Varying the Victory Conditions
Moderators: Slitherine Core, The Lordz, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
Varying the Victory Conditions
I know it's too late to implement in this first edition of Panzer Corps, but there's something I like to suggest for future expansions and that is having varying victory conditions. I'm playing mostly the '39 Campaign and they all have you capturing Victory Hexes to win a mission. One of the things I really liked about PG: Scorched Earth was that it had varying victory conditions. Some missions had you finding and destroying elite enemy units, in addition to capturing some VH's (some had a variation where you had to find and destroy enemy fortresses). Other missions you had take a couple of cities plus exit a certain number of units off the other side of the map. I realize the MP maps have some alternate victory conditions, but, from what I've seen in the SP, all of the maps I've played are based on VH's only. Just thought I'd pass that on and hope you consider it in future editions of the game.
Last edited by AgentX on Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:54 am, edited 2 times in total.
We are paying close attention to this issue, and in fact, already in 1.0 there is some variety in this respect. One problem is, when you are showing major WW2 operations in the game, your options become more limited. For example, the mission can hardly revolve around destroying an elite enemy unit, this is more a thing for tactical games.
What we do have is requirement to destroy all enemy units in addition to capturing all VHs (Bagration, Germany). In Overlord the requirement is to destroy all units on the french mainland (transports in sea do not count). In addition to this, we have tried to play with VH conditions a little bit. Thus, in Norway you don't need all VHs to secure marginal victory, and in Italy you need to hold Sicily for decisive, while for marginal this is not required.
We checked if doing this for more scens would be a good idea, for example, request the player to take only a certain number of objectives in some scens, but concluded that as it stands this will only hurt the game. In most scens you already go across all map with a broad front, and so you pass all objectives anyway. If you don't need to take all of them, it can only make the game easier because you can just ignore cities with the biggest defense and take those with less defenders.
One issue to keep in mind when talking about fancier victory conditions is that the AI must be able to handle them. The reason why MP maps use advanced victory conditions more extensively is that there you do not have an AI problem. But in SP every new condition requires some tweaks in AI department. Thus, if the AI needs to protect elite unit from destruction, the AI needs to understand what an elite unit is, and how to protect it. This is one more reason why the use of complex victgory conditions in 1.0 is limited, but in the future we'll of course try to improve this aspect.
What we do have is requirement to destroy all enemy units in addition to capturing all VHs (Bagration, Germany). In Overlord the requirement is to destroy all units on the french mainland (transports in sea do not count). In addition to this, we have tried to play with VH conditions a little bit. Thus, in Norway you don't need all VHs to secure marginal victory, and in Italy you need to hold Sicily for decisive, while for marginal this is not required.
We checked if doing this for more scens would be a good idea, for example, request the player to take only a certain number of objectives in some scens, but concluded that as it stands this will only hurt the game. In most scens you already go across all map with a broad front, and so you pass all objectives anyway. If you don't need to take all of them, it can only make the game easier because you can just ignore cities with the biggest defense and take those with less defenders.
One issue to keep in mind when talking about fancier victory conditions is that the AI must be able to handle them. The reason why MP maps use advanced victory conditions more extensively is that there you do not have an AI problem. But in SP every new condition requires some tweaks in AI department. Thus, if the AI needs to protect elite unit from destruction, the AI needs to understand what an elite unit is, and how to protect it. This is one more reason why the use of complex victgory conditions in 1.0 is limited, but in the future we'll of course try to improve this aspect.
Last edited by Rudankort on Mon Jul 04, 2011 7:42 am, edited 2 times in total.
Great to know and thanks for the reply. Guess I play the '39 Campaign too much and haven't played the '43 West Campaign (that has Italy and Overlord) because it looked too short from campaign tree in the Library. Does it really end at Overlord, so it can be completed in just two missions? Why not extend it since you already have the maps? D-Day was June '44, so you could make a special '45 version of SeaLion and then follow it with US invasion in '46.
If you start a 1943 campaign, the war in the east is not finished yet, and so if you manage to win decisive in Overlord, you still have Lake Balaton. But if you pull off a decisive there too, yes, it will end.
But you can also get to defensive branch of the campaign if you start in 1939, you just need a couple of marginal victories in key scenarios. On higher difficulty levels it is quite possible that the player will end up going along this path.
As for expanding the campaign, it is always an option, but most people will play 1939 campaign anyway, and so the effort spend on USA '46 and the like would be better spent on more historical scenarios in earlier years. Besides, in 1946 the US should have their atomic bomb already, so any fictional scens at that time become questionable.
But you can also get to defensive branch of the campaign if you start in 1939, you just need a couple of marginal victories in key scenarios. On higher difficulty levels it is quite possible that the player will end up going along this path.
As for expanding the campaign, it is always an option, but most people will play 1939 campaign anyway, and so the effort spend on USA '46 and the like would be better spent on more historical scenarios in earlier years. Besides, in 1946 the US should have their atomic bomb already, so any fictional scens at that time become questionable.
This is very true and I guess the US could have used their A-bombs on Germany instead since Japan was basically defeated and Germany would have been the bigger threat (after a failed Overlord mission). About your other point, I'm finishing up a '39 campaign on Field Marshall so I can unlock the higher difficulty. Very likely, I will then go down the other path and hit those defensive missions. Tell me something, can you play any campaign on Field Marshall and that unlocks the higher difficulty levels for all campaigns? Or, only the campaign you played?
In order to unlock bonus difficulty levels you need to conquer the US on Field Marshal. This means that only 1939 and 1941 campaigns allow it. When bonus levels are unlocked, they are added to game options screen and can be used for any campaign, and for single scenarios too.
PS. In what version did you start your Field Marshal campaign, and what is your experience with it? Too easy? Too hard? Any specific issues?
PS. In what version did you start your Field Marshal campaign, and what is your experience with it? Too easy? Too hard? Any specific issues?
I started a new one on RC4. I usually start a new one with each new beta, so I can better see the differences on the newest version (so, often, I don't even get to finish off the US....lol). So far, so good with RC4 and I'm really enjoying it (no issues so far). Biggest difference I can see is that experience seems to be acquired at a slower rate. Hard thing is that I'm not playing two campaigns simultaneously so I can't really see all the differences. Is Prestige any different? First three missions, Prestige was in short supply and had to make some tough strategic decisions. However, that also seemed to be the case when I played on Colonel in RC3 (once you get to the fourth mission, lack of Prestige becomes less of a concern). Guess when I unlock those harder difficulty levels, Prestige will become even more valuable. I saw your AAR of the Mannstein level and, with all those losses, Prestige had to be constantly in short supply. Hoping I can get through it without cheating as well (must have been tempting to use that Prestige cheat, though).
That campaign was played by Kerensky. Anyway, thx for sharing your observations. And yes, slower exp growth rate is the main difference between FM and General.