Grand Campaign Unit Revisions (GC45West, Mar 4 2013)

[deducter]

Hi Deducter,

What do you think of the new Heroes units in the GC 1.14.
I'm currently at Ostrov 41,playing FM 25%, and just got two extra units for the Smolensk 41 scenario.
Some scenarios may be a little tougher, Maginot Line 40 has extra minefields for example. But I'm concerned they affect the balance too much. Especially when you play with lower prestige %, they had a bigger impact.

I am quite busy recently, and in my own private files all I did was tweak Panther G GD down 1 and increase overstrength costs somewhat. My personal testing from a while ago indicates this isn't a huge difference in terms of gameplay. Increasing overstrength costs moderately doesn't really cut down the mechanic, and if I increased it too much, then there might be a tendency to overstrength only the invincible units anyway, so it's not an optimal fix.

I checked out the many extra bonus units, and they are powerful (Rudel +9A, +9D, yeah...). The GCs are easy enough as is, and while these make the game easier, it doesn't seriously affect anything. 1943-1945 should still be a reasonable but beatable challenge.

I think, until there are new gamerules files that I can tweak, there isn't much left that I can do. In particular, I feel without a cover system and a limit to dice rolls in combat, I will not be able to improve upon my current files much.

[Waffenamt]

Just have to say a great big thanks for your revisions. I could never go back to playing without them! After restarting a few months ago with a better balance of forces, I'm presently slogging through turn 4 of the Stalingrad Docks, and I find it's been taking me a fair bit longer to get through a turn starting around mid '42. I've been playing at FM level right from '39. but haven't tried the 1.14 update yet as I'll wait till '43 if I can pull through. Everything feels about right so far, and the Soviets are defending and counterattacking every step of the way. I'm sure I'll really be seeing the effects of this mod in the next few months.

I'm really looking forward to trying out some of the heavy tanks when I upgrade my remaining Panzer IIIs, as long as I have some prestige left by then! I've really enjoyed going through your videos of these battles too. Even if I try and follow your first couple of turns, my battles will soon take a shape of their own and my skills have improved considerably since learning to use some of the advanced tactics you've demonstrated.

Way back when, when I was playing Panzer General I found it very enjoyable but the use of super units was such a temptation I never thought I could get an historical feel for it. But with Panzer Corps, these revisions on top of the DLCs have made this nice and challenging, and the weapons and equipment changes seem to fit right in with the period. I don't believe I've ever had so much bang per buck from any wargame, ever. Many thanks for what you've contributed to this!

Regards

[Muddy]

Thank you for this mod, it is excellent.

[deducter]

Thanks for all the support.

Work will resume on this once v1.20 of PzC is released.

[Muddy]

Thanks for all the support.

Work will resume on this once v1.20 of PzC is released.

And I'm very glad to hear it. I always thought that the game was missing something, and all that time it was this mod.

[deducter]

Within the new v1.20, work will once again resume. I intend to apply the dice roll cap , making this a completely different game. In a way, 1939-1942 will be much harder, but 1943-1945 will be somewhat easier assuming the player uses a historical core.

Please let me know what features/requests players are interested in.

[nvett]

Sorry what exactly do you mean by dice roll cap, is that a custom rule you can apply as I didn't notice it in 1.20 changelog?

[deducter]

Sorry what exactly do you mean by dice roll cap, is that a custom rule you can apply as I didn't notice it in 1.20 changelog?

Yes, it caps the number of dice of a combat roll to 10, regardless of overstrength. Units with lower strength will still roll whatever their strength is. I don't know if the the formula is still that ROF is a multiplier before the cap or after.

This reduces the effects of very powerful player overstrength cores, but makes it so that a less overstrength player core is better against the AI in 1943+.

Overstrength will be set to the same cost as 1 pt of elite reinforcements now. It is still potentially very useful, considering that a Panther reduced from 13 to 11 strength would still be rolling 10 dice, but one reduced from 10 to 8 would only be rolling two. So effectively, you can potentially start a scenario with +50% dice before needing to reinforce, which is quite an advantage.

I'll also remove the prestige soft cap, since that system doesn't play well with this system.

[Muddy]

Will it be a long job to adapt the mod to 1.20?

[deducter]

Will it be a long job to adapt the mod to 1.20?

Yes. There's quite a few game mechanics that I've been thinking about adjusting.

In particular, with the dice cap roll, I'm considering just removing the hidden "ROF" variable for most units. There's no real purpose left to it anymore, now that I think about it. What does it really accomplish, at the end of the day?

ROF mostly affects artillery. But the game can easily be balanced by simply having the higher caliber guns have much less ammo, to simulate the need to maintain a stockpile of shells to fire a truly devastating barrage. Lower caliber guns like the 10.5 cm artillery will have much more ammo, so they are more able to provide defensive fire.

Obviously certain special "super weapons" like the Gustav Rail gun will still have low ROF, but those are only given in specific scenarios.

Another change is that overstrength will serve as a "tactical reserve" system. I will set its price to be linear and to be the equivalent of one elite reinforcement point, although bear in mind the later years will still have higher elite reinforcement costs.

Also, I will likely remove the prestige soft cap, given the already finely tuned combat system. A prestige soft cap would be counterproductive with the dice roll cap system.

Keep in mind that a more "historical" core of non-overstrength units will actually be much better in 1943+. It won't win many DVs, but it won't be so easily annihilated by the wave after waves of 13+ strength AI units.

The GCs should not feel like a completely different game, but one where tactical skill matters far more than just building up a super core and using it to crush the opposition. Core composition will still be important, but should be somewhat more flexible.

[deducter]

Other changes: experience files.

I personally don't like rewarding IN to units much, so I think I'll limit it to tanks and fighters. IN bonus on infantry is too good. I will, however, double the effects of entrenchment in both close defense and in ground defense. Suddenly, the ability to ignore entrenchment (Panzer II Flamm, pioneers) will become very valuable.

I also don't like huge attack bonuses, as that makes battles proceed much too quickly. So fighters and AT units will go back down to 1 AA. However, fighters will actually receive +2 AD per 100 exp. Thus, highly experienced fighters, say, your 5-star Bf 109G in 1945, will still be very valuable. It will survive the AI hordes much more easily. I can also adjust the jet fighter defenses down, so if you upgrade, and lose exp, your new jet fighters may be powerful offensively, but weak defensively.

However, for AT units, I can't decide whether to stick with 0.5 IN bonus or to remove that but increase its GD bonus. For instance, giving a AT unit a GD bonus of 2 per 100 exp will make a 5-star StuG have more defense than a 5-star Panther! However, my concern is that the Soviet heavy assault guns will be too tough to defeat unless I artificially lower their GD. I feel like AT units are probably easier to balance with the typical 0.5 IN bonus and 1 HA bonus per 100 exp though.

[ThvN]

Very good ideas, making experienced fighters more survivable makes a lot of sense.

The AT guns are quite difficult, I saw the stock 200% HA exp bonus and I feel it is too much. AT units should be good 'ambush' units so an INI bonus makes sense, I would keep it. I am contemplating making it a bit higher than the tank INI bonus so that more experienced AT units slowly close the INI gap vs. tanks on the offense, making them much more effective at attacking 'green' tanks. But I'm afraid it would make them too powerful without tweaking the stats a bit.

I'm not sure I would give AT units a big GD bonus, experienced units should be better at using cover & concealment, but would AT units be much better then others? Instead I'm thinking of playing around with the AD bonus to give some unit types a bit more character, making them harder to suppress by strat bombers than others, so as to make them more resilient.

The exp values can be tweaked in very small steps of course, so if certain stat values are very common on a particular class, you will see a 'tipping' effect at certain exp values. Certainly I see potential for a lot of tweaking existing stats, so be careful, you might end up reworking everything again!

[deducter]

The AT guns are quite difficult, I saw the stock 200% HA exp bonus and I feel it is too much. AT units should be good 'ambush' units so an INI bonus makes sense, I would keep it. I am contemplating making it a bit higher than the tank INI bonus so that more experienced AT units slowly close the INI gap vs. tanks on the offense, making them much more effective at attacking 'green' tanks. But I'm afraid it would make them too powerful without tweaking the stats a bit.

The exp values can be tweaked in very small steps of course, so if certain stat values are very common on a particular class, you will see a 'tipping' effect at certain exp values. Certainly I see potential for a lot of tweaking existing stats, so be careful, you might end up reworking everything again!

Bigger IN bonus for AT units is unacceptable, as they already get +3 IN when defending vs tanks.

What I wanted to do was truly differentiated tanks and AT units. Tanks are well-rounded with no real weak points, except in close terrain very infantry, but tanks tend to be more expensive. AT units may be cheaper, but they are also tougher, if somewhat lower on IN.

However, I can't imagine how to balance it appropriately, so I think we'll just have to stick with 0.5 IN, 1 HA, and 1 GD too for AT units. They will just be cheaper than tanks, but much worse against soft targets (no bonuses).

[ThvN]

Bigger IN bonus for AT units is unacceptable, as they already get +3 IN when defending vs tanks.

Yes, the ini stats would have to be tweaked; and then it might still be too powerful. I find these types of units among the most difficult to accurately portray, especially without switchable versions.

What I wanted to do was truly differentiated tanks and AT units. Tanks are well-rounded with no real weak points, except in close terrain very infantry, but tanks tend to be more expensive. AT units may be cheaper, but they are also tougher, if somewhat lower on IN.

Well, that is good logic. The unit classes really are a bit too strict to accurately portray every type of unit, and the biggest advantage of the StuG's was cost and availability, and you have that sorted already. You could try to differentiate their roles by tweaking the stats, but that depends on what you think is both acceptable and reasonably accurate.

For example, the issued ammunition mix might change the SA/HA for a particular type of gun (StuG's usually carried 50/50 HE/AP, but more dedicated AT guns may have had more AP in the mix. The StuG's had better optics than tanks and the (artillery) crews were better trained in long-range gunnery, but I'm not convinced I can up the INI bonus for the whole AT class because of this. For lack of a better alternative, I'm thinking about giving them a bigger AD bonus, to represent their concealability and resilience.

However, I can't imagine how to balance it appropriately, so I think we'll just have to stick with 0.5 IN, 1 HA, and 1 GD too for AT units. They will just be cheaper than tanks, but much worse against soft targets (no bonuses).

Just curious, if you think 2.0 GD is overpowered, do you think 1.5 GD is too much as well? I'm thinking that the new adjustable step-OS costs might have a bigger impact on the game overall, and careful tweaking of this might benefit the cheaper AT units more than the exp bonuses.

[Muddy]

I won't even pretend to have understand a word of what you said deducter. But I can say I enjoy the game much more when playing with your mod, the game is a lot more exciting , if you know what I mean? So I am looking forward to the day it has been converted, and starting a new GC.

[borsook79]

Other changes: experience files.

I personally don't like rewarding IN to units much, so I think I'll limit it to tanks and fighters. IN bonus on infantry is too good. I will, however, double the effects of entrenchment in both close defense and in ground defense. Suddenly, the ability to ignore entrenchment (Panzer II Flamm, pioneers) will become very valuable.

Please remember that while units can get INT via exp the heroes are (or in case of GC will be in 1.21) limited to +1 now.

[deducter]

Other changes: experience files.

I personally don't like rewarding IN to units much, so I think I'll limit it to tanks and fighters. IN bonus on infantry is too good. I will, however, double the effects of entrenchment in both close defense and in ground defense. Suddenly, the ability to ignore entrenchment (Panzer II Flamm, pioneers) will become very valuable.

Please remember that while units can get INT via exp the heroes are (or in case of GC will be in 1.21) limited to +1 now.

Yes, I am aware of this, and it is a very good one. The sin isn't the IN itself, but a combination of high attack, high IN, and overstrength that allows the player's units to often destroy the AI's units without taking any losses.

[Delta66]

I add played Allied Corps beta campaign from 1939 to D-Day only with strength 10 units. D-Day was hard, at least for a first attampt at the scenario, but it feeled right for all other scenarios.

Have you considered caping units dice rolls to 11 or 12 instead of straight down to 10, adjusting the price accordingly.
14 or 15 seems way too much combined with higher attack values. But 11 or 12 looks reasonable and it gives some extra reason to OS without being too strong.

Something cool would be to get an extra die roll for OS 13+ and maybe a second for OS 15, but I'm not sure it is possible with the current system.

[deducter]

I add played Allied Corps beta campaign from 1939 to D-Day only with strength 10 units. D-Day was hard, at least for a first attampt at the scenario, but it feeled right for all other scenarios.

Have you considered caping units dice rolls to 11 or 12 instead of straight down to 10, adjusting the price accordingly.
14 or 15 seems way too much combined with higher attack values. But 11 or 12 looks reasonable and it gives some extra reason to OS without being too strong.

Something cool would be to get an extra die roll for OS 13+ and maybe a second for OS 15, but I'm not sure it is possible with the current system.

I'm not working on AC content, just the GCs. I've playtested most of the scenarios using mostly 10-strength units, and it's okay. There were still certain overpowered combos, particularly elite infantry in close terrain in the late war years, OS strategic bombers, OS Ju 87G, that these changes will eliminate.

DV will be even more difficult for many 1943+ scenarios now, but I'm okay with that. Cores will likely need some rethinking, instead of just stacking tons of artillery and bombers, more "melee" units will probably be necessarily. This mod is intended to challenge even the toughest players, while maintaining a historical feel, and without just giving the AI massive bonuses.

The thing is, weaker cores will actually have an easier time, as the 13+ str AI units will not just crush a player's PzIV/StuG III core in 1944. So this change, in a way, levels the playing field and makes tactics much more important.

[deducter]

Major game rules changes already done:
1. Dice rolls for all units capped at 10.
2. OS now cost are linear and is the same as one standard STR point of elite reinforcement; elite reinforcements still more expensive in later years.
3. ROF of all non-unique units (so this excludes units like the Gustav rail gun) set to 10, so it is no longer a hidden attribute.
4. Infantry GD and CD entrenchment bonuses doubled to 2 and 1, respectively. This means that entrenched infantry is very difficult to root out, and that the "meng" flag is more useful. Certainly scenarios like Moscow, Sevastopol, and Stalingrad should now be appropriately difficult.
5. All artillery SA increased to compensate. This means that artillery should be better against infantry in the open, but much less effective against entrenched infantry.
6. Strategic bomber SA increased and cost decreased. This is because the use of the 14-str STR bombers to knock a unit's ammo down to 1 or 2 in one attack is now impossible. However, these bombers are still very good against entrenched soft targets.
7. Unit exp bonuses adjusted; the main changes are that infantry no longer increase in IN, all +2 attack bonuses are down to +1, and that fighters get +2 AD bonus.

Minor changes:
1. General rebalancing of all units to account for the removal of ROF. Some highlights are included below.
2. Soviet 122-mm ART range increased appropriately to 4.
3. Bf 109K cost increased.
4. Panther GD increased to 20 for all models.
5. KV-1B and KV-1C GD decreased.
6. Various heavy caliber/rocket artillery ammo decreased; however, they should be much more effective against entrenched infantry than lighter artillery.
7. German TAC adjusted to account for new rules; in particular, Ju 87B and R SA and HA increased, Bf 110 early models attack and defense increased, Fw 190F and Fw 190G IN and defenses increased.
8. American 76 mm gun HA to 17 in all years.
9. Soviet SMG infantry ammo to 5, GD to 6.

All the new changes eliminate most of the supremely overpowered combos, the high IN/high attack units like OS SE Grenadiers, OS 4-5 star Panthers, OS fighters with IN and attack heroes, OS Ju 87G, OS strategic bombers. Losses will increase for very powerful cores the late war, but actually decrease for weaker cores.

I want to warn that with most of the changes, DV in the late-war scenarios is probably impossible without using many of the new "super units" like Rudel who are provided. And I think that's perfectly okay. If you want to take a historical core without all these heroes, then you should expect the historical outcome, and your tactical skill can only do so much.

I am currently taking suggestions/requests for other unit changes.