Heroes Assignment

[Chris10]

I put this here for commenting on the matter.

I got two Range Heroes (Range+1) on a 17cmK18 which now ended up with a range of 5.
While all nice and stuff It feels weird and not very natural when units become ultra overpowered by getting
multiple heroes of the same kind...

Wouldnt it be more appropiate to exclude already given heroe classes when assigning a new one ?
So that Units get only 1 heroe per class (range,attack,defense,movement..and so on)

This would avoid the creation of absolute ÜberUnits.

Thoughts ?

[billmv44]

I like getting the super units. In the DLC series, I have a Ju-87G with +8 attack. It's a huge asset in slowing down those 15 strength IS-2s when playing on Manstein level. If this is to change, I think it should be an option for the player to decide if he wants to limit heroes like this or not.

[zappel]

Artillery with +2 range, Ju87 with +8 attach: some like it, some not. I'm one of those who don't like it, prohibit super-units with three identical hereos.

[ivanov]

Units with the same heroes assigned, always looked to me like something that was not meant to be and that it was overlooked by the DEVS.

[billmv44]

I think a more important change would be to eliminate the less useful hero assignments. For example, artillery with Spotting, aircraft with Movement, etc.

[zappel]

OK, an artillery with +1 spotting is really a dissipation but an artillery with +1 movement enjoys all the advantages. In my book +1 movement is always a good hero even if its an airplane. Difficult to say which other hero is really unnecassary.

[zappel]

In my book +1 movement is always a good hero even if its an airplane.

Self-Fullfilling prophecy

Sturm-Fallschirmjäger

SuperUnit.png (113.58 KiB) Viewed 4509 times

+1 movement is good but +2 movement is too much, look at this range! These paratroopers can move by feet even as far as by airtransport.

[Chris10]

I think a more important change would be to eliminate the less useful hero assignments. For example, artillery with Spotting, aircraft with Movement, etc.

OK, an artillery with +1 spotting is really a dissipation but an artillery with +1 movement enjoys all the advantages. In my book +1 movement is always a good hero even if its an airplane. Difficult to say which other hero is really unnecassary.

Guys, all heroes are useful. Wherever people can take advanatge of them or not is up to their play style but its totally absurd to talk about more or less useful hero assignments. Its like saying all tanks below Tiger are uselss..lets get rid of them..cmon.
There has to be some variety,especially if double heroes are eliminated, any increase in stats is always helpful and artillery with spotting +1 is especially useful when moving hex by hex thru mountains,just to give an example.
+1 movement for all 1hex movement towed artillery or AT is very powerful if you know how to take advantage of it

In my book +1 movement is always a good hero even if its an airplane.

Self-Fullfilling prophecy

SuperUnit.png

+1 movement is good but +2 movement is too much, look at this range! These paratroopers can move by feet even as far as by airtransport.

See..thats what I mean..it isnt really fun this way as things can become pretty absurd when multiple heroes of the same kind get assigned

[Kerensky]

This is just the opposite side of the RNG coin. There are threads like this that claim some hero combinations are too powerful. There are even more threads that say they are too weak (Why I get all init heroes! Why all arty have plus defense!?). This is what happens in a random system. Most turn out somewhat average, some are really good, and some are really not so good. All balanced in the grand scheme of things, which leads me to believe it is very much working as intended.

It's for reasons like those here that there was probably never a 'disband/sack' hero option, or people would really end up with all of these super hero units, which probably would be bad.

[Tarrak]

This is just the opposite side of the RNG coin. There are threads like this that claim some hero combinations are too powerful. There are even more threads that say they are too weak (Why I get all init heroes! Why all arty have plus defense!?). This is what happens in a random system. Most turn out somewhat average, some are really good, and some are really not so good. All balanced in the grand scheme of things, which leads me to believe it is very much working as intended.

It's for reasons like those here that there was probably never a 'disband/sack' hero option, or people would really end up with all of these super hero units, which probably would be bad.

I totally agree with Kerensky. Most units turns out to be average. In case you get the less useful hero combination so be it. If you get a rare top combination it makes the unit a rare gem to treasure and nurture.

[Chris10]

Well...the best would be obviously to get this out of the hardcode (why is so much basic stuff hardcoded in PzC ? )
and export the entire heroe thingi into a heroes.pzdat were people can fiddle around with
- what bonuses
- how big bonuses or random
- edit any kind of naming string
- what pictures for which bonus
- set %
- set random or fix heroe assignment
- manipulate the messages to be displayed

[monkspider]

I like the super hero units, they are rare and they can make a campaign play surprisingly different when you get them. I remember the campaign where I had not one but two artilleries with +1 move, that was an interesting experience!

[zappel]

There are even more threads that say they are too weak (Why I get all init heroes! Why all arty have plus defense!?). This is what happens in a random system.

Sure, that's excatly what I meant. An artillery with three defense heros should be prevented just as an artillery with three range heros. The program should randomize the heros as before but only one hero of each kind.

[Rudankort]

Sure, that's excatly what I meant. An artillery with three defense heros should be prevented just as an artillery with three range heros. The program should randomize the heros as before but only one hero of each kind.

The end result of this would be, all units would have more or less same heroes, with more or less equal bonuses, and then why have heroes at all? Such "averaged" bonuses are already provided by experience: all Tigers with the same exp have the same combat peformance. The heroes were added specifically to make special, outstanding units. Even the best unit has just one move and one attack per turn, and so, considering the size of the core in late campaign, should not affect the balance all that much.

[zappel]

Sure, that's excatly what I meant. An artillery with three defense heros should be prevented just as an artillery with three range heros. The program should randomize the heros as before but only one hero of each kind.

The end result of this would be, all units would have more or less same heroes, with more or less equal bonuses, and then why have heroes at all? Such "averaged" bonuses are already provided by experience: all Tigers with the same exp have the same combat peformance. The heroes were added specifically to make special, outstanding units. Even the best unit has just one move and one attack per turn, and so, considering the size of the core in late campaign, should not affect the balance all that much.

Hmmm, that's also a good argument. I agree, every unit with the same heroes is nothing special but a unit with three identical heroes is "too" special. What now?

[Rudankort]

Hmmm, that's also a good argument. I agree, every unit with the same heroes is nothing special but a unit with three identical heroes is "too" special. What now?

What now? I guess, nothing. Everything is working as designed, everybody is happy.

[deducter]

I think the current hero system is fine, luck always average out in the end. In my GC playthrough, I had all sorts of +defense artillery heroes and even a hilarious +2 spotting towed AT unit, but I also feel like I have plenty of super units (3 +1 range artillery, a Stuka with +5 Attack, a TAC with +2INI/+2A/+2D) that make a huge difference in combat performance.

That said, a heroes.pzdat file that allows customization would be incredibly awesome. In the short term this could work just as chris describes. But ideally, in another expansion, you could do add all sorts of crazy new hero traits (a logistics one to improve fuel/ammo/resupply, an "expert defender" type that prevents penalties from mass attack, a "blitzer" type that allows +1 attack a turn at the cost of attack power, a "commissar" for the Soviets to "inspire" their men to fight to the death and never retreat/surrender etc.). I personally would love a hero management system where you could transfer heroes in between the same unit class, but doing so would incur huge prestige costs. There'd also be some restrictions to prevent too much stacking of a certain type of bonus.

[zappel]

Hmmm, that's also a good argument. I agree, every unit with the same heroes is nothing special but a unit with three identical heroes is "too" special. What now?

What now? I guess, nothing. Everything is working as designed, everybody is happy.

That's true: everything is working as designed and everybody is happy. And while I have no other suggestion all is working as it is expected to work.