Gameplay changes in 1.20

[Rudankort]

Hello All!

Changes in beta 4

- Soft cap rules were changed a bit. It no longer calculates unspent prestige and units in reserve at all.
- Disbanding aux units is allowed again.
- Range penalty for artillery was removed. While reasonable mechanic on its own, our equipment file is not ready for it. It penalizes units which are already weak, and does not penalize units which are too strong. Maybe it will stay as a modding option. 2x entrenchment rule remained.
- Close terrain bonus vs. planes was reduced to 4.
- I removed "Upgrading a unit also adds replacements" rule, because it induced players to use upgrade instead of replacements, which is meaningless.
- Overstrength is lost after upgrade, but this rule does not apply when upgrading transport, or upgrading within a series.
- Replacements come suppressed, but I tweaked the engine so that air and naval units behave like ground ones (suppression is removed after one hand-to-hand attack).


List of changes between 1.13 and 1.20

The list is actual for 1.20 beta 4.

Most changes are probably self-explanatory, but some are explained in more detail below (marked with *).

- Prestige soft cap (*)
- Class-specific experience effects (*)
- Forcing enemy units to surrender earns you prestige (*)
- Overstrength is progressively more expensive with every point applied (*)
- Initiative heroes are limited to +1 bonus
- Entrenchment gives 2x defense bonus against ranged attacks
- Close terrain now gives +4 defense bonus to ground units vs. fighter and tactical bomber attack
- Overstrength is lost after upgrade (*)
- Replacements come suppressed (*)
- Train transportation takes 2 turns instead of 3 (*)


Prestige soft cap

This is a mechanics which, in its current form, came up in our Snowball effect discussion thread. I've posted a test version there, but there was no feedback on it, so it is now part of the new Allied beta. Here is a description of this new feature, taken from the snowball thread.

- I've set two parameters in the game: normal prestige per slot (NormalPrestige) and max prestige per slot (MaxPrestige). The former is equal to 400 and the latter to 800. These values are of course very arbitrary. In the future we may need to deduce them from game's data and change them from scenario to scenario (depending on available equipment etc.). But for now, they should give us a start. 400 prestige points accomodate all but high end units in each class, and 800 is enough to buy most units in the game, including OS.
- As long as player's prestige is below normal, he gets full prestige, just a now.
- When player's prestige gets above normal, all prestige earnings are reduced using a koefficient: (MaxPrestige-Prestige)/(MaxPrestige-NormalPrestige). In other words, the closer we get to MaxPrestige, the less prestige we earn.
- The koefficient never drops below 0.2, so 1/5 of normal prestige income is the slowest earning possible. It is perfectly possible to get above MaxPrestige, and thus get all Tiger II force, but it will take more time than now, and after that prestige will accumulate very slowly too.
- Player's prestige is calculated as follows. For each core unit its cost is UnitCost+TransportCost, adjusted to unit's strength. So, a normal 10-strength unit at full OS is 1.5 of its normal cost. Unspent prestige and units in reserve are not counted. This means that the game allows to accumulate more prestige if it remains "passive" (does not actively participate in the battles). Bonus units are not taken into account at all.
- Player's prestige is recalculated every time he gets income, not just at the beginning of a scenario etc., so it does not help in any way to keep units in reserve and deploy later etc. In particular, prestige bonus for DV comes at the end of the battle, when all the units which actually contributed to this outcome are deployed. We might need to adjust this on the maps with exit zones, but this should be good enough for a test.
- Difficulty adjustment is done before the koefficient is applied. This means that player on Rommel will hit the cap later than on Colonel.
- Soft cap affects only single player campaign games, and only the side whcih plays the campaign (germans in all the official content).

The idea of this mechanics is to slow down core progression in case it happens too fast. High end units are still the most desirable (which makes sense, I'm sure real commanders would love to have an army consisting solely of the best equipment), but the player should not be able to get them all at once. In this game prestige is supposed to provide a quality cap, so as long as it remains limited, quality cap should work. At the same time, player is still motivated to earn as much prestige as he can, and with as small force as possible. This is pure theory though. How it works in practice remains to be seen.


Class-specific experience effects

Another major change. It is a common complaint that some unit classes do not benefit enough from experience. Infantry in particular suffered from this. We wanted to address these problems, but also, we wanted to further stress the roles of different unit classes in the game. So, we have added a big table to the game, specifying what bonuses each unit class gets to each of the 8 primary combat stats, per star. This table is fully moddable btw, and is located in Data/exp.pzdat. Here are all the bonuses, shown in a convenient tabular form.



This is just the first pass on this table, and we are very much interested in your feedback. Which bonuses shall be increased? Which bonuses shall be reduced? Let us know!


Forcing enemy units to surrender earns you prestige

I wanted to add one more non-trivial way to earn prestige to the game, and this is it. When you force a unit to surrender, you earn additional praise from High Command, and also capture some equipment which would be useful in the future. To model this, the game will award you with half cost of the surrendering unit (adjusted to its strength). For example, if you force 6 points of a unit to surrender, you will get 0.5*(6/10)=0.3 from its normal cost.


Overstrength is progressively more expensive with every point applied

It has been noted that OS in general is underpriced, and the last 1-2 points in particular make units over-powered. So, every point of OS gets progressively more expensive than the previous one.
- First point costs the same as a point of normal elite replacements
- Second point costs 1.5 of that amount
- Third point: 2x
- Fourth point: 2.5x
- Fifth point: 3x


Overstrength is lost after upgrade

This one might sound harsh, but this change is closely related to the previous one. In 1.13 upgrading 10-strength or 15-strength unit costs the same, so you get 5 points of upgraded unit for free. Since OS is often considered over-powered, especially in the late game, getting it for free does not sound logical. I could adjust the rules to make OS upgrades more expensive. But instead I decided to give the player a choice: to pay less and lose OS, or to pay extra and restore it on the unit.


Replacements come suppressed

In 1.13 a crippled unit can be freely replaced from 1 to 10 strength in front of the enemy, without the need to retreat behind the line for refitting. This strategy is still possible in 1.20, but it becomes more risky, because any strength added by green or elite replacements in the middle of a battle comes suppressed. So, when a unit gets replacements in the front line, it does become more persistent to possible enemy attacks, but at the same time it is more vulnerable to enemy fire.


Train transportation takes 2 turns instead of 3

This is a minor but often requested change, which is supposed to make train transportation more useful. It works like this: disembarking from a train no longer spend unit's turn, much like when you embark and immediately disembark on the same hex in a single turn. If a unit is moved in a train, it still must remain in the train for the duration of the enemy's turn, which leaves it vulnerable to enemy's attack. But if the unit survived this period of vulnerability, it can unload and act on the same turn.

---

Overstrength is not limited by the number of stars

This is probably the most controversial change, but I wanted to give it a try. With overstrength lost in upgrades, it becomes a strategic decision when to apply it and to which units. But in early game overstrength does not play a major role, because the units do not have much experience on them. It kicks in later, when the units are already very powerful, with better equipment, more experience and 2-3 heroes on each unit.

So, I decided to try to disconnect overstrength mechanics from experience. In 1.20 beta1 it can be applied to any unit, up to 5 points, from the very beginning of the campaign. Of course, all the rest rules still apply: you cannot overstrenth using free green replacements, and you cannot quickly restore overstrength in the course of the battle - it still comes one point at a time.

Let us know how this change affects your play. Do we want to keep it, or revert to the old way?

This mechanic was removed. While an interesting concept, it creates problems for old content and breaks balance of other existing machanics (e. g. devaluates experience), and so will be better suited in a completely new gameplay environment.


Entrenchment level defines how many strength points of a unit are not subject to lasting suppression

Another issue often reported is that artillery is too powerful, and that it is all too easy to fully suppress defending unit, after which you can attack it with anything at all. Thus, tanks can be used to attack defending infantry with high entrenchment level and in close terrain. To reduce this effect, and to make entrenchment more useful, combat rules were tweaked a little bit. In 1.20, unit's entrenchment protects it from lasting suppression. Every entrenchment level protects one point of unit's strength from lasting suppression.

Here is an example. A 10-strength infantry unit has entrenchment of 6, and it is attacked by artillery. One point of entrenchment is removed right away by this attack, but 5 remain. This means that 5 points of strength on infantry unit are not subject to lasting suppression. Maximum suppression which can be placed on this unit by artillery is 10-5=5. If one point is killed by bombardment, only 4 can be suppressed. So, in any case 5 points remain intact, and they can do a lot of damage to a tank, if it dares to attack such a unit.

I have decided to replace this mechanic with 2x defense bonus from entrenchment against ranged attacks. Hard suppression cap felt a bit too artificial and rigid: in many cases more powerful artillery units were not more effective than lesser ones, which does not feel right.


---

This is it for now. If anything is not clear in the above description, let me know.

[deducter]

Class specific experience effects is an awesome idea. I assume the old rules are now completely irrelevant?

However, overstrengthing green units is fine for most unit classes, but overpowered for artillery and bombers. These ranged units don't take return fire, so each point of overstrength is almost always a good investment. Artillery and bombers will be more important than ever and by far the best unit classes.

Edit: IN = 1 for 100 exp is definitely too much for infantry, since initiative is by far the best stat for infantry, given their generally low CD and high SA. I think 0.5 or even 0.34 is better.

I feel like CD needs to be higher, minimum of 1, perhaps even 1.5. I think it would be both better for gameplay and more realistic if experienced infantry were much more durable than green infantry.

The other values in the table look good.

[Rudankort]

Class specific experience effects is an awesome idea. I assume the old rules are now completely irrelevant?

Yes, the new mechanics replaces the old one. I like it when simple formula covers all cases, but in case of experience this approach does not seem to work, so I decided to use brute force instead...

However, overstrengthing green units is fine for most unit classes, but overpowered for artillery and bombers. These ranged units don't take return fire, so each point of overstrength is almost always a good investment. Artillery and bombers will be more important than ever and by far the best unit classes.

It is a fair point, but the question I ask myself is: "if this is overpowered for green units, does not it mean it is even more overpowered for elite units?". That's the general line of reasoning behind this new feature. If we allow to use full OS on elite units (and by the middle of the campaign most units can have 3-4 or even 5 stars on lower difficulties), why not allow it for greens? And fix balance issues elsewhere?

However, to make it work properly, we might need to make OS more expensive, and progressively more expensive with each point. This is something still to consider.

Edit: IN = 1 for 100 exp is definitely too much for infantry, since initiative is by far the best stat for infantry, given their generally low CD and high SA. I think 0.5 or even 0.34 is better.

I wanted to make experienced infantry an undisputed king of close terrain, and initiative seemed to be the key. I was conservative with initiative bonuses of other classes, to avoid those overpowered Panthers we've discussed, but infantry has generally lower initiative ratings in the open, compared to tanks, so I thought giving it a boost in close combat would be a nice idea. I did not do extensive testing though, so some correction might be in order.

I feel like CD needs to be higher, minimum of 1, perhaps even 1.5. I think it would be both better for gameplay and more realistic if experienced infantry were much more durable than green infantry.

Good point, especially if we do reduce INI bonus.

Thanks for comments. BTW, what is your opinion about the other changes?

[zappel]

Wow, these changes sounds very well and I'm looking forward to watch them in game. I think especially the prestige gap and the overstrength rules will bring new advance to the game.

[deducter]

It is a fair point, but the question I ask myself is: "if this is overpowered for green units, does not it mean it is even more overpowered for elite units?". That's the general line of reasoning behind this new feature. If we allow to use full OS on elite units (and by the middle of the campaign most units can have 3-4 or even 5 stars on lower difficulties), why not allow it for greens? And fix balance issues elsewhere?

However, to make it work properly, we might need to make OS more expensive, and progressively more expensive with each point. This is something still to consider.

I noticed that tanks had their IN bonus reduced to 0.5 per 100 exp, which is a very positive change. The problem with Panthers was their combination of high attack AND high initiative. Just high attack by itself is not so bad. This will definitely reduce the problem with the overpowered Panthers/King Tigers. I personally think this (limiting initiative bonus from experience) is actually the more radical solution (as opposed to capping combat dice rolls) to the problem of high IN and high attack units, but your solution will definitely help a lot, and it is the more elegant and transparent solution.

Edit: IN = 1 for 100 exp is definitely too much for infantry, since initiative is by far the best stat for infantry, given their generally low CD and high SA. I think 0.5 or even 0.34 is better.

I wanted to make experienced infantry an undisputed king of close terrain, and initiative seemed to be the key. I was conservative with initiative bonuses of other classes, to avoid those overpowered Panthers we've discussed, but infantry has generally lower initiative ratings in the open, compared to tanks, so I thought giving it a boost in close combat would be a nice idea. I did not do extensive testing though, so some correction might be in order.

I feel like CD needs to be higher, minimum of 1, perhaps even 1.5. I think it would be both better for gameplay and more realistic if experienced infantry were much more durable than green infantry.

Good point, especially if we do reduce INI bonus.

Thanks for comments. BTW, what is your opinion about the other changes?

The Panther/King Tiger problem is precisely what is going to happen with infantry. That experienced infantry, especially with heroes, will be able to annihilate anything without losses in close terrain. The combination of high IN and high attack will destroy everything in close terrain without the attacker taking losses. I don't like combat completely without losses. This is why I am okay with the combat engine where it's possible to have a King Tiger take damage from a conscript in the open.

With the new experience table, selecting balanced values will be much easier. From my extensive experience working with the equipment file, I am 80% sure IN of 0.5 and CD of 1.5 or even 2 will be good values for infantry.

That said, all the other values look solid. I cannot be sure, having not played this version yet, but they all look very reasonable, especially with IN bonus being lower on units like tanks and fighters.

I do still have a few more wishes:
1. Game replays and multiplayer lobby! I suspect many players would be happy to pay $20 just for these features.
2. Ability to write custom combat rules, like infantry +2 GD vs AT units.
3. Modding parameter for maximum number of combat dice rolls.

But all in all, I am very happy with the changes already implemented (although the prestige soft cap parameters will need to be carefully adjusted).

[semper_fidelis]

I am not a fan of the suggested upgrading rules.

From one perspective, a damaged unit would be pulled off of the line, rested and refitted at the same time, so when a damaged unit is upgraded that makes a certain amount of sense to me and it makes deployment go a bit faster. My only problem it that it may be cheaper to upgrade an experienced unit to bring it back to back to strength than to pay for elite replacements. On the flip side, bringing down manpower when the unit gets new equipment really stinks. Though not all commanders did this, but pulling together the best gear and the strongest unit to be the tip of the spear is more probable. So what about increasing the cost of the upgrade for over-strength units by some factor of the cost of the new gear, say 100% of upgrade cost + 10% of upgrade cost per strength point above 10. It also works the other way, for damaged units.

[Rudankort]

The Panther/King Tiger problem is precisely what is going to happen with infantry. That experienced infantry, especially with heroes, will be able to annihilate anything without losses in close terrain. The combination of high IN and high attack will destroy everything in close terrain without the attacker taking losses. I don't like combat completely without losses. This is why I am okay with the combat engine where it's possible to have a King Tiger take damage from a conscript in the open.

The difference with Tigers/Panthers though is:
- There is not so much variation in INI ratings of infantry. Tiger II has 14 initiative, while many tanks it will face will have 10 and less. Such huge difference is not common in infantry class.
- Infantry units of various nations are more even. All major nations have a choice of several 4-5 INI infantry units to choose from.

So, it should be more difficult to gain an edge here. I do agree with you that units not taking losses are evil. If this is the case with new infantry rules, it will be fixed.

I do still have a few more wishes:
1. Game replays and multiplayer lobby! I suspect many players would be happy to pay $20 just for these features.
2. Ability to write custom combat rules, like infantry +2 GD vs AT units.
3. Modding parameter for maximum number of combat dice rolls.

I'm working on replays, and this feature is giving me some trouble. Still, I hope to finish it for this release. As for the rest - we shall see.

[Rudankort]

So what about increasing the cost of the upgrade for over-strength units by some factor of the cost of the new gear, say 100% of upgrade cost + 10% of upgrade cost per strength point above 10. It also works the other way, for damaged units.

How is it different from what the game already offers? You pay more to upgrade unit AND re-overstrength it, compared to just upgrading it. So, it is the same "increasing the cost of the upgrade for over-strength units" which you suggest. The only difference is, now you have a choice. You can conclude that 10 Tigers will be enough for your spearhead, and you do not need to pay for 15. Or you can get 15 by paying more. What is the problem exactly?

[deducter]

One other note on the unit experience table: I think fighters should gain +1 air attack per 100 exp, but +2 air defense, instead of +2/+1 currently. Right now, the air battles during the late war is very much a series of short engagements in which fighters do 5-7 damage per hit on each other, because of all the high attack, low defense units. Giving fighters more durability, especially to experienced fighters, makes a lot of sense. Historically, the problem with the Luftwaffe during the late war was that the average skill level of pilots was very low, so the new recruits almost invariability got shot down very quickly. However, the veterans, even in the face of overwhelming Allied air superiority, could compete until the very last days.

[Kerensky]

The overstrength change is a monumental difficulty reduction.

In a campaign such as Allied Corps, I think it might not be such a bad thing. It fits into the historical theme of superior resources Allied forces enjoyed over German opponents and the progression rate of the campaign means that upgrades happen somewhat frequently, meaning OS will be reset time and time again.

In the Grand Campaign though, this poses serious problems. I can walk all over 1939 Poland Manstein like I'm playing on Field Marshal (first mission is still tough because you can't pre-15 strength your starter force!) After all being able to fight 15 strength Manstein units head on with my own 15 units... well it's the equivalent of fighting 10 strength Field Marshal units with my own 10 strength units. This is compounded by the sheer size of the Grand Campaign, where it takes a good 10-15 scenarios to get through a single campaign and a single year of the war, meaning there isn't a big problem of upgrades resetting OS. 15 strength Stukas and artillery pieces retain their usual ability to attack with impunity but now they really annihilate enemy opposition with their extra attack dice.

I can't imagine how much of a massacre it will be to take 15 strength German quality units against 10-13 strength Allied units in the Grand Campaign early years on a non-Manstein setting.

Does it fit in Allied Corps? Maybe depends on the content everyone is still exploring. After all, it may really take 15 strength Shermans and fighter bombers to put a serious dent in very strong German armor such as the Tiger I and Tiger II. Does it fit in previous content? I don't see this working out.

[LostAgain]

I was quite surprised when I came across the ability to upgraded beyond experience, but I am an immediate fan of the concept. Please keep it, and if possible, incorporate it into the previous incarnations of Panzer Corp! Ithink it adds a unique challenge in planning, does one add a new unit or overstrength what you already have?

[deducter]

I don't think the ability to overstrength without experience is going to work at all as a game mechanic. It's far more optimal to deploy fewer core at 15-strength than any other strategy. At the default difficulty levels, without the +5 strength boost in Manstein, the AI refuses to attack those units in the opening scenario, and the player can take the initiative, use full artillery suppression, etc. to completely negate any strength loss.

I'd vote to immediately remove this mechanic, or, if it is to be implemented, there needs to be an option to cap combat dice rolls at 10.

[Mountaineer]

These are long overdue changes, especially the return to full strength at upgrade and the ability to overstrength to any level.

[Ballacraine]

Upgrading a unit also adds replacements.

A logical & desirable change.
It takes away the embarassment & expense of rectifying after upgrading an understrength unit.

Overstrength lost after upgrade.

Should be based & 'priced' on pre-existing unit strength.
It doesn't make sense that the overstrength would simply disappear.

Overstrength not based on experience.

Adds some flexibility in the use of overstrength.
Probably a good idea once we get used to it.

Balla.

[nikivdd]

Overstrength should not go beyond the number of stars. IMO it takes away challenge. I agree fully with Kerensky. This model removes my desire to continu working on my mods.

[Ballacraine]

What this revised overstrength does do, is enable a 'Conscript' approach, employed by the Soviets.
Similarly, the US tactic of swarming few quality German tanks with masses of inferior Shermans could be modelled.

It will require refinement, but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

Balla.

[deducter]

What some of the posters here are missing is that deploying fewer core units with all maximal overstrength is now by default the optimal strategy. Period. There's no point in doing any other type of deployment.

The reason is that the AI refuses to attack those overstrength units, and by using artillery and bombers, the player can almost completely negate any losses whatsoever, except for fighters. This strikes me as a poor system.

Basically, as Kerensky says, now the player gets the Manstein bonus of +5 strength vs the AI.

[Ballacraine]

I wouldn't dispute that you could do that.

There are always 'gamey' ways of doing things.

It really depends what strategy you use.

Personally, I use very few, if any, overstrength units.

For sure it certainly requires some form of refinement, but I think it is too early to entirely write the approach off.

Balla.

[Longasc]

I find the changes quite good and will comment more when I tested them in practice.

Kerensky and deducter already pointed out why overstrengthening green units would create problems. Stukas with 15, Artillery with 15? Ugh.
Another solution to the whole problems caused by high experience/stars and overstrength is needed.

Suggestion: Is 15 overstrength really necessary?
Can't it be capped of at 12 and retain the old rule, so 2 Stars XP are needed for 12 STR?

[Longasc]

I hope the "Reform" mechanic might get added as an official feature at a point. I am not using it right now because I am too lazy to re-apply the cheat all the time and because my Beta-Core is not thaaat important to me. But I would like this feature, definitely.