Rarity concept in service of variety

[deducter]

Another issue is that the difficulty jump from Colonel to FM is not very big. Rather than simply making FM much harder and making the gap between Colonel and FM too big with nothing in between, why not add a few new difficulties in as an intermediate?

Instead of Colonel -> General -> FM, you can have Colonel -> Generalmajor (100% base prestige) -> Generalleutenant (100% base prestige, -50% exp) -> General der Panzer Truppen (75% base prestige, -50% exp)-> Field Marshall (50% base prestige, -50% exp) -> bonus difficulties. The exact numbers can be subject to further tuning, those are just some quick ones I threw out. Just by adding a few new difficulty modes, this could go a long way towards addressing the issue of frustration.

You cannot balance the game around players willing to save/reload or use cheat codes to give themselves prestige. While there's nothing wrong with having fun using the cheat codes, that's not a legitimate way of balancing the game. If you think that's how balancing works, just enable cheat codes for multiplayer and see how well that turns out.

I think it is fair to make the highest difficulties very challenging, because it's not necessarily something meant for everyone. You cannot tune the game for only the hardest difficulty. After all, Manstein exists and is the hardest by far on the vanilla rules/eqp file, yet very few feel compelled to play it. With more difficulty options, you can start out at Colonel and gradually improve yourself, working your way up to FM, which should feel very different. Furthermore, this graduated difficulty scale does not require much extra work to implemented.

[fsx]

I think, only prestige could cover all the requests. Other concepts would cover a part of the requests.

Should I use all my slots
Should I use normal or elite replacements
Should I upgrade some units
Should I use overstrength
Should I buy units
Should I spend prestige during scenario for replacements

As I had such a prestige shortage, it was a new level of the game. The preparation before the scenario was much longer. But this feature is a problem for part-time-player.

For collecting some informations, it would be nice to have a prestige-report for each scenario with the possibility to save it.
earned prestige during scenario
MV,DV,Lost-prestige
spended prestige for replacements (normal, elite) during scenario
same for overstrength during scenario, buy core/aux, upgrade during scenario
and the same actions before scenario-start
and difficulty level.

If the player has too much prestige, he allways uses the best units and overtrenght and all slots available.

[kokkorhekkus]

The debate is very interesting

For my point of view it's boring to see Core 's tank forces with only Tigers and Panthers or Paratroopers or mountain inf. for mini 50% of an infantry core. "Werhmacht uber älles" syndrome is not an interesting concept for me. balance between historicity and an enjoying game is better.

With ideas discuted above a simple adjustement could be :

2 types of material : rare & not rare. The rare ones with 20% cost for each sup. unit (Tiger 700 then 840 then 1080...)
So : Panzer IV is not rare, Tiger is. Panther...pb...perhaps not rare I don't remember the historical production but with a little higher PP cost.
Decreased costs for PZ IV ????? for mass production versions like G & H ? (but further complication...it's not really a good idea I think)

Same things for some Infantry forces (with expensive training) : I think Para & Mountain Units, perhaps Ing. too...or a more expensive base's PP cost for the last type, perhaps.

For arty : same concept above 105 caliber canons

planes : He 177 : rare ! (just an example, but 190 is not rare, except the version with torpedo !)

furthermore, Adjusted costs (high ones...or cheapest ones for rare but "bad" material ?) could introduce also XX variants of materials. Like 109G's versions and so on...

[fsx]

Yes, kokkorhekkus that could be work.

I would give each unit a rarity value.
For a Tiger perhaps 2. The first unit would cost like the column cost says (for example 700), the second 2(rarity)*Costs of the previous one = 1.400, the 3rd 2.800 = 2 * 1.400 and so on.
Cost of x th unit = cost in the equipment * rarity ^ (x-1)

Replacements and elite replacement calculated from the avarage cost of an unit.
But normal replacements at the start of a scanario (deployment phase) should cost something for rare units. An other Column? To give the upgrade costs from the second unit on.
If I own 1 Tiger replacements (normal, between scenarios) costs 0, for 2 Tigers each replacement (strength +1) costs the value in th new column, for
3 Tiger lastvalue * rarity = columnvalue * 2,
4 Tiger lastvalue * rarity = columnvalue * 2 * 2,

Cost of strenght +1 if you own 1 unit = 0
Cost of strenght +1 if you own x units = (new column) * rarity ^ (x-2), x > 1

The two new values could have decimal parts.
For a Panzer IV rarity could be lower than 1. The second, 3th.. would have reduced costs.

[kokkorhekkus]

Thanks for this debate fsx ,

But I think that balance must be preserved, and with the red army power in '44 & '45 campaigns... :

20% for each Tiger sup. on the field seems better for this, don't you think ? 700pp then 840 then 1080 and so on...a (cumulative) column value of 1.2 indeed

The interest for playing on FM or "Rommel" mode must be preserved too...

Drastic changements have drastic consequences for most players & the "sergent" level is not very interesting ...

[kokkorhekkus]

around this debate I think that "one time updtates" for rare materials/versions - if further materials will be added by the Slitehrine team - could be fun for the durability of DLC's

here is an exemple :

FW190 A5/U14...with a torpedo. (very) rare...it must be more expensive than 190A, but an A's update around 200 pp for a particular scénario could be fun, then your 190A is coming back for no cost. (but fighter class for this type of material is a problem perhaps, like A and F/G versions...a reform here is an idea too)

[kokkorhekkus]

I've read a second time the Uran's post

It is about a progressive entry of new materials in the fields, and deleted ones too.
But the idea of rare materials (introduction of other versions of trucks or 109 G-6/R8 and his friends) are around the same subjects

So for the one of the other the question is : is the limits have to be strict ones (one, and two and three tigers available from scenario to another, with same cost) or limited by a PP cost ?

[Casaubon]

I personally was rather fond of the late PG games' approach to limiting access to units, but of course these games played out drastically different to the first PG.

I also enjoyed this concept very much in the Panzer General Western Assault game, though a certain limited availability for rare types causing cost increase could do the trick better than hard limits to types.

I´d suggest to have an INCREASE to prevent powerbuying certain types as well as an old stuff gets cheaper DECREASE in cost like:

switch

• case unitsincore(tiger) > costlimit(rare): unitcost =unitcost + percentage(rare) * unitsincore(tiger) - timediscount(rare)
  
  case unitsincore(me109) > costlimit(common): unitcost = unitcost + percentage(common) * unitsincore(me109) - timediscount(common)

etc.

[fsx]

Thanks for this debate fsx ,

But I think that balance must be preserved, and with the red army power in '44 & '45 campaigns... :

20% for each Tiger sup. on the field seems better for this, don't you think ? 700pp then 840 then 1080 and so on...a (cumulative) column value of 1.2 indeed

The used numbers in the example are only a part of an example. Tests have to show what could be an good value for the parameter.

[kokkorhekkus]

So the Casaubon's formula seems good, and with tests (in FM and "Rommel" levels ?) for implemented values, you're right fsx

perhaps with a third formula with no changes in pp cost or a fixed cost (Panther ? not so rare, but no so common)

And the balance has to be with 2 approach in mind : "one time campaign" DLC approach, and long time approach for the complete DLCs from '39 to '45...not very easy

[Scrapulous]

I am a big fan of the original proposal. I would like to see new units only become available in limited numbers, perhaps as prototypes. Then, if historical production supports it, they may become available in higher numbers over time, perhaps eventually becoming available in unlimited numbers.

I would also like to see this not tied to difficulty (I am not good enough to play at Field Marshal level, but would still like to play with a more historical core force), but perhaps a "Game Setting," similar to the way that you can choose whether Weather, Supply, and Fog of War are enabled at the beginning of a campaign.

I also see merit in altering the cost of a unit to reflect availability/scarcity of the materials used to build it. I think both of these elements could be combined to make a very realistic purchasing system.

A game that did something similar to this was the Close Combat series. Typically each battle group had its own unit supply system with a limited number of reinforcements.

[Zhivago]

Let it be....let it be....

[kokkorhekkus]

...limited number of reinforcements based on real productions...not so bad alternative idea too ?

but perhaps a more complicated approach & flexibility of the game mechanics than (progressive) higher PP costs

[Scrapulous]

Another benefit of these proposals occurs to me: it increases the benefit of captured units. Later in the DLC Grand Campaign for example, often captured units are immediately sold off or upgraded. But if there is a limited amount of Wehrmacht materiel (as there certainly was historically), enemy T-34s and KVs would be much more valuable acquisitions (as they certainly were historically).

[kokkorhekkus]

all in all , if possible : with a major patch by Slitherine in X months or one or two years may have the "dream" result : making PZC a timeless game for all of us, and all new gamers

with :
- a majority of deducter's stat changes (some details to revise perhaps, like Tiger's cost if a rarity concept is validated)
- introduction of a lot of new units, because more chess pieces = more fun, that's why PZC is superior than chess ! (sub-menu panel could be introduced for sort of unit to avoid overdrives of visuality. exemple : G series for the 109, Half Tracks...or a submenu for rare materials just available one time. Ex : The half Track with XXmm canon for your favorite INF unit, The 38 exemplary sturmpanzer...)
- introduction of the rarity concept, whatever form it takes (progressive costs (my own preference), progressive deployments, strict limits...a mix like scrapulous writed)


I'm an ancient PG series gamer, the new PZC is, have to and must be even better.
After strategic board games I played almost only Europa Universalis II for X years with friends. Now only PZC for several weeks ! This two games share a fondamental common point : a balance equilibre of the gaming system. But for durability from years to years such a (more solo) game must introduce new things for DLCs , to retry and retry, in my point of view. Not only new DLCs or chino-japanese packs
...and then will become the "grand classic" for WW II , with liability between historicity & an unique fun gaming approach for all kind of public

[boredatwork]

My belated 2 cents:

Mechanics can either **encourage** variety by giving players more equally viable options to choose OR they can **force** variety by imposing arbitrary limits on the "best" choice.

IMO any system which is based upon the later would not be the right path. This isn't a simulation and unit and time scales vary from campaign to campaign and scenario to scenario, so IMO arbitrarily preventing someone from taking all Tigers if they wish shouldn't be the goal.

What IMO should be the focus is increasing the viability of the other era appropriate choices to make them an equally viable path to fight a given scenario at a given difficulty and have it "feel" equally challenging.

I think the real hurdle to achieving that is the legacy prestige system inherited from PG - culmulative power combined with pre-made scenarios and fixed difficulty results in too many variables to balance and too few tools to do so.

From vanilla Beta:

http://slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 47#p205847

5) Because *everything* is tied directly to prestige I think balance will be hard because it will likely rely heavily upon players to know beforehand how much prestige to allocate to new equipment/upgrades versus having to hold in reserve for repairs. In the above shot I started LowCo with ~2700 prestige - after upgrades and new units I still had over 800 which previously was sufficient. This is turn 7 - with <50 prestige left and a largely impotent army.

6) Even easy enemy kills aren't, IMO, a good thing. Killing enemy units too easily means the only way to make the game 'challenging' is to spam spawn cheap units on the objectives to 'challenge' (read: annoy) the player to hack through unlimited cannon fodder with limited resources.

7) The historical "feel" is more out of whack - yes some units went through 200%-300%-600% casualties over the course of the war but rarely was the turnover remotely close to that on average for a single campaign.

The more I think about it the more I think a heavily modified version of the Fantasy General system would be a better way...

As I proposed in another thread last spring, in my OPINION much of the flaws of the current system could be resolved by getting ride of prestige altogether and switching to a QUALITY based core limit (similar to Tarrek's weighted core proposal) as opposed to the current quantity based one. That would allow players to continue to take all Tigers IF THEY WISHED, but make other choices EQUALLY VIABLE FOR A GIVEN LEVEL OF DIFFICULTY by balancing quantity with quality. For the suggestion and the multi page angry debate it provoked see: http://slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 61#p317861

Add a score sheet and achievements to stroke the epeen of players who do exceptionally well, but remove the in game strength bonuses that result from the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer that are the bane of balance.

Again IMO.

[kokkorhekkus]

I've read and I'm agree with your approach Mr Boredandsometimesangry !

Cheat codes and other stuffs, and self discipline like "I've got the PPs but i don't buy an all Tiger task force because it's too easy" is not really efficient for a game system.

So we are here with this very interesting "new" concept. And the balance between 1) PROGRESSIVE AVAILABILITY, 2) "EXTENSIVE CORE FORCE WITH NOT SO MUCH MONSTER UNITS POSSIBILITIES OTHERWISE YOU HAVE NOT ENOUGH ONES AT ALL ", and 3) real RARITY have to be found.

In fact perhaps you have find the more simple approach...It have to be the heart of these thoughts about this topic in my opinion. And all 3 concepts are compatible. A rare unit but fun unit , not so expensive in pp, could be on the field...but with limits ? Your core ideas are progressive ones, progressive costs for rare units could be integrated in the heart of this idea. But in this case an fine adjustment for the "progressive coefficient" have to be found. He must be "light" for obvious reasons in a variable core force perspective (otherwise a lonely tiger will always be there and not two) , but strict limits of deployment are not silly for RARE but CHEAP (new ?) units.

Then you're right WITH RESPECT WITH THE ACTUAL PRODUCT AND DESIGNERS WORK, and BALANCE (ex : the red army's deployment in DLCs don't have to be changed), a real richer game could be possible without not so much changes in the base programm. (and varied "BUYABLE even if weak units" have a "second or real life", it's fun)

have a good day (at work !)

[robman]

One way to introduce rarity/variety (not the only way) would be to offer unusual units as "freebies," along the lines of SE and captured units. "General, you performed so well thus far that high command has decided to allocate you a Flammpanzer III--not available in stores!" And up it pops, mid-scenario.

[kokkorhekkus]

another sehr gut idea I think

But with historic materials for my point of view...high command has decided to allocate you a..."Goliath" ,-)