I don't like the feature "Overstrength is not limited by the number of stars", as i feel of loosing motivation to get my units EXP, anyhow they get overstrength now "without" me working for it. This is more an emotional feeling, nothing objective.
I love the "Overstrength is lost after upgrade" mechanic, as having now to think more about overstrength vs. update.
Also "Replacements come suppressed" is a great mechanic!
Gameplay changes in 1.20
Moderators: Slitherine Core, The Lordz, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Maybe I'm in the minority, but I see no harm in decoupling overstrength from experience. The potential problem with making the game easier by overstrengthing units I think is a moot point because you can't afford to overstrength everyone. Sometimes no one.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Overstrength is lost after upgrade
Overstrength is not limited by the number of stars
I hate these changes. First it is bad graphicly since the stars is no longer linked to how much you make a unit overstrenght. Also by having all overstrength going away if you upgrade the unit only makes me reluctant to upgrade because a 15 mk1 is better than 10 mk4 for instance.
Overstrength is not limited by the number of stars
I hate these changes. First it is bad graphicly since the stars is no longer linked to how much you make a unit overstrenght. Also by having all overstrength going away if you upgrade the unit only makes me reluctant to upgrade because a 15 mk1 is better than 10 mk4 for instance.
Last edited by Verus on Sun May 05, 2013 9:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
I would like to repeat what deducter already said:
-> Overstrength becomes a real problem when you know how to game the system/mechanics of Panzer Corps.
New players don't, but we veterans do. Our 39-45 DLC experiences boiled down that once you are getting in trouble...
FEW but STRONG overstrengthened high XP units were way to go. 3-4 Panzer IV Strength 10 couldn't even come close to a 13-15 Strength Tiger I-II.
They saved costs in the long run and the AI did not even dare to attack them, making them ultimate road blocks.
The loss of the extra strength after upgrading is to reduce another way people played the system:
Downgrade to cheaper units for free, repair them, overstrengthen them and THEN upgrade to a "Maus" tank or sth like that, effectively saving tons of prestige.
I have to play some more to test the effect of the new rules in Allied Corps, but I am afraid it will break the VERY nicely balanced 39-45 DLCs, and that's very likely. 15 STR Stuka early on, green or not -> totally breaks the early game balance, IMO.
So I really have to wonder if this change is not better reserved for a Panzer Corps 2 instead of Allied Corps which will play by the same rules as all the other Panzer Corps scenarios and campaigns.
-> Overstrength becomes a real problem when you know how to game the system/mechanics of Panzer Corps.
New players don't, but we veterans do. Our 39-45 DLC experiences boiled down that once you are getting in trouble...
FEW but STRONG overstrengthened high XP units were way to go. 3-4 Panzer IV Strength 10 couldn't even come close to a 13-15 Strength Tiger I-II.
They saved costs in the long run and the AI did not even dare to attack them, making them ultimate road blocks.
The loss of the extra strength after upgrading is to reduce another way people played the system:
Downgrade to cheaper units for free, repair them, overstrengthen them and THEN upgrade to a "Maus" tank or sth like that, effectively saving tons of prestige.
I have to play some more to test the effect of the new rules in Allied Corps, but I am afraid it will break the VERY nicely balanced 39-45 DLCs, and that's very likely. 15 STR Stuka early on, green or not -> totally breaks the early game balance, IMO.
So I really have to wonder if this change is not better reserved for a Panzer Corps 2 instead of Allied Corps which will play by the same rules as all the other Panzer Corps scenarios and campaigns.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
I am finding in AC, the exp/strength decoupling is no problem, it is balanced well.
But I worry about it in AK/GCE with full prestige levels (up to Field Marshal). I reached the bug/break point in AC today (salern0->Cassino/Anzio). Instead of editing around it, tonight I'll play four or five GCE '43 or '44 scenarios and see what it does.
But I worry about it in AK/GCE with full prestige levels (up to Field Marshal). I reached the bug/break point in AC today (salern0->Cassino/Anzio). Instead of editing around it, tonight I'll play four or five GCE '43 or '44 scenarios and see what it does.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Tonight I had some time to play 1.20 with GC campaigns. Not so good.
Personally I thought the entrenchment advantage and similar rule changes to benefit defense would offset any big advantages, but it was more lopsided than I expected. First, I opened a '43 GCE with an imported core. But I thought that wasn't a fair example as everyone can be 13 strength anyway by then, easily. So I went and opened a fresh GC '39 game.
Normally I play on rommel. I can play from Poznan to Berlin redux with all DVs on Rommel, i know the game and the ins and outs. But '39 can still be challenging as you have a basically stock core, little prestige to work with, so it's still a little work. Not so in 1.20. I set the difficulty to "Field Marshal" so I had the same prestige rates as the vast majority of players, instead of Rommel. Here's what I found:
a) If you overstrength a stuka to 14, it kills anything you point it at here, even the early B model with <100 exp.
b) just setting artillery to 12 at this level pummels opponent units.
So with normal prestige levels, you can very easily tip the game into a walk-over, even in '39 with no experience and little prestige to work with. I went through Poznan, Danzig, and Lodz and it was cake in all of them - normally I have to work at these just a little. I feel this advantage is going to just snowball instead of getting corrected when harder opponents come in '40 and later.
Also, it seemed the AI dealt with the rules weirdly; I kept seeing very overstrength artillery units (14, 15), but nothing else strengthened. Those could be quickly neutralized, so the rule changes all worked to my advantage with no real counter. So the AI was not taking intelligent advantage of the new rules. Possibly if the AI is altered then it could work. But overall, it's like deducter said above and I don't think vanilla and the GC's should be played by these rules as they stand now.
Personally I thought the entrenchment advantage and similar rule changes to benefit defense would offset any big advantages, but it was more lopsided than I expected. First, I opened a '43 GCE with an imported core. But I thought that wasn't a fair example as everyone can be 13 strength anyway by then, easily. So I went and opened a fresh GC '39 game.
Normally I play on rommel. I can play from Poznan to Berlin redux with all DVs on Rommel, i know the game and the ins and outs. But '39 can still be challenging as you have a basically stock core, little prestige to work with, so it's still a little work. Not so in 1.20. I set the difficulty to "Field Marshal" so I had the same prestige rates as the vast majority of players, instead of Rommel. Here's what I found:
a) If you overstrength a stuka to 14, it kills anything you point it at here, even the early B model with <100 exp.
b) just setting artillery to 12 at this level pummels opponent units.
So with normal prestige levels, you can very easily tip the game into a walk-over, even in '39 with no experience and little prestige to work with. I went through Poznan, Danzig, and Lodz and it was cake in all of them - normally I have to work at these just a little. I feel this advantage is going to just snowball instead of getting corrected when harder opponents come in '40 and later.
Also, it seemed the AI dealt with the rules weirdly; I kept seeing very overstrength artillery units (14, 15), but nothing else strengthened. Those could be quickly neutralized, so the rule changes all worked to my advantage with no real counter. So the AI was not taking intelligent advantage of the new rules. Possibly if the AI is altered then it could work. But overall, it's like deducter said above and I don't think vanilla and the GC's should be played by these rules as they stand now.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Thanks for testing this out. Indeed, it looks like this rule is not going to work for the past content. I could make over-strength more expensive and thus more rare, but then this might affect late campaign, which is balanced with the assumption that many core units have OS on them.Kamerer wrote:Tonight I had some time to play 1.20 with GC campaigns. Not so good.
What is your opinion about the other changes listed in this thread? Do they break the GC?
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
I was worried the entrenchment change would slow things down a lot, but not that much. It does indeed feel a bit more "realistic."
The only other thing I think about is the loss of overstrength w/upgrade. I think it should only be when upgrading out of family - e.g., from Panzer III to Panther, but not from Pz.III/J to Pz.III/L for example. With the frequent upgrades of the armor in the III and IV families, it could get expensive for new players and Rommel, for example. Also it makes more logical sense in my mind.
Oh, one other thing. I noticed today that you can no longer have negative prestige; you always could before. This was actually helpful as as time saver in a few limited cases. For example, if low on prestige and repairing/replacing in deployment, then you get almost done and realize you overlooked a unit or a needed purchase. Instead of starting all over, what I would do is quickly give myself, say, 200 prestige, do what I need, then subtract 200 and then have a negative -195, for example. Not something that happens often, but it can be helpful in a few instances.
The only other thing I think about is the loss of overstrength w/upgrade. I think it should only be when upgrading out of family - e.g., from Panzer III to Panther, but not from Pz.III/J to Pz.III/L for example. With the frequent upgrades of the armor in the III and IV families, it could get expensive for new players and Rommel, for example. Also it makes more logical sense in my mind.
Oh, one other thing. I noticed today that you can no longer have negative prestige; you always could before. This was actually helpful as as time saver in a few limited cases. For example, if low on prestige and repairing/replacing in deployment, then you get almost done and realize you overlooked a unit or a needed purchase. Instead of starting all over, what I would do is quickly give myself, say, 200 prestige, do what I need, then subtract 200 and then have a negative -195, for example. Not something that happens often, but it can be helpful in a few instances.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Negative prestige was not displayed well in the game, and for this reason I "fixed" it to never drop below zero. I did not know some people used it.Kamerer wrote: Oh, one other thing. I noticed today that you can no longer have negative prestige; you always could before. This was actually helpful as as time saver in a few limited cases. For example, if low on prestige and repairing/replacing in deployment, then you get almost done and realize you overlooked a unit or a needed purchase. Instead of starting all over, what I would do is quickly give myself, say, 200 prestige, do what I need, then subtract 200 and then have a negative -195, for example. Not something that happens often, but it can be helpful in a few instances.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
After playing a while around with the new changes in AC i like most of them except the overstrength without exp.
Overstregthing a unit is the best way to make it really strong. It gives it additional rolls, multiply the effects of initiative, and provides them with a safety cushion against destruction. Additionally due to having bad odds against overstrengthed units the AI quite often just refuse to attack them giving the initiative totally to the player. Of course the same applies to overstrengthing units with the experience limit but it's slows it down. You can't just overstrength units from start. I think this change actually widens the gap between good and worse players. The good one got lots of prestige so he can overstrength his units early on ... this allows him for easier game play and even more prestige earned. The snowballing just kicks in earlier.
Additionally it makes balancing the scenarios even more difficult: I played the Crete scenario once without overstrength on my units and once with all of them at 15 ... the difference was HUGE the scenario went from quite hard to almost easy mode. Yes it costs quite a lot of prestige to overstregth all units but it saves me quite some prestige during the scenario as a) the units are better in combat and b) even if they lose some points they aren't that faster in danger of being destroyed so i can save in game reinforcements which are more expensive.
Overstregthing a unit is the best way to make it really strong. It gives it additional rolls, multiply the effects of initiative, and provides them with a safety cushion against destruction. Additionally due to having bad odds against overstrengthed units the AI quite often just refuse to attack them giving the initiative totally to the player. Of course the same applies to overstrengthing units with the experience limit but it's slows it down. You can't just overstrength units from start. I think this change actually widens the gap between good and worse players. The good one got lots of prestige so he can overstrength his units early on ... this allows him for easier game play and even more prestige earned. The snowballing just kicks in earlier.
Additionally it makes balancing the scenarios even more difficult: I played the Crete scenario once without overstrength on my units and once with all of them at 15 ... the difference was HUGE the scenario went from quite hard to almost easy mode. Yes it costs quite a lot of prestige to overstregth all units but it saves me quite some prestige during the scenario as a) the units are better in combat and b) even if they lose some points they aren't that faster in danger of being destroyed so i can save in game reinforcements which are more expensive.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Rudankort wrote:
Negative prestige was not displayed well in the game, and for this reason I "fixed" it to never drop below zero. I did not know some people used it.
You change anything in this game, I am going to notice.
But I may be one of the few who uses it so if you think it should be that way, I will not whine. Honestly it is only helpful in '39 GC on rommel because pp is so low. And I get the last units and realize I'm 50 or 100 short and I don't want to go back and reload and do all my reinforcements again, choosing between elite and regular, etc. So I "borrow" 100 or 200, then subtract it right away so i don't forget. Then just let it top up as I take hexes. Very convenient. And frankly I thought the negative was displayed well, it stood out to my eye (and I play on a laptop and not an uber-large screen).On a related thought: I don't play a lot of computer games, so I am not the most qualified person to comment. But in general, I find the UI of PC very friendly, very efficient, and aesthetically pleasing. It blows away most UIs I encounter on web sites, the few other games I know, and other devices by a large margin.
Ok, here's a UI change that might be helpful that occurred to me yesterday. Is it possible to split the purchase unit list screen between flags? Here is what I mean:
When trying to figure what "flag" (nationality) unit to buy, in Axis it was rarely an issue, you bought German for most things, vs. a very few useful Italian ones. Now it's harder to decide with so many UK vs. US units. As it is, it takes a fair amount of clicking and back-and-forth to compare unit characteristics of different flag weapons. I noticed none of the weapon classes takes up more than 1/3 of the screen when you toggle "purchase", and then select a class. Perhaps the bottom half could show the corresponding weapons of the other "flag." So I could have both UK and US infantry, for example, shown. I can then click the UK unit, then as I mouse over the us I can see it's stats compared. This would be very cool. I am not a programmer so I don't know if that's a big deal to do or not, but it's a thought.
Last edited by Kamerer on Tue May 07, 2013 9:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
This is a good idea actually, definitely can be useful in a mixed GB/US campaign. I'll think if this is feasible to do.Kamerer wrote:When trying to figure what "flag" (nationality) unit to buy, in Axis it was rarely an issue, you bought German for most things, vs. a very few useful Italian ones. Now it's harder to decide with so many UK vs. US units. As it is, it takes a fair amount of clicking and back-and-forth to compare unit characteristics of different flag weapons. I noticed none of the weapon classes takes up more than 1/3 of the screen when you toggle "purchase", and then select a class. Perhaps the bottom half could show the corresponding weapons of the other "flag." So I could have both UK and US infantry, for example, shown. I can then click the UK unit, then as I mouse over the us I can see it's stats compared. This would be very cool. I am not a programmer so I don't know if that's a big deal to do or not, but it's a thought.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Nice proposal Kamerer!
I workaround it by taking 6 screenshots and tab-out/tab-in to compare. Most times US won.Now it's harder to decide with so many UK vs. US units.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
What application do you use to do that? I loaded Fraps a while back to do that, but it doesn't want to work on my computer (maybe it hates Chrome?). I need to find/learn to use a simple screenshot app.omegabet wrote:Nice proposal Kamerer!I workaround it by taking 6 screenshots and tab-out/tab-in to compare. Most times US won.Now it's harder to decide with so many UK vs. US units.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Print Screen button plus MS Paint should do the job without the need to install anything. But if a separate app, IrfanView is quite good and free. That's what I use personally.Kamerer wrote:What application do you use to do that? I loaded Fraps a while back to do that, but it doesn't want to work on my computer (maybe it hates Chrome?). I need to find/learn to use a simple screenshot app.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
So, finally some time to give some more feedback.
First a bug reminder, before I forget to mention it:
Razz mentioned that the camo trait still doesn't work correctly, and he's right. I gave it to a unit, and tested with a hotseat scenario. A normal unit can drive next to a unit that has 'camo' and it will be revealed, as it should. But at the start of next turn, even if the 'camo' unit remains stationary (and should remain visible), it is turned invisible again.
The unit that is standing next to it can even drive through the hex with the camo unit, and if I try to move into the hex with the 'camo' unit it appears after a little wait. Both these actions do not trigger an ambush as well. If I drive into it from several hexes away the ambush works normally.
Also, a while ago a spotting issue with the 'Undo' option was found, viewtopic.php?f=121&t=41219 but I could not reproduce it anymore in this 1.20beta. I didn't see it in the changelog, but is this issue fixed for this version?
About the new features, overall I'm very pleased with them, I have some quick comments but I will need to invest a lot more playing time to give better feedback on some of them.
No air attack (AA) bonus for tactical bombers and strategic bombers? I would expect them to do more return damage if they are attacked. Does giving them a bonus 'break' the units with zero attack or bracketed attack values? And I am tempted to reduce the GD bonus for air units.
Some other values look interesting, the recon gets no INI bonus, and a lot of unit types get no CD bonus. And as said before by deducter, it might be better for the infantry to swap the values for GD and CD or just increase the CD as deducter said, making them more specialized in close-terrain. But it would all have to be thoroughly tested to get the 'best' numbers.
I don't think you should totally abandon it, this particular overstrength mechanism could work as a trait or something for units that are slow to gain experience (towed AT) or need an artificial strenght boost to be threatening, but are too good to use the Conscript system of higher base strength.
First a bug reminder, before I forget to mention it:
Razz mentioned that the camo trait still doesn't work correctly, and he's right. I gave it to a unit, and tested with a hotseat scenario. A normal unit can drive next to a unit that has 'camo' and it will be revealed, as it should. But at the start of next turn, even if the 'camo' unit remains stationary (and should remain visible), it is turned invisible again.
The unit that is standing next to it can even drive through the hex with the camo unit, and if I try to move into the hex with the 'camo' unit it appears after a little wait. Both these actions do not trigger an ambush as well. If I drive into it from several hexes away the ambush works normally.
Also, a while ago a spotting issue with the 'Undo' option was found, viewtopic.php?f=121&t=41219 but I could not reproduce it anymore in this 1.20beta. I didn't see it in the changelog, but is this issue fixed for this version?
About the new features, overall I'm very pleased with them, I have some quick comments but I will need to invest a lot more playing time to give better feedback on some of them.
I had started playing through GC'39 and GC'40 with your earlier .exe to see how much less prestige I would end up. But I was too slow and than this beta came... It didn't break the game for me, but it might be a good idea to have the values tweakable, as the effect is both long-term and difficult to quickly determine. I might go back and spend some more time on the GC's with this, the Allied scenarios seem to be getting enough decent feedback already.- Prestige soft cap
Yes! Very nice, and moddable as well... I will be easier to compare the results if the GC's are replayed, because I'm more familiar with the battle results. But a few quick impressions:- Class-specific experience effects
No air attack (AA) bonus for tactical bombers and strategic bombers? I would expect them to do more return damage if they are attacked. Does giving them a bonus 'break' the units with zero attack or bracketed attack values? And I am tempted to reduce the GD bonus for air units.
Some other values look interesting, the recon gets no INI bonus, and a lot of unit types get no CD bonus. And as said before by deducter, it might be better for the infantry to swap the values for GD and CD or just increase the CD as deducter said, making them more specialized in close-terrain. But it would all have to be thoroughly tested to get the 'best' numbers.
All good changes, it took some getting used to at first but I like it, feels very natural. The 'suppressed replacements' feature is especially nice when you fail to completely destroy a unit and it retreats and reinforces. You basically get an extra chance to finish it off, and players will have to judge carefully if they should retreat further back to safety or reinforce immediately, much more challenging.- Upgrading a unit also adds replacements
- Overstrength is lost after upgrade
- Entrenchment level defines how many strength points of a unit are not subject to lasting suppression
- Replacements come suppressed
I generally don't use it, I still keep overstrengthing according to experience levels. But it must be said, it can be very useful to give a green unit some overstrength for a better chance of survival and/or quicker experience gain, but it quickly feels overpowered for some unit types.- Overstrength is not limited by the number of stars
I don't think you should totally abandon it, this particular overstrength mechanism could work as a trait or something for units that are slow to gain experience (towed AT) or need an artificial strenght boost to be threatening, but are too good to use the Conscript system of higher base strength.
Good. To be sure, I tested it with some different unit types, and it seems to work OK.- Train transportation takes 2 turns instead of 3
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
Just noticed Kamerer's UI proposal, good idea. Which reminds me of one more little thing about the UI that I've come across:
There is a strange situation with the UI overlays for the transport types. In the stock PzC, there are only UI sidebar icons and map movement overlays for 'wheeled' trucks and 'halftrack' transports. But the Quad artillery tractor is 'all-terrain', and it shows in the sidebar as a halftrack icon (next to the unit class icon) but the movement overlay on the map shows a truck?
Similarly, the Kangaroo has a tracked movement type, but has the same problem, which looks even weirder because it is obviously a fully tracked vehicle.
For 'all-terrain', it would be fine if both the icon and the overlay would show a truck, for tracked vehicles an extra overlay + sidebar icon would be nice.
There is a strange situation with the UI overlays for the transport types. In the stock PzC, there are only UI sidebar icons and map movement overlays for 'wheeled' trucks and 'halftrack' transports. But the Quad artillery tractor is 'all-terrain', and it shows in the sidebar as a halftrack icon (next to the unit class icon) but the movement overlay on the map shows a truck?
Similarly, the Kangaroo has a tracked movement type, but has the same problem, which looks even weirder because it is obviously a fully tracked vehicle.
For 'all-terrain', it would be fine if both the icon and the overlay would show a truck, for tracked vehicles an extra overlay + sidebar icon would be nice.
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
A possible bug has been encountered. Maho1973 discovered that the scenario rewards are rather strange, with less prestige given on lower difficulty levels: viewtopic.php?f=148&t=42293&p=400210#p400179
I did a quick run through Border Raids with all 5 difficulties, and although the 200% bonus for Sergeant and 150% bonus for Lieutenant work correctly for the starting prestige and the destroyed supply dump, something is off. On Sergeant, you have 600 on the last turn, 450 for Lieutenant, and 300 for the rest, all normal figures. I substracted the total I had at the start of the next deployment from these numbers for the Triumph reward numbers.
Actual Border Raids 'Triumph' reward (600 according to campaign.pzdat):
Sergeant: 106
Lieutenant: 259
Colonel: 437
General: 655
FM: 655
I know the soft cap is supposed to kick in later at higher difficulty levels, but this looks wrong to me. Maybe the scenario starting prestige/supply dump reward mess up the system, but with only three core units at 120 prestige each I can't see how that would give these results?
I did a quick run through Border Raids with all 5 difficulties, and although the 200% bonus for Sergeant and 150% bonus for Lieutenant work correctly for the starting prestige and the destroyed supply dump, something is off. On Sergeant, you have 600 on the last turn, 450 for Lieutenant, and 300 for the rest, all normal figures. I substracted the total I had at the start of the next deployment from these numbers for the Triumph reward numbers.
Actual Border Raids 'Triumph' reward (600 according to campaign.pzdat):
Sergeant: 106
Lieutenant: 259
Colonel: 437
General: 655
FM: 655
I know the soft cap is supposed to kick in later at higher difficulty levels, but this looks wrong to me. Maybe the scenario starting prestige/supply dump reward mess up the system, but with only three core units at 120 prestige each I can't see how that would give these results?
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
If I'm not mistaken, this is exactly what is supposed to be happening. On these easier difficulties, prestige is available in abundance, so the game is adjusting the values so they don't run away and snowball. It's almost like taxes. Bigger incomes are having to pay more. And who doesn't just luv taxes, right? 
Re: Gameplay changes in 1.20
No, this is indeed a bug. Fixed now, thanks for reporting. The issue was that in an allied campaign (side=1) the game took a few params from side 0 by mistake.
For the prestige soft cap to kick in, the player still has too little prestige, even on Sergeant where he gets a lot more than on higher difficulties.
For the prestige soft cap to kick in, the player still has too little prestige, even on Sergeant where he gets a lot more than on higher difficulties.