RC1 New Unit Balance Thread

Open beta forum.

Moderators: Slitherine Core, The Lordz, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design

Panzer3L
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 4:32 pm

Post by Panzer3L »

uran21 wrote:
Luckily I preserved data on movement that was included in first iterations of e-file so it is easy to turn back to it.

If based on references and including differences to be seen in stats movement for tracked vehicles would range from 2 to 8.
2 would be Maus and 8 would be M18 Hellcat.

Higher movement was changed together with spotting based on complains on this forum related to smaller maps.
Let as put aside that for now. Basing statistics on real differences is clear and neat and it has only couple of open questions related to units on the edge of the scale for two values. Speaking from gameplay point of view aren't some higher movements too powerfull and movement of 2 too restrictive?
4 is slow, 3 puts you on defensive actions unless involved in siege, 2 doesn't give you a chance for a decent retreat.
Value for movement of 6 is IMO more related to travelling trough rough terrain where in most cases your movement will cost you 2 points so you can move as fast as 3 hexes, very good for some outflanking manoeuvre or coming from the rear to be in action on time. 7 and 8 gives you a position to easily follow land transport vehicles. Any distance is not a problem with this.
So shouldn't there be a limit on the edges of the scale for movement for pure tactical reasons? Allowing from 3-6 would give enough room for differences but it would cut the edges, maybe making Hellcat exception as only unit with movement of 7.
Speaking of movement some towed weapons should be realistically at 0 but that 0 is not flexible enough.
All good points.
I didn't say that your efile is unbalanced,its just a bit too balanced for my taste.
I mean in ww2 there were units which realy were OP when they came out.
I don't think its a problem if there are some units which are a bit OP as long the oppenent AI or human player has also some of them.
I don't think those OP units should be balanced by restricting their stats in a unhistoric way (yes i know its just a game...)
OP units (mainly tanks and SPG's) should be restricted in numbers just as it was in reality, at least in most cases.

So let the players have some OP units but don't let them have their entire core filled with them (the PG problem).
I also think that there should be a restriction for those OP heavy units in the core.

So one should not be able to buy more than:

8 Panthers
4 Tigers
4 Jagdpanthers
3 Kingtigers
2 Elephants
1 Jagdtiger
0 Maus (not purchaseable as it is already)

Such a restriction would be good for realism and also gameplay.

These numbers/restrictions should be editable in the efile ofc.

Another thing.
I think it will be hard,close to impossible, to come up with an efile which is perfect for single player and multiplayer.
I assume that most buyers of the game will be singleplayers....MP enthusiasts will come up soon with their own "tournament"-efile i guess.
This is something where Blizzard failed big time,they still think they can balance the game for both PVP and PVE,epic fail.

However its not a real problem for me tbh since the efile can be modded in PzC,so u gotta do what u think its best for the game.
I'm just expressing my thoughts. :)
Last edited by Panzer3L on Thu Jun 16, 2011 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 8624
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky »

I am totally against any and all arbitrary restrictions on equipment availability.

Such measures homogenize a player's core and stamp out any possibility of deviation, successful or not.
That is a cop out to avoid balancing units and will only lead to people always maxing out their restriction.

A player should be able to dump 100% of their prestige into nothing but King Tigers, if they absolutely wanted to.
They should also not be as successful for having done so, compared to buying a well balanced force.
Panzer3L
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 4:32 pm

Post by Panzer3L »

Kerensky wrote:A player should be able to dump 100% of their prestige into nothing but King Tigers, if they absolutely wanted to.
They should also not be as successful for having done so, compared to buying a well balanced force.
So they still will be restricted at the end u just want to give them the chance to find out themself why some restriction is neccessary.
Panzer3L
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 4:32 pm

Post by Panzer3L »

Kerensky wrote:That is a cop out to avoid balancing units and will only lead to people always maxing out their restriction.
Even if u don't wanna restrict core's that way in the official release i would very much apreciate it if there was a stat for it in the efile.
So i and mybe other scenario/campaign designers could use this feature (or cop if u will) for their mods.
Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 8624
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky »

Let people play the way they want to play.

But with robust unit balance, anyone who wants to be a excellent or 'pro' player will understand why buying alternatives and not just 'the best' all the time is the winning ticket.

As for custom campaigns where the designer wants to place their own restrictions, this is already possible with the 'no buy' flag. Simply award the player with restricted units as you see fit (A la SS units in the stock campaign), but don't allow them to buy them on their own. Is that what you're asking?
Obsolete
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1203
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 5:25 pm

Post by Obsolete »

I have nothing against people buying all artillery, all infantry, or whatever, no matter how bad a plan that may be.

Let them figure it out for themselves what works and what doesn't.

Though, there was that one top rated player in PG-III who found a way to break the game by going full infantry....
Image
Experience Ratio = (def exp level + 2)/(att exp level + 2)
Entrenchment Ratio = (def entr rate + 1) /(att entr rate + 1)
Iscaran
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:12 pm

Post by Iscaran »

Quoted from Uran21:
"Basing statistics on real differences is clear and neat and it has only couple of open questions related to units on the edge of the scale for two values. Speaking from gameplay point of view aren't some higher movements too powerfull and movement of 2 too restrictive?
4 is slow, 3 puts you on defensive actions unless involved in siege, 2 doesn't give you a chance for a decent retreat. "

I totally agree that a major factor in basing unit difference should be somehow the "reality" - most players will look at PzC balancing by the way it feels "right" in history. As everyone playing campaign will try to "beat" history won't he ?

I do not feel that 2 movement would be to restrictive for a tank unit as "Maus" represents. It had no chance for retreat its speed was even slower than walking infantry. (If we neglect the historical fact that the 2 tanks of that type never saw combat at all).

A speed of 3 is already good enough for a strong unit. Such units can be well used to either hold some place until....anything. OR to break the initial "thick" front line at some place, after which the faster tanks take over.

I also agree that very high tank speeds (>6) are somewhat critical because this makes the tanks the ultimate weapon for any kinds of offenses nearly unlimited by their advancing speed.

IDEA:
Maybe you could make (the really "fast" tanks only advance so quickly in really flat terrain or only on roads, by increasing the movement speed reduction for tracked units for "rough" terrain ?
Therefore a Hellcat for example could go 8 on roads, but only 5 on normal flat terrain and maybe 2 in hills/forests and 1 in swamps/mountains ?

I can also understand why Kerensky does not want a fixed buy limit for certain unit types - although this would be reflected by reality wouldn't it ? Nevertheless this kind of balancing would solve any problems you could never avoid by balancing via prestige only.

It is an as good idea for campaign balancing (especially in regard for historicalness) and it would also allow for multiplayer balancing.

BUT, perhaps it might be the best thing to let players decide WHICH kind of balancing they want. Maybe for MP games there could be made a "buy restriction" list which every players has to agree upon (or can be negotiated) before. If you could offer that system via some kind of switch you would have the best of both worlds and satisfy all player wishes without the urge to create insane prestige costs for certain

LASTLY: I think because the upgrading of infantry is so much restricted players will refrain from buying large amounts of infantry as it costs you the full price if you switch from infantry to pioneers...isnt that a little too high though pioneers are a different kind of infantry they are still mainly equipped with the same weapons apart from some special weapons (like flamethrowers etc.)

I think by having the upgrade costs for infantry being more "linear" like standard infantry costs 95, pioneers 225 then upgrade cost is 130 instead of 225. In such a case players would buy more infantry ? As sidegrading or upgrading infantry is no longer "such a big" decision when it comes to prestige (Diversity is what you want right ? Otherwise there is too little to gain by having all different kinds of infantry...therefore players will only buy grenadiers and pioneers (mostly).
wyldman68
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 4:32 pm

Post by wyldman68 »

After reading over this discussion about Tiger 2 tanks and price. Maybe a progressive price where first 2 Tiger 2 tanks cost regular price, the next Tiger 2 in core cost regular price plus (let us say) 100 more prestige or maybe 10%, 3rd Tiger 2 cost regular price plus 200 prestige or 20% and so on. Could be used on any of the Tanks, but with a different starting point for excess charge. This does not hard restrict you to 4 Tiger 2 tanks, but makes you think twice about a 3rd or 4th or so on.
Iscaran
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:12 pm

Post by Iscaran »

THAT is indeed an interesting idea Wyldman !

Not sure how this would indeed workout but definitely something to try out perhaps ?
Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 8624
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky »

It's like affirmative action for German tanks. That's not necessary a bad thing though. :)

Either way, we have a new update, so please continue balance discussion in the new thread, so any newcomers don't have to sort through pages and pages of possibly outdated information.
viewtopic.php?p=233173#233173
Panzer3L
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 4:32 pm

Post by Panzer3L »

Kerensky wrote:
As for custom campaigns where the designer wants to place their own restrictions, this is already possible with the 'no buy' flag. Simply award the player with restricted units as you see fit (A la SS units in the stock campaign), but don't allow them to buy them on their own. Is that what you're asking?
Not realy.
Atm there are just two values to choose from in the efile's puchase-stat ,purchaseable and no buy.
I would like to have this setting in numbers going from 0 (no buy) up to say 100.

So if u set a panther to purchase value say 8 the player or AI can never have more than 8 of that panther in his
core,if u set this value to 100 the player can have 100 of that panther in his core/army.

By default (in your offical efile) this value would be set to max 100 in order to let the players buy everthing they want.
That way if someone just plays with the official efile he wouldn't even notice any kind of restriction,unless he wants to buy that 101st
panther which is unlikely.

As matter of fact this would be another game feature even though its kinda"hidden" : "Possibility of having restricted numbers in core of a specific unit type" or you could call it "Rareity-Factor for units"....

In MP this feature could be used not for realism/historic restriction but for preventing spamming of cheap AA units or others.
But one doesent have to use any restrictions when creating an efile if u don't like it.

That way everyone would be happy.

Another thing.Bonus units.
Like i already ask for in another thread it would be awesome if there was a bonus unit stat in the efile.
Just two values to choose from for this, "no bonus " and "can be bonus".

So by default (in your official efile) for example the waffen ss panther would be set to 0(no buy) and be set to "can be bonus".
That way the game would work as it does atm.

For my Mod i would have the waffen ss normaly purchaseable but would set other units to "can be bonus".
Mostly i would set captured equimpent to "can be bonus" but also some of those very rare units.
I'm aware that there are no captured units/equimpent available yet in the game but they will be in my mod.

So basicly.

1.Just add another stat in the efile called "bonus unit" with a value range of "no bonus" and "can be bonus".
2.Change the already existing "purchaseable"-stats value range to 0-100 (instead of just "no buy" and buy")
3.Get the game to correspond with those stats and "act" accordingly ofc.
uran21
Panzer Corps Map Designer
Panzer Corps Map Designer
Posts: 2318
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:34 pm

Post by uran21 »

Panzer3L wrote:Another thing.Bonus units.
Like i already ask for in another thread it would be awesome if there was a bonus unit stat in the efile.
Just two values to choose from for this, "no bonus " and "can be bonus".
Check Add Traits column in e-file, magic word bonus but I didn't check it with others than SS and do not know is there anything other related to it in the code.
uran21
Panzer Corps Map Designer
Panzer Corps Map Designer
Posts: 2318
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:34 pm

Post by uran21 »

Iscaran wrote:Maybe you could make (the really "fast" tanks only advance so quickly in really flat terrain or only on roads, by increasing the movement speed reduction for tracked units for "rough" terrain ?
Therefore a Hellcat for example could go 8 on roads, but only 5 on normal flat terrain and maybe 2 in hills/forests and 1 in swamps/mountains ?
I could change how movement type like tracked behaves on different terrains but that would affect all tracked vehicles so not really a solution.
Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 8624
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky »

I rather like the changes to tank movement in RC2. Tigers got their nerfs, Panthers got their buffs. Time to move on to other issues.
Iscaran
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:12 pm

Post by Iscaran »

"I could change how movement type like tracked behaves on different terrains but that would affect all tracked vehicles so not really a solution."

Well I that it would affect all tracked vehicles - but perhaps the issue is indeed with all tracked vehicles and we are only discussing it because it is most obviuos for the tanks situation.

Maybe with a change to all other tracked vehicles like +1 to speed PLUS the change of how tracked movement works might do a good job ?

Just an idea though - and I personally dont have enough play experience with PzC to say this is the way I would want it to go.
uran21
Panzer Corps Map Designer
Panzer Corps Map Designer
Posts: 2318
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 8:34 pm

Post by uran21 »

Iscaran wrote:Panther is around 15 hp/t
Tiger I is 12 hp/t
Tiger II is 10 hp/t
Maus is ~ 5hp/t

So lets say a 5 movement for panther and 4 for Tiger and Tiger II leaves a 2 for Maus
Jagdtiger is also around 10hp/t but has nearly 50% more weight than Tiger II. => so speed 3. Would also be better in gameplay reasons - but I could live with a speed of 4 for that as well.
Jagdpanther is again around 15hp/t => equal to Panther (its also very close in total weight). So same speed as Panther definitely.
Power per weight is actually a good tool to outweigh stat when speed is on the border of two values. Thanks for pointing out on it.

How to effectively include cross country performance individually is still an open question to me.

Units that were changed regarding the movement are:

Panther D
Panther A
Panther G
Tiger II
Cruiser Mk.IV (A13)
Cromwell Mk.IV
Cromwell Mk.VII
Challenger (A30)
M2A4
BT-5
BT-7
T-60
T-70
Marder IID
Jagdtiger
M18 Hellcat
SU-100
Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 8624
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky »

I'm not sure if I'm comfortable with the M18 moving 7, but we'll see how it functions after some play testing.
I fully endorse all the other movement changes though.

Be sure to check the new thread for updated RC2 discussion.
viewtopic.php?p=233173#233173
Iscaran
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 8:12 pm

Post by Iscaran »

Glad I could help to make PzC to improve further on its way to RELIVE the PG-times of my youth :D

"How to effectively include cross country performance individually is still an open question to me. "

I mean on equally motorized tanks a +-1 because of overall weight or some retrievable data on cross country speed should make up for a decision making otherwise that +-1 may indeed be used a little for balancing flavor and personal flavor.
Panzer3L
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2011 4:32 pm

Post by Panzer3L »

uran21 wrote:
Panzer3L wrote:Another thing.Bonus units.
Like i already ask for in another thread it would be awesome if there was a bonus unit stat in the efile.
Just two values to choose from for this, "no bonus " and "can be bonus".
Check Add Traits column in e-file, magic word bonus but I didn't check it with others than SS and do not know is there anything other related to it in the code.
Awesome :D

Thanx
Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps Open Beta”