full up again - 50 miles behind enemy lines! And if you consider that supplies of gas were the #1 problem for the Germans from '44 on, it's a mystery why they didn't try SOMETHING to simulate this.

Now that might sound picayune, supplies? Trust me, supplies are the #1 most important part of combat. An army runs on its stomach, remember? In the last 200 years the only change is that it also needs gas and ammo, and wants a lot more of all of them. In typical combat 6 out of 7 people involved are in the rear supporting the 1 guy at the front.

A similar situation faces commands being sent to the units. If a unit is 5 miles behind the lines, fine, use a radio. But when they're 150 miles it's another matter entirely, ever see A Bridge Too Far? In these situations those units that lose contact should automatically go into some sort of defensive mode, or at least try to regain the lines in a retreat or breakout. They shouldn't be able to continue on as if nothing had happened.

In fact, it's that very point that is what the Blitzkrieg is all about. By punching a small hole in the enemy's lines with a small but highly mobile force, you can run into their rear and cut off their supplies. Do it right and you can cut off a huge army's supplies and command, and they're done for at that point. You don't even have to shoot them, just wait until they run out of ammo and spend so long out of contact they just give up. Like in Barbarossa, or Stalingrad.

So considering this game is called Panzer Commander, perhaps the two most important points of the Blitzkrieg should be included, huh? And yet, they're not.

What does this lead to? Well the one thing that I've seen over and over is that a single computer controlled unit will get left behind while I'm executing a rush. At that point they'll run around and around behind your lines, grabbing cities for points.

But then to rub salt in the wound, the computer is able to spawn new units at any city. So basically they run into the rear, grab a town, and start making new units miles behind you! So in PGIII, like the earlier games, you are forced to kill each and every unit on the map, dead. No hurting either, dead.

I find it particularly frustrating because it seems so easy to fix. Have a front line that you maintain in real time. Allow supplies to travel only xxx number of hexes off a road, coming from a dump with a fixed supply in the rear. Now it suddenly becomes WAY more realistic. And don't start, this would NOT make it harder to play!