Panzer Corps Grand Finale: a DLC and an update!

[KeldorKatarn]

Cool

[Magic1111]

• UI and controls
...
o Number of units in reserve is now shown as N+B, where N is the number of
normal units, and B is the number of bonus units.
...

Hi Folks!

What does this new feature exactly mean? Hmm, I don´t undestand this, because I´ve didn´t see it in game yet!

Can anybody please post an screenshot to explanation me the feature?

Best regards,
Magic

[floplop]

I still don't know where these 18 new scenarios are supposed to be..??

[Anfield]

The N+B is seen on your screen when you deploy before a battle. So it might be 19/19 units can deploy, below that for the amount of SE units on mine im seeing Units in Resever 19+3. As Ive got 3 SE units in my core.

The 18 new missions are in 45 West I believe.

[Magic1111]

The N+B is seen on your screen when you deploy before a battle. So it might be 19/19 units can deploy, below that for the amount of SE units on mine im seeing Units in Resever 19+3. As Ive got 3 SE units in my core.

Okay, thx! Then I must notice it in my next deploy phases....

[IainMcNeil]

Hi Gary

we'd be happy to link to your mirror site - just mail info@slitherine.co.uk with your details and we'll connect you to the marketing team.

Cheers

Iain

[mautschi]

Hello

It seems that the IDS_MESSAGE0 in the first round disappears. The scenario files are from v1.11. If i start them with 1.13, the messagebox is not displayed.

[Jelinobas]

Hello

It seems that the IDS_MESSAGE0 in the first round disappears. The scenario files are from v1.11. If i start them with 1.13, the messagebox is not displayed.

Haste schon mal versucht die Files mit dem 1.13er Editor neu zuspeichern ohne sonst was dabei zu ändern? (Öffnen, speichern und im Spiel Scenario neustarten.)

[dumbttt]

"Dice chess" should be the default, not a cheat. Dice rolls can get quite crazy in this game. I hate to loss elite units to randomness. Granted IRL battles are often unpredictable, PzC is not about battle simulation, but rather more about being a fun game.

[Rudankort]

"Dice chess" should be the default, not a cheat. Dice rolls can get quite crazy in this game. I hate to loss elite units to randomness. Granted IRL battles are often unpredictable, PzC is not about battle simulation, but rather more about being a fun game.

For now, this mode is an experiment. Let's see what players think about it.

[mautschi]

"Dice chess" should be the default, not a cheat.

I support this !

[churchlakecity]

Support this,too.....

[Magic1111]

Support this,too.....

Me too...!

[guille1434]

Or, may be a combination of "Dice Chess" and the regular "Dice Roll"... should be the default mode, where "Dice Chess" will be the normal outcome, but with a chance (say 10%, or 5%) that one "Wild Roll" occurs, reflecting the always present possibility that someone down the chain of command of one of the warring sides make a serious blunder, blowing the carefully planned battle! I think the result will be less quantity of "Wild Rolls" but not them being totally impossible to happen. I think some "luck or bad luck factor" has to be reflected in-game.

By the way, I think the problem of infantry attaking from a closed terrain hex, to a tank unit situated in on open terrain hex, and inflicting very high losses to tanks should be fixed... This should happen only when infantry attacks from closed terrain to another closed terrain hex, and this may also happen when attacking fron open to close terrain. This, always assuming that the unit combat is resolved inside the hex where the attacked (not attacking!) unit is placed. In present I feel that when an infantry unit attacks from closed terrain to a tank in an open terrain hex, the tank unit suffers unrealistically high losses.
Just some thoughts added...

Thanks!

[Horst]

In present I feel that when an infantry unit attacks from closed terrain to a tank in an open terrain hex, the tank unit suffers unrealistically high losses.

One problem is that even an attack value of 1 or -1 can often cause severe damage and not only in close terrain, especially if units are more experienced. It's like turning a molotov into a panzerfaust. One reason why I set HA 0 to the super-strengthed Soviet Conscripts and other country's infantry units, like Luxembourgian Militia, with no real anti-tank weapons in my game. It's a bit slaughterish with advancing tanks and half-tracks but I think plausible.

PS: An idea would be to make a (customizable) rule that the maximum enemy losses inflicted is depending on the attack value no matter what experience, e.g. (-)1 can do only 0-1 damage while (-)10 can do 0-10 damage. That way, you could better simulate AT weapons for close range, like motolovs and anti-tank rifles which are rather a nuiscance than a real anti-tank threat (later). Or light AAMGs on tanks which sometimes shoot down a plane but not half of a squadron with only AA -1.

PPS: What I’d also like to have in the game are more fortkiller traits, like fortkiller25 and fortkiller50. That would help to create more plausible V-rockets and siege weapons, like Gustav & Karl. At moment, they are the ultimate tank-killers with these extreme HA values.

[dumbttt]

Or, may be a combination of "Dice Chess" and the regular "Dice Roll"... should be the default mode, where "Dice Chess" will be the normal outcome, but with a chance (say 10%, or 5%) that one "Wild Roll" occurs, reflecting the always present possibility that someone down the chain of command of one of the warring sides make a serious blunder, blowing the carefully planned battle! I think the result will be less quantity of "Wild Rolls" but not them being totally impossible to happen. I think some "luck or bad luck factor" has to be reflected in-game.

I think this is already reflected with rugged defense, but rugged defense can only happen in favor of the defender. Maybe make it so that results can go both ways: attackers can score critical hits, seriously hurting the defenders.

[ThvN]

My 2 cents about the combat roll deviation: While I can frequently feel some frustration about the stock deviation, it usually evens out in the end, and I never lost because of it. But still the combat result prediction is treated by me as a rough suggestion, esp. with powerful units whose initiative is very close, in those cases I simply do not trust the combat predictor, only when the predicted loss ratio is overwhelmingly in my favour. And even then, I prefer to try and supress as much as I can beforehand. So although at times it feels a bit too 'random', I know it works in my favour as well, I just notice it less (a common psychological phenomenon).

The 'dice chess' variation is a little bit boring to me. For me personally a variation in combat results that lies between 'stock' (100% variation?) and 'dice chess' (20% variation) would be very nice. Nevertheless, I continue to play with the stock settings, and I enjoy the game like that, and the occasional moment of frustration keeps things exciting, I guess.

For a near-perfect solution that should satisfy practically everybody, maybe some sort of slider (as an advanced option) can be added to set the variation bandwidth, or perhaps a cheat code where the player can input the desired % variation from stock. As an example: 'dice 0' (zero) being the 'chess' value, 'dice 20' the 'dice chess' setting, and 'dice 100' takes it back to stock. Or something like that. I'm not sure if something like that is even possible?

And those low attack values that Horst pointed out can indeed produce some 'interesting' results, last weekend during multiplayer a Panther (-1 AA) managed to take 4(!) strength points of a Yak fighter plane. But despite the occasional freak outcome I still want to keep all those 'low' values, it gives flavour. And some sort of damage limitation mechanism is already built-in (the rate of fire), so the conscripts can be made to give 'normal' attack results while staying at strength 15, if wanted.

I usually make up some sort of reason for any 'unreasonable' losses, such as my Yaks: I put them down to 'operational losses', like a tank getting stuck and abandonded or a plane having an accident. As real-world extreme examples, in the pacific theatre over half of the losses in fighter aircraft were non-combat losses. These losses include running out of fuel, which is already modeled in the game, but many other things can go wrong. Like with the Neuhammer Stuka disaster, a training exercise/demonstration where 13 Stukas dove into the ground. So some strange random combat outcomes can be quite realistic.

[Der_Wolff]

"Dice chess" should be the default, not a cheat. Dice rolls can get quite crazy in this game. I hate to loss elite units to randomness. Granted IRL battles are often unpredictable, PzC is not about battle simulation, but rather more about being a fun game.

For now, this mode is an experiment. Let's see what players think about it.

Hello togehter,

this is my first comment in English.
Since October 2012 I play Panzer Corps.
Sometime I wrote some comments in the DMP Forum.
Yesterday I saw Mautschi information about the "Dice chess".
This was reason enough for me to try my comment directly here.
I'm for the function "Dice chess", because somtimes the results are illogical .

Example: I have a tank (Panther D, strength 13, 2 heros with attack +2 and initiative +3, in a defensive position with an entrenchment 2 against a wheeled reconnaissance vehicle and the result is: I lost 60% from my strengh and the
reconnaissance vehicle is still alive, I had a big question mark in my face.
And some outher resluts too
If I calculate for my self: The defender has the entrenchment + his defence power + strengh + experience + neighbouring troops against the attack power + strengh + experience + suppression (artillery or strategic bomber) + neighbouring troops and then + random generators.
I hope my English is okay.

[Magic1111]

I hope my English is okay.

Yes, and welcome here!

[Delta66]

"Dice chess" seems very good to me, probably my favourite mode so far.
Certainly we could debate on the "best" % of variation, but this will vary from people to people. A slider would be neat, however having only a few modes also help playing the "same game", which make sense when talking strategies and combat technics on the forum.