AOredone updated

[Andrea69]

Hello biohazard15, thanks so much for the suggestions; this is definitely a good resource for the aircraft update.
One of my priorities, aside from aircraft range, is to further develop and differentiate the strategic bomber class. It's clear that the game developers have mixed things up a bit between tactical and strategic bombers, placing medium bombers here and there and assigning the anti-ship role to strategic bombers. This choice was certainly a bit arbitrary, but it shows that beyond historical references, we must also consider what the game's engine is capable of offering. In this case, I believe it was intended to increase the appeal of this class, which otherwise (at least for less experienced players) would have been lacking.

Some further suggestions, if I may:

1) Azuls in 1939:
- Blue Division was formed two days after Barbarossa start, so Azul gift unit in Raseiniai is (kind of) historically correct. The one in 1939 Czechoslovakia, however, is not
- Since we can get two Spanish infantry units in SCW (Colonial Infantry and Guardia Civil), I propose adding a couple of upgrade hexes for these in Czechoslovakia
- Colonials get upgrade to standard Azul Infanterie (this replaces Azul gift unit)
- Guardia get upgrade to a new unit Azul Zapadores (Zapadores was the name for sapper regiment of Blue Division). Compared to German Pioniere: same traits, +1 speed, +2 to soft\hard attack, -2 to all defense stats, +1 core slot cost. Basically assault Pioniere.

Here I had decided not to modify the vanilla event, but your idea is interesting even if it would no longer be about gift units but about unit upgrades. However, completing the Spanish expeditionary force with the Zapadores intrigues me

Speaking of Stalingrad - a bug report: in Streets of Stalingrad elite objective, I got only Boelter hero, but not the equipment. Might be because I saved\loaded quite liberally during this mission.

The scenario files look fine to me... it seems strange that if you received Boelter, you didn't also receive the additional equipment. Furthermore, if for some reason the event doesn't fire correctly, you should have seen a red error text message on the screen for a few seconds

[biohazard15]

The scenario files look fine to me... it seems strange that if you received Boelter, you didn't also receive the additional equipment. Furthermore, if for some reason the event doesn't fire correctly, you should have seen a red error text message on the screen for a few seconds

I did a quick check of my equipment pool, and it seems I had a similar bug in Pindus - Dietl is here, but no Italian equipment. Smehow it went unnoticed by me back then. Can't remember anything about red error text, but I may have missed it due to hardware - I play on 32" monitor, and said red text looks really small on it.
Might be something about save\load - the game isn't exactly stable when it comes to scripts in this case.

Just remembered one more thing about 1940 - you may want to move Alpini spawn point away from Valona, to the northern map edge. I did what I always do here in vanilla - group all my units around victory hexes and let Greeks come to them (except a small group I sent to the elite objective). By doing so I accidentally blocked all the spawn hexes. Not a bug per se, more like an oversight.

[dan1107]

Hi Andrea69, I quickly checked the files, played through the game up to the start of AO1940, and thoroughly examined the tanks in the units.csv file. Of course, it’s possible that I missed something.

Notes:

In AO1939, the Spoils Of War.lua and UndisclosedLocationEP.lua files have the following values: weak_count = 1, mediocre_count = 1, and outstanding_count = 1. The correct values should be 2.

Spoils Of War - I remember the first time I played this map and what a surprise awaited me there. An absolutely perfect scenario. Of course, I had the Generalissimus + DvG settings, SCW was going smoothly, then against France and Poland, everything was fine, and suddenly this. It was the first and last time my army ran away in panic
Here, I might assign a hero with the NoSurrender trait to all T-34 and KV-1 units so they can’t be captured. Because they’re too strong at this point for players to use.

In NorthNetherlands, I would probably change the gift unit to Fallschirmjager41, because the Fallschirmjager has been in service since January 1, 1940, so it’s possible to purchase or upgrade to it.

I have uploaded the changes regarding tanks as a text file to the following address:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/jvn64wj4 ... s.txt/file

[Andrea69]

In AO1939, the Spoils Of War.lua and UndisclosedLocationEP.lua files have the following values: weak_count = 1, mediocre_count = 1, and outstanding_count = 1. The correct values should be 2.

Hello, you are right about the random hero count, will fix it

Spoils Of War - I remember the first time I played this map and what a surprise awaited me there. An absolutely perfect scenario. Of course, I had the Generalissimus + DvG settings, SCW was going smoothly, then against France and Poland, everything was fine, and suddenly this. It was the first and last time my army ran away in panic

This scenario was made by Grondel, so all credits to him

Here, I might assign a hero with the NoSurrender trait to all T-34 and KV-1 units so they can’t be captured. Because they’re too strong at this point for players to use.

Although it is not easy for many of them to surrender, I tend to agree with you. But I won't add the NoSurrender trait to everyone, I want the player to still have the chance to capture some, let's say it's a further incentive for this challenge

In NorthNetherlands, I would probably change the gift unit to Fallschirmjager41, because the Fallschirmjager has been in service since January 1, 1940, so it’s possible to purchase or upgrade to it.

Well, it seems a bit strange to me to have as a gift in 1940 troops available only in 1941, for the infantry the prototype concept doesn't work well... however that scenario seems right to assign the player the new Jagdkommando unit that I will probably introduce in the next build; it will be a unit with the NoPurchase trait, just perfect as the gift for an elite objective

[Andrea69]

I have uploaded the changes regarding tanks as a text file to the following address:

https://www.mediafire.com/file/jvn64wj4 ... s.txt/file

Definitely good work on close defense and fuel. I will update the values ​​in the equipment file

[dan1107]

This scenario was made by Grondel, so all credits to him

So many thanks to Grondel for the realy perfect work

Well, it seems a bit strange to me to have as a gift in 1940 troops available only in 1941, for the infantry the prototype concept doesn't work well... however that scenario seems right to assign the player the new Jagdkommando unit that I will probably introduce in the next build; it will be a unit with the NoPurchase trait, just perfect as the gift for an elite objective

It could be a unit that will test new equipment (same as prototypes) that will later become standard. A new special unit is, of course, the best solution. I'm already looking forward to it

Definitely good work on close defense and fuel. I will update the values ​​in the equipment file

I'll try to focus on SPAT, SPArty, SPAA etc. I noticed some duplicate rows there as well. And so I'll see what else comes to mind. Except aircrafts - I know you'll be doing big revision for them.

[Andrea69]

I'll try to focus on SPAT, SPArty, SPAA etc. I noticed some duplicate rows there as well. And so I'll see what else comes to mind. Except aircrafts - I know you'll be doing big revision for them.

Good, I'm waiting for your advice and suggestions on this matter. As for me, right now I am focused on a major naval warfare update, which is crucial before starting work on AO46. Currently, the stats of the naval assets in the game are aligned with the same values, following Grondel's excellent work on the game's naval warfare mechanics. But it's clear that realistically the Yamato can't have the same stats as the Fuso or the Nevada, for example.

[dan1107]

Hello Andrea69,
as I promised, I've run some additional checks on the files.
I again send the file with the potential corrections.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/490qxkrf ... 2.txt/file

[Andrea69]

Hello Andrea69,
as I promised, I've run some additional checks on the files.
I again send the file with the potential corrections.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/490qxkrf ... 2.txt/file

Hello, I’ve taken a look at the file and I want to thank you again for your valuable work, especially regarding vehicle fuel and those two additional scenarios with incorrect hero counts.
I had already noticed the duplicate units, though frankly I can't give you a definitive explanation: I believe the team that originally created this equipment file intended to include a switch (such as an AT switch for heavy artillery) but abandoned the idea for balance reasons; anyway they didn't delete the entry, perhaps thinking it might come in handy if they changed their minds later.
The same applies to units listed with a non-existent switch: the team created them to expand the rosters, but without suitable models they decided to keep them in a sort of limbo (No Purchase trait, so no actual effect on gameplay), though they could easily be reactivated. For instance, I think the SdKfz111AA/AT could be part of the game; I might even add its switch so it becomes fully usable.

[dan1107]

Hello, I was happy to help because I know you’ve put a lot of work into this mod. I make small changes myself from time to time, and I know how much work it takes.

I also have an idea regarding heroes, but that’s really something for the very far future, if at all.
A few years ago, I posted in a thread about wishes for PC2, saying that I’d like it if historical heroes gained experience in a similar way to units. And several other people shared that wish there. In the latest DLC (Allied Operations - Italy: Vol. 1), Slitherine implemented a very simplified but useful system for upgrading heroes, and that’s what led me to think my idea through more carefully.

And of course, this is just my perspective—you and other players might not like it at all.

It’s a bit complicated and all fictional, so hopefully I can explain it clearly

1) Add more historical heroes to the game. I always enjoy the game more when a real-life character joins me rather than a randomly generated hero. For example, in Spain, add Colonel Carlo Rivolta (as a hero to the gifted M11-39 tank unit in the Zaragoza scenario), as well as Werner “Vati” Molders, who replaced Adolf Galland in the Condor Legion, Joaquín García Morato, etc.

2) These historical heroes would start out weaker but have 5 upgrade levels (just like the 5 stars for units), each unlocked after 5 or more—or fewer—standard scenarios.
I’ll illustrate this with the example of Carlo Rivolta.
He would start as a hero with the ReducedSlots and Readiness traits.
After 5 scenarios (1 star), he could be upgraded, for example, +1 HA or players could choose from multiple options (+1 HA or +1 SA, etc.).
After 10 (2 stars), for example, +1 Ini or +10 Speed
After 15 (3 stars), +1 HA or +1 SA
After 20 (4 stars): +1 Ini or +10 Speed
After 25 (5 stars), the final and best upgrade would be a choice of 3 or 4 new traits. For example, Butcher, TankKiller, LightningAttack, or CripplingBlow
This could be free, or cost Prestige, Command Points, or other special points...

3) If historical heroes were added, the RandomHero() function would be activated every 4th scenario (currently, it occurs in about 80–90% of scenarios). This would allow the values for weak_count, mediocre_count, outstanding_count, and 'ubers_count' to be reduced to 1 for AOSpain, AO1939, and AO 1940; 2 for 41–43; and 3 for 44–46. That way, the element of randomness wouldn’t be as pronounced. That way, the element of chance wouldn’t be as pronounced among different players—where one might have an 8* DoubleAttack in 1944 while another has an 8* Legendary. This way, if they only ever bought “outstanding” heroes, their collections would be very similar.

Pros:
- A better feel with historical heroes
- Less randomness when generating heroes—I know this can be bypassed by General Trait Killer team, but I think most players who play modes like AOR, GC, or SoE don’t want to make the game easier for themselves; on the contrary, they’re looking for major challenges
- There won’t be as much need to focus on gaining prestige (which, by the way, is the worst thing about PC2 for me, and it’s even more pronounced in AOR, where it forces players to adopt a playstyle of capturing as many units as possible for prestige. And in a single scenario, depending on your playstyle, you might have as few as 1,000 or as many as 20,000), allowing them to enjoy different playstyles more funny.
- There would be fewer very powerful heroes.
- By upgrading historical heroes, players could better tailor them to their playstyle and preferences, resulting in a more enjoyable experience.
- Since there wouldn’t be as many random heroes and players would have similar ones, it would probably be easier for mod developers to balance the difficulty.

Cons:
- So far, I only see one, but it’s a really big one. And that’s all the work involved with these heroes—until now, all you had to do was create a historical hero, and then you didn’t have to worry about them anymore (of course, there are exceptions like Wittmann, Rudell ...), but in this new system, it would be necessary to create scripts for upgrading them for 5 levels—and you’d have to work with that hero in 6 scenarios without forgetting anything.

It’s long, but hopefully it makes at least a little sense.

[Andrea69]

These seem very good ideas to me; SOE I think is already implementing something similar. From the next revision I will also add a kind of upgrade system for heroes.
Also I agree about more historical heroes to replace random ones.

[Nexus]

So, I am well into my playthrough on this.
First of all thanks for all the effort in creating this thing.

Two criticism follow below. I already suspect it will not be considered as these things seem quite intentional but I will give as much clear reason as possible, and maybe you'll think about my arguments.

1. The scale of some maps is just very over the top. Apart from the performance problems this creates, it takes a lot of fun and "play-flow" out of the game (Netherlands was most obvious examples):
- Multiple turns you will simply move stuff around without achieving anything meaningful.
- While turn-balanced that you can achieve objectives, you need to position your initial units perfectly, as it is impossible to pivot later on. This is very annoying and frustration inducing as you are basically forced to play with prior knowledge: try once and then do a proper run with the knowledge on what weight of your force goes where
- You are regularly forced to leave enemy units behind in unfavorable location where they could immediately snatch back an objective just because you still need to drive through half the map. This breaks immersion as you again play with assumption about AI behavior (not active unit) or prior knowledge.
-> I would suggest to tune scale to allow for 'some' reshuffling during mission but still reward good initial plan - Arras for example was spot on scale-wise imho.

2. The aircraft spam on some maps is just ridiculous and totally immersion braking. There is literally no incentive to actively fight enemy AC. I started not bringing any bombers and just use some fighters and AA for coverage for important units. These maps are an absolute slog and no fun to play for large parts.
GrandCampaign also uses this method but only in a select few missions where it make sense (i.e. Moscow). There is absolutely now way the allied would have been able to throw never-ending waves of planes at you in Arras.
-> I suggest to do reinforcement only every X waves, so you have at least some incentive to clear the sky. I am close to abandoning my playthrough because of this.


I hope you'll consider these points. The Mod has so much good things and improves a lot on the vanilla in lots of places which makes these hard problems sting even more.

Thanks and Regards,
Nexus

[Andrea69]

So, I am well into my playthrough on this.
First of all thanks for all the effort in creating this thing.

Two criticism follow below. I already suspect it will not be considered as these things seem quite intentional but I will give as much clear reason as possible, and maybe you'll think about my arguments.

1. The scale of some maps is just very over the top. Apart from the performance problems this creates, it takes a lot of fun and "play-flow" out of the game (Netherlands was most obvious examples):
- Multiple turns you will simply move stuff around without achieving anything meaningful.
- While turn-balanced that you can achieve objectives, you need to position your initial units perfectly, as it is impossible to pivot later on. This is very annoying and frustration inducing as you are basically forced to play with prior knowledge: try once and then do a proper run with the knowledge on what weight of your force goes where
- You are regularly forced to leave enemy units behind in unfavorable location where they could immediately snatch back an objective just because you still need to drive through half the map. This breaks immersion as you again play with assumption about AI behavior (not active unit) or prior knowledge.
-> I would suggest to tune scale to allow for 'some' reshuffling during mission but still reward good initial plan - Arras for example was spot on scale-wise imho.

Hello, I agree that some maps (Denmark without a doubt, the Netherlands only partly) are a bit too large and need some downsizing; I will certainly take this into account for the next revision. Of course, large maps also increase the challenges - from troop deployment and splitting forces to managing territory. What you find frustrating, others (myself included) see as simply an extra layer of difficulty that we appreciate. It’s a matter of perspective. In any case, if you’re struggling to move your armies, I suggest making more use of the railway lines; in every scenario, they are capable of transporting a large number of units if a player chooses to use them.

2. The aircraft spam on some maps is just ridiculous and totally immersion braking. There is literally no incentive to actively fight enemy AC. I started not bringing any bombers and just use some fighters and AA for coverage for important units. These maps are an absolute slog and no fun to play for large parts.
GrandCampaign also uses this method but only in a select few missions where it make sense (i.e. Moscow). There is absolutely now way the allied would have been able to throw never-ending waves of planes at you in Arras.
-> I suggest to do reinforcement only every X waves, so you have at least some incentive to clear the sky. I am close to abandoning my playthrough because of this.

Well, I’m not particularly fond of the "aircraft spam" script either; in fact, it was only used in the Sealion scenarios of AO 1940, and I haven't used it since. There are plenty of other scenarios featuring lots of aircraft, but without the aircraft spam. In the Sealion context, Grondel (who developed it) and I felt it effectively simulated the Germans' inability to achieve air superiority over the RAF. However, I agree that it can be somewhat annoying - and, above all, counterintuitive - since it is actually in the player's best interest not to destroy Allied aircraft, but merely to weaken them, in order to avoid triggering the automatic spam.

[Nexus]

Thanks for the reply.

Hello, I agree that some maps (Denmark without a doubt, the Netherlands only partly) are a bit too large and need some downsizing; I will certainly take this into account for the next revision. Of course, large maps also increase the challenges - from troop deployment and splitting forces to managing territory. What you find frustrating, others (myself included) see as simply an extra layer of difficulty that we appreciate. It’s a matter of perspective. In any case, if you’re struggling to move your armies, I suggest making more use of the railway lines; in every scenario, they are capable of transporting a large number of units if a player chooses to use them.

I get why this is done and I agree for most part. My whole point here is that it is occasionally overdone and the effect of rewarding a good pre-battle planning could also be achieved with slightly more manageable map-size.

Well, I’m not particularly fond of the "aircraft spam" script either; in fact, it was only used in the Sealion scenarios of AO 1940, and I haven't used it since. There are plenty of other scenarios featuring lots of aircraft, but without the aircraft spam. In the Sealion context, Grondel (who developed it) and I felt it effectively simulated the Germans' inability to achieve air superiority over the RAF. However, I agree that it can be somewhat annoying - and, above all, counterintuitive - since it is actually in the player's best interest not to destroy Allied aircraft, but merely to weaken them, in order to avoid triggering the automatic spam.

Can you clarify on that? I just played Arras and it sure felt like the AC are respawning all the time. I also checked the lua script afterwards and from my limited understanding the code for respawning is there. Next mission Lille also seem to have it, which is the main reason right now why I switched back to another game.
Is this unintentional in this mission(s)?
For Sealion I would agree that it can make sense. I would still recommend to think about a multi-turn cadence of the reinforcement to give player some reward of battling the enemy AC and you would feel the ebb and flow of momentary superiority until the allied supply train catches up.

Thanks and Regards,
Nexus

[Andrea69]

Can you clarify on that? I just played Arras and it sure felt like the AC are respawning all the time. I also checked the lua script afterwards and from my limited understanding the code for respawning is there. Next mission Lille also seem to have it, which is the main reason right now why I switched back to another game.
Is this unintentional in this mission(s)?
For Sealion I would agree that it can make sense. I would still recommend to think about a multi-turn cadence of the reinforcement to give player some reward of battling the enemy AC and you would feel the ebb and flow of momentary superiority until the allied supply train catches up.

Yes, the script is active in the pre-Sealion French scenarios as well, though to a more limited extent (there are fewer hangars to deal with). In any case, it no longer appears after Sealion. That said, if you want to limit its effects, simply damaging enemy aircraft without destroying them is enough, as the spam only triggers when they are destroyed. Of course, you can't prevent the AI's suicide attacks, but this strategy makes the situation much more manageable. Hope this helps.

[DefiantXYX]

2) These historical heroes would start out weaker but have 5 upgrade levels (just like the 5 stars for units), each unlocked after 5 or more—or fewer—standard scenarios.
I’ll illustrate this with the example of Carlo Rivolta.
He would start as a hero with the ReducedSlots and Readiness traits.
After 5 scenarios (1 star), he could be upgraded, for example, +1 HA or players could choose from multiple options (+1 HA or +1 SA, etc.).
After 10 (2 stars), for example, +1 Ini or +10 Speed
After 15 (3 stars), +1 HA or +1 SA
After 20 (4 stars): +1 Ini or +10 Speed
After 25 (5 stars), the final and best upgrade would be a choice of 3 or 4 new traits. For example, Butcher, TankKiller, LightningAttack, or CripplingBlow
This could be free, or cost Prestige, Command Points, or other special points...

Sound nice, but is it this panzercorps2? I like to manage my core and stuff, but that might go in the wrong direction and could be hard to balance...
In your example I could create a hero with a range/speed of +20?! Thats ridiculous, combined with some other heroes, you can scan the whole map in one turn

Yes, the script is active in the pre-Sealion French scenarios as well, though to a more limited extent (there are fewer hangars to deal with). In any case, it no longer appears after Sealion. That said, if you want to limit its effects, simply damaging enemy aircraft without destroying them is enough, as the spam only triggers when they are destroyed. Of course, you can't prevent the AI's suicide attacks, but this strategy makes the situation much more manageable. Hope this helps.

That never worked for me, AI is alawys suiciding. And at some point I started to farm kills...
I think the feature is not bad at all, but the repawn timers should be adjusted (>1 turn for respawn) and there should be a maximum pool of respawns.

[dan1107]

Sound nice, but is it this panzercorps2? I like to manage my core and stuff, but that might go in the wrong direction and could be hard to balance...
In your example I could create a hero with a range/speed of +20?! Thats ridiculous, combined with some other heroes, you can scan the whole map in one turn

But that would have to be an extra-mini map But seriously now. In the files that define units and heroes, speed is listed in tens, just like fuel. So if a unit has a movement = 5 and fuel = 15, it’s defined as speed 50 and fuel 150. The same applies to heroes. I’m used to doing it this way, so if that confused anyone, I apologize

[DefiantXYX]

Ah, I see. I only remeber the Rome Scenario in the PC1 Mod. The allied planes have something like +10/+20 as a trait and can cross the whole map.

[biohazard15]

So, I've finally made it through 1943 and started 1944.

Can't say I don't like it, but I definitely like it less than earlier years. Overpowered Soviets were fine in Citadel arc - this was the defining moment in the war, so throwing in the best troops is logical - but in later missions? Come on guys, where have you been while I was plowing through you at Prokhorovka and Kursk? Second-line troops would be more believeable, IMO. Also, need more Lend-Lease stuff.

I like big maps, but these are kinda TOO big - and with nothing to do except grinding down yet another OP Soviet formation. Astrakhan deserves a special mention here: in vanilla, the Volga Delta part was a kind of fun Vietnam-esque experience, where you send your infantry and maybe Akiyama in a Flammpanzer, but not your tanks and other stuff. I've even put on "Run Through The Jungle" while clearing it (with Azuls in their leafy hats, of course). Now? You can safely ride through it. Meh.
Not to mention the lags - and I have a near-the-top PC (7800X3D, 64GB RAM, RTX4070, the game is on SATA SSD). Loading takes ages sometimes.

Baku was okay, but its 1944 counterpart Case Orange was kinda strange. The briefing tells me that Brits are going to bomb now-mine oil rigs - okay, I set some flaks and put some fighter patrols. And then the Brits just kinda... don't come. Okay, some of them TRIED to come - only to bump into my fighters stationed at that airfield to the south and being shot down in ambushes. You probably should place some Brit AFBs to the west of Baku (meaning NW corner of the map), to give them two attack vectors.

Right now, I've just started Voronezh. I have a feeling I will be hating this map.

Bugs encountered:
- Something strange is happening with airfield capture script. I get a full assortment of fighters, but I get only the first tacbomber or stratbomber mentioned in the script. Swapped planes in the script (Pe2 for Il2M3) - et voila, I'm getting new planes, but not the old ones. Looks like the script shuffles fighters, but not bombers. Tested on Rostov1943 and Manych.
- In Baku, attacking oil rigs may result in COD (as in crash on desktop). I guess the game tells me that I'm not supposed to kill my future oil supply?
- Not really a bug, but it would be nice to have some landing craft and an extra dock in Baku, to get to Artem if you don't have paratroopers on hand (and if you just want to land some troops ahead of your main force). I know that we're not supposed to achieve naval superiority here - but then just put some Soviet TBs in the sea, so we need to look out for them.

P.S. Kinda sad that you've decided to cut Kuybyshev in AOR45. I have a special attachment to that city - I happen to live there (it's called Samara now), so I was looking forward to that mission. The rather unique geography of my city would make an awesome mission - a kind of "reverse Stalingrad", where you have to ferry troops across Volga, from the Bend to the city and surroundings while fending off artillery and air attacks. There were no bridges nowhere near it in 1940s, so landing craft would be your only choice.