Room for improvement

[marsellus]

Few ideas from me:
1. Some WW2 heroes or generals mentioned in many scenarios of '39-'42 campaigns (and next new too) above the name and overstrength could have a hero and his photo in battle history card and suitable bonus ability - defence, attack, movement etc.
2. Bonus abilities could have been more various - like those in PG2.
3. Mountain infantry could have movement bonus also at forests not only rough terrain - there are very few maps where mountain inf is really usefull and desirable - I wont say they're completely useless but... it could be better also not making it too good.
4. Maybe there could be random possibility of a partisans appear behind the lines e.g. next to captured city hex - ofc not very often event, but could be a reason to consider leaving some units to guard the back not only rushing forward
5. Some ideas about bridge engineers in other topic also.

[El_Condoro]

4. Maybe there could be random possibility of a partisans appear behind the lines e.g. next to captured city hex - ofc not very often event, but could be a reason to consider leaving some units to guard the back not only rushing forward

That can be done now through AI scripting. In Red Dawn I have some objectives that will be retaken by remnants of the enemy (5 strength) if you don't leave a covering unit in them.

[marsellus]

That can be done now through AI scripting. In Red Dawn I have some objectives that will be retaken by remnants of the enemy (5 strength) if you don't leave a covering unit in them.

I think this is a good idea coz makes game more unpredictable. Ofc until it's not happening everywhere everytime

[PGtomli]

I'd like to see the following game design features improved:

NEW REINFORCEMENTS DESIGN:
- Each turn (for each side) starts with a reinforcement phase (this is before the Movement/Battle phase)
During the reinforcement phase the player (human and AI) has an opportunity to reinforce units that are within supply lines. New units can also be procured, if there are any supply locations available and if there is resources (prestige and equipment) available. This differs from the current game design because in the current game design the player can supply at any time and can get new units at any time during the turn. That can be exploited by the player sacrificing a low unit and freeing up a core slot to buy a new unit and place it in a weak sector.

- Reinforcements should consist of a pool of available (reinforcement) equipment. I.e. in the purchase screen each unit will have a number detailing how much strength can be pulled out from the reserve. This pool is defined in the map design and during the progress of the map it can be increased and lowered. Let's say the Fallschirm unit has 20 reserve. That means if you have a Fallschirm at 6 strength and supply it, the remaining reserve would be at 16. Now, let's say you buy a new Fallschirm. After this purchase your reserve will be down to 6. If you still have additional prestige, you can no longer buy a fully stacked Fallschirm. This system is good because it makes the map deeper and more realistic. Usually a player will just buy the best troops, but in reality the best troops were not always available (even if the player has prestige). Implemeting this design would make the scenarios more realistic, interesting, unique and add another layer of balance.
- The reinforcement pool can be increased a little by capturing objectives and destroying enemy units. There may also be scripted events for increasing the reinforcement pool. This could potentially lead to the player gaining/capturing some enemy equipment (rare and few).

NOTE: Reinforcements are still purchased with prestige points.

[robman]

That can be done now through AI scripting. In Red Dawn I have some objectives that will be retaken by remnants of the enemy (5 strength) if you don't leave a covering unit in them.

I think this is a good idea coz makes game more unpredictable. Ofc until it's not happening everywhere everytime

This suggestion works nicely with a change that I would like to see, the ability to split units. This would greatly help with the problem of defending rear and flank areas, and it would be MUCH more realistic than the current need to leave many towns, bridges, etc. completely unguarded.

How might this work? There would be a "split" button in the UI panel. Select a unit, press, and the game asks you how many units you want to create. For example, let's say you have a unit with a current strength level of 9. If you select "2," it would be split into a unit of 4 and a unit of 5; if you select "3," it would be split into 3 units of 3. The new units would appear right next to the "mother" unit, placed along the lines of debarkation arrows. Reinforcements would be limited to the corresponding fraction of the total possible, rounded down. There should be penalties for initiative and perhaps for supply.

[whaco]

[quote="DrkCon"]I'd like to see a few of the things already mentioned (Hero identification and Enhanced Heros)

Also, I'd like the engine to simply continue. WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf 1 + 2, Isreal War of Independence, Falklands, Kosovo, etc..etc..etc..

quote]

I think this is the best Idea I've heard all week. Vietnam doesnt play out well RTS or Squad/platoon level b/c of the jungle, but would surely be interesting to see operations that involved the Cambodian/Laos border, The Ho Chi Minh Trail, The Tet offensive, Dong Ap Bia, even Siagon, all these would have to be scaled back to some degree I assume, but none the less great fun when you have Aircav involved....

[PGtomli]

More features that could be great for Panzer Corps:

• Supply lines (- see previous posts).
• Feature for supply lines: Units that start out of supply receive penalty to movement (- except for para troopers and partisans)
• If a unit is out of supply, it will not be able to reinforce by using the '+' button (- currently only adjacancy is considered when reinforcing)
• New option for maps: Disable Undo Button (- to make it so that you can't undo moves. This is a more hard core level to prevent "test-scouting" and such maneuvers)
• To accomodate the disabling of the undo button; add feature that the combat odds display does not require hair cross (- display haircross over non adjacent units by holding down ctrl and hover with mouse)
• Implement overrun for tanks in some fashion (- not as owerful as in Panzer General, but still some kind of overrun that allows the tank to do one [and only one] overrun per turn and then advance with remaining movement minus penalty)
• Implement 2 range attacks for some tank and anti-tank units with powerful turrets, such as Tiger, Kv85, Firefly, JagdTiger, etc (- like Panzer general Scorched Earth)
• Implement an equipment pool or supply/demand model of some kind (- see "new reinforcements" thread for examples)
• Single Player: Implement dynamic campaign where the player can choose where to attack on a strategic map and losses do not end game but makes it go towards a unfavorable ending. Successes make the campaign go towards a favorable ending. Re-using maps would be ok, but starting positions and enemy numbers of units and the player's units are modified by the success rate.

[Tarrak]

I think you are going way way to far with your ideas PGtomli. All the changes you are suggesting are not going to improve PC, they are going to turn it into a completely different game. If it's for worse or better that's a question of personal preference but especially the supply lines will make it certainly lose the Panzer General feeling.

[dragos]

The single most annoying thing for me is the possibility for both player and AI to purchase units in any owned city/village on the map. Just restrict purchasing new units in several designated hexes.

I even adjusted the strategy in order to deal with the unpleasant situation when the AI is spamming units at the most inconvenient moment in unrealistic situations, like popping 4-5 tanks around a flag in the middle of a surrounded location. It is most annoying since the AI seems to freeze up to a minute during its turn, announcing it is going to spam a shitload of units somewhere.

I found it is important to block enemy flags in advance without capturing them just to prevent the AI deploying there.

[TheGrayMouser]

Just thinking aloud on the concept of supplies:
What if you only had a finite amount of ammo and fuel?
For ease of play/ keep the same feel as current , no need to trace the lines or anything , just every time a unit refuels/re-ammo's , that amount is deducted from a "universal depot" for fuel and ammo.

Of course that begs the ? of what happens when that universal depot is run dry... Perhaps only a tiny fraction would be given to a unit next time it fuels up?

To take it further you could lose / gain supplies by capturing supply "depots" ( basically cities or any other hex for that matter, designated as such in the editor)
Also you could even buy additional supplies between scenarios with prestige, maybe even supplies carry over as well....

Of course none of this would be for the standrd GC or the expansions but would be pretty cool to have as an additional feature for custom games.

[robman]

The single most annoying thing for me is the possibility for both player and AI to purchase units in any owned city/village on the map. Just restrict purchasing new units in several designated hexes.

I even adjusted the strategy in order to deal with the unpleasant situation when the AI is spamming units at the most inconvenient moment in unrealistic situations, like popping 4-5 tanks around a flag in the middle of a surrounded location. It is most annoying since the AI seems to freeze up to a minute during its turn, announcing it is going to spam a shitload of units somewhere.

I found it is important to block enemy flags in advance without capturing them just to prevent the AI deploying there.

Getting rid of this problem would be one of the advantages of a slightly more robust line-of-supply system. It is reasonable, for example, to limit the deployment of new units to friendly airfields and towns linked to the original deployment hexes, or to other friendly towns, or to friendly side of the board by road or rail. I agree that the supply system needs to stay simple, since otherwise it would change the character of the game, but I think that's doable.

[brettz123]

Actually if you want it to be realistic you should have all new units start at a map edge.

[HBalck]

Actually if you want it to be realistic you should have all new units start at a map edge.

Yes - the old PG2 (in Europe PG3D) its much better - new bought units can only entry from special supply points on the map edges.

H.Balck

[soldier]

I kind of like the idea of their being a small penalty for resupplying if your a long way out from your friendly towns (maybe -25% or worse if your even further out). No change to the interface is needed. I also liked that in PG certain terrain hexes like desert, would impact supply, probably marsh would be similar. I'm not in favour of pools, traceable supply lines or depots for this game but i agree some improvement could be made.

[Gwaylare]

My focus is on multiplayer game and there two points I am not fine with. Although they are mentioned already here again:

1) To resupply troops is much to easy and cheap. This means the mean idea is to eliminate troops to avoid reinforcing. The focus should be more on fighting to get better positions, than to eliminate troops.
On the other hands things should not be to complicated. I like supply lines very much, but this is a bit to much for this game. So I like the reduction of possible reinforcements by airplanes and adjacent units. To do this for troops far away would be fine and to avoid increases from strength 1 to 10 in a single round seems to be a good idea. Do not give ammo in addition to the strength, you do very seldom reammo infantry, because you reinforce them inseed.
New units should not be placed adjacent to enemy units or may be they should get supression like para troopers.
I like the idea of increasing costs for buying and reinforcing the same unit typ (except infantry) all the time to get a better mix.

2) The undo function needs to be fixed. It is fine to have an undo function, but it should not be possible to scout with it. So where is the problem to reveal all enemy units by deselecting the unit after the move. After that no undo is possible. So you cannot directly attack an enemy within fog of war. You need to move into position, deselect the unit, select it again and attack after that. This seems to be much to complicated? But you have to do it like this at the moment as well, because there could be ari behind and you will detect this just by deselecting the unit before you attack. Only the adjacent hexes are revealed, not those behind. This is hard to understand! So I do not know how many bad attacks I have launched, because I missed that

Overall this is a great multiplayer game and great balanced maps!

Best regards
Gwaylare

[Schneides42]

Sorry if this has been covered elsewhere, and this may be just me, but every so often I mistakenly click on the end turn button rather than the resupply button! Can these be moved or perhaps a 'pop up' to confirm end of turn if there are friendly units that have either move, attack or supply options available?

Cheers

Schneides

[dan_hnnng]

I've done the same thing many times:(