[Axis Campaign] Legacy of Versailles-vanilla v0.3 (11/08/14)

[timek28]

I just arrived at England44 scenario. A little spoiler alert - scenario has 80 turns! I feel I will be playing it for the next month

[timek28]

Has anyone actually completed the LoV? I'm at the UK44 scenario as I said and it has 80 turns... I'm getting extremely fatigued by the campaign. I split the scenarios in several chunks and try to play 5-10 turns per day (or if I have enough time, per morning - afternoon).

It took me 4 hours to play first 10 turns of UK44, which I played more or less perfectly. Then a big spawn of UK fighters came and they crippled 2 of my aircraft (1 Fw190 3 stars and 1 Fw190F 4 stars). It seems that enemy is endless, and moving close to 100 of my units per turn combined with countless enemy is really tiring. I cannot count the number of allied planes I destroyed in prior scenarios but virtual factories keep pumping and pumping without any problem... Also all allied pilots that die are replenished easily with equal or more experienced ones (I'm kind of being sarcastic here)...

Has anyone completed campaign, and does anyone have any tips? I'm afraid if UK44 looks like this, what will the US east cost be like, or God forbid notorious west cost.

This is battle on a scale I have never seen before (DLCs are cakewalk compared to this), and I have never seen enemy so relentless and numerous before...

I give you props, as you obviously created LoV with much enthusiasm but I think this kind of campaign is just not for me. I'm sure other players love it and enjoy it. I feel exhausted right now... Maybe I'll give a shot to your elite core campaign tomorrow. I'm putting LoV on the shelf as I had much more then I can handle...

[Wildthing]

Hi timek, i finished the beta months ago (PC Version 1.14).
If you regain your motivation to complete UK44, you have to see the scenario as a monstrous single Game "in the Game". I needed about 1 week for UK44, because i have a reallife.
If you finished this match, in my opinion you passed the high of the campaign. The US-maps are smaller but more work to do (!). Nico tried to compensate the excellent german equipment with high number of allied reinforcements. Thats the only way to give the stupid A.I. a chance.

After finishing the Campaign, i was completely exhausted and did not start PanzerCorps for weeks. But, in the end, i was happy to have finished LOV. I think we will never see a campaign with such a huge number of cores and gigantic map-size.
Nico decided to switch the focus in the LOV-Ultimate on a small Core with moderate map-size. A very good idea to prevent brave players like you from beeing frustrated.

Greets, Wild

[timek28]

Hey Wild

Thanks for the answer I understood everything you said. Good for you that you finished UK44 in 1 week I would take probably a month at my pace On a side note my frustration grew too big. I actually deleted the savegames of LoV and decided to play AC again instead. To be honest it is like a cakewalk compared to LoV. Especially on medium difficulty. I basically brutalize the AI. After frustration with LoV it is not such a bad thing either

Nico did a great job as usual with LoV. I just don't have enough time, nerves and freshness in me to play this campaign till the end. There is too much stuff going on. Too many fronts, auxiliaries and core units. There has to be some leverage of free time input, and enjoyment with the game. My current optimum is playing around 2 hours per day and being able to more or less finish a scenario in that time. AC gives me just that and it feels good cause in the bottom line this should be fun. It's just a game... So therefore I really really like that Nico has oriented him now to more moderate campaigns with smaller cores. I put high hopes in elite core mod.

And one more thing. I completely agree that the only way to counter superb German hardware is to spawn out hordes of AI units. Nico did this and I completely understand it. Maybe it is really time for me to try out multi-player engagements after all...

[rezaf]

I've been playing LoV every now and then in the recent weeks and I got to say LoV is a considerable achievement.
Contrary to my previous belief, the campaign is not super-difficult (except for one mission so far), and the far greater emphasis on auxilaries makes for a very different approach to missions than all vanilla content.
Relying purely on the stock equipment file made for some unfortunate limitations, but all things considered, I think you did a pretty good job of building a smokescreen in front of these whenever possible.
All in all, tremendous job, I'm happy we're in for some content of this quality now that you've turned "pro" - though I am a bit dismayed that neither this nor the "successor" LoV Ultimate will see further development at least for the forseeable future.
Also, I fully understand the reasoning behind going for a smaller core, as you have a really huge one herein which allows for some flexibility the original campaigns and DLCs did not allow but also has the downside that each scenario takes an eternity to play, but I still hope you'll include at least some "big battle" every now and then where you control a large number of auxilaries at least. We'll see.
Bottom line, playing this reinforced my view that the two best campaign creators here, bebro and you, got what they deserved when the opportunity was provided to them to develop official content. Well deserved indeed.

Keep up the great work Nico!
_____
rezaf

PS:
Things I liked:
Large core size and many auxilaries made for different gameplay and allowed me to keep units in core and field I'd never consider otherwise.
Lovingly created maps with attention to detail.
Well scripted scenarios with thought-out force compositions.
Historical mini-lessons in scenario briefings and debriefings.
Info popups (often with images) for important events such as capturing a unit.

Things I liked less:
Large core size and many auxilaries made for VERY long and time consuming scenarios.
Small omissions due to relying exclusively the stock equipment file.
Sometimes excessively brutal "counter attacks", especially with airpower.
Return to the "defense trinity" of the vanilla campaign, where every objective is defended by AT/AA and ART.
Suomussalmi.
_____
rezaf

[nikivdd]

I've been playing LoV every now and then in the recent weeks and I got to say LoV is a considerable achievement.
Contrary to my previous belief, the campaign is not super-difficult (except for one mission so far), and the far greater emphasis on auxilaries makes for a very different approach to missions than all vanilla content.
Relying purely on the stock equipment file made for some unfortunate limitations, but all things considered, I think you did a pretty good job of building a smokescreen in front of these whenever possible.
All in all, tremendous job, I'm happy we're in for some content of this quality now that you've turned "pro" - though I am a bit dismayed that neither this nor the "successor" LoV Ultimate will see further development at least for the forseeable future.
Also, I fully understand the reasoning behind going for a smaller core, as you have a really huge one herein which allows for some flexibility the original campaigns and DLCs did not allow but also has the downside that each scenario takes an eternity to play, but I still hope you'll include at least some "big battle" every now and then where you control a large number of auxilaries at least. We'll see.
Bottom line, playing this reinforced my view that the two best campaign creators here, bebro and you, got what they deserved when the opportunity was provided to them to develop official content. Well deserved indeed.

Thanks a lot for the compliments.
I have invested too much time in this campaign, just to see it wither and die. There is still one more update to come, after the release of Soviet Corps. Then at least i will be able to use the stock Finish units. And do a tweak of the terrain in Suomussalmi. Updates afterwards will simply depend if people are posting feedback or not.

I would also like to thank Timek28 for his valuable feedback when he was playing. The small updates sofar are mainly because of him.

[timek28]

I would also like to thank Timek28 for his valuable feedback when he was playing. The small updates sofar are mainly because of him.

You'r welcome

I really appreciate everything you are doing for this community. Unfortunately, I really hit the brick wall with UK44 scenario I really wanted badly to complete campaign, but that scenario just overwhelmed me. I thought US scenarios would have 150 turns

Anyways, as you can see both rezaf and I have pointed out pretty much the same good things and bad things. I know LoV won't be updated soon (at least for some time), but I hope since you have so much talent that future endeavors will bring (much) smaller cores and shorter scenarios (80 turns is just too much). Campaign length on the other hand is not a problem I like many scenarios

IMO GC West is a good example of how core development should look like, and that core cap should be around 35 units. In that case most of scenarios could be around 20-25 turns, while most epic ones could be up to 35 turns.

[nikivdd]

I must admit that i have been thinking about the UK44 scenario. It is truly a huge map with plenty of turns. What i didn't think of at that time, is to present the player with the option to bypass this titan scenario. I completely understand that not everyone is so keen to play UK44 for the reasons pointed out, and would like to see a "short cut" towards Greenland and the Northamerican continent. I can make the necessary change and include it in the next update.

[Horst]

Something that would be nice to have in any future scenario is a retreat/replacement zone, so you can replace any core unit with one from the reserve list. This is sometimes a bummer if you can't change your core during a scenario. These handy exit zones came into my mind that move your units from the map into your reserve list again.
It's only important that the start positions should be close the exit zones, otherwise you could teleport your units into the rear of an advancing enemy, similar like in the AC scenario "Italian Offensive", what is totally unplausible. I guess start positions and exit zone can't always be on a map's edge, but otherwise it should work fine then as game feature.

[nikivdd]

Something that would be nice to have in any future scenario is a retreat/replacement zone, so you can replace any core unit with one from the reserve list. This is sometimes a bummer if you can't change your core during a scenario. These handy exit zones came into my mind that move your units from the map into your reserve list again.
It's only important that the start positions should be close the exit zones, otherwise you could teleport your units into the rear of an advancing enemy, similar like in the AC scenario "Italian Offensive", what is totally unplausible. I guess start positions and exit zone can't always be on a map's edge, but otherwise it should work fine then as game feature.

I understand. It is a more interesting alternative than to restart the mission. I will create an exit hex in every mission. Thanks Horst

[jmacnamara]

I must admit that i have been thinking about the UK44 scenario. It is truly a huge map with plenty of turns. What i didn't think of at that time, is to present the player with the option to bypass this titan scenario. I completely understand that not everyone is so keen to play UK44 for the reasons pointed out, and would like to see a "short cut" towards Greenland and the Northamerican continent. I can make the necessary change and include it in the next update.

I just use 'endscn 0'. The map looks beautiful, but is rather daunting and my trusty old laptop starts making noises after a while. I do LOVE the LOV campaign though. I have never properly thanked you for making this and the old PG style campaign you created earlier. You have given me many, many hours of gaming fun. Thank you!

[guille1434]

I like very much the ideas of a "campaign tree bypass" for rather exhausting scenarios (like UK 44) and also the "exit zone". Undoubtelly, they will add quality and flexibility to your mod work, niki!!

[nikivdd]

I like very much the ideas of a "campaign tree bypass" for rather exhausting scenarios (like UK 44) and also the "exit zone". Undoubtelly, they will add quality and flexibility to your mod work, niki!!

I wrote the bypass; after Dover '44 there should be a choice. I send the update to Timek for checking if it works. If there are any other volunteers, send me PN. In the meantime i also added 1-2 exit hexes per scenario.

@jmacnamara: thank you for your kind words I'm sure you know the feeling what the passion for a game can do to a modder .

[rezaf]

You guys are of course right, but a really positive aspect of having a big core is, like I pointed out, that it gives the player some more wiggle-room to carry sub-optimal units. In most DLC scenarios, I wouldn't dream of swapping in a mediocre unit unless I REALLY couldn't afford anything else - in LoV, I still had some PzII in France, as updating the huge core in one go just was a too intimitating (expensive) prospect.
I do hope Rudankort will find a better solution to this recurring dilemma, though - giving unit's different "weights" would be one solution that was discussed.
This doesn't help for making scenarios in PzC as it is today, though.

In any event, the real issue with such long scenarios for me is the huge number of enemies - the AI turns take an eternity.

Like I remarked above, one thing I didn't like so much in LoV is the return to the vanilla campaign's approach of every objective being defended by a defense trinity, sometimes with multiple units of each type, and then a lot of well entrenched infantry. Especially earlier in the war, when units tend to be less-experienced and tanks still fairly weak, I feel there's a total failure when it comes to simulating the importance of speedy armored approach - and that's in a game with Panzer in the very title. You usually can never allow your tanks to advance well ahead of your "core" troops, namely infantry and artillery, because early armor can't do jack shit without support and even strafing fighters alone can do massive damage to them.
So, somewhat ironically, I find myself playing the very game that made the french army so inferior to the real wehrmacht (at least that's how I understand it) - closely tying all tanks to the other forces and basically only using them in unison as opposed to making maximum use of their mobility.
A similar thing happens with paratroopers - you can basically forget running a successful "air raid" behind the line with paras, because in basically all scenarios, all objectives are well defended (as described above) and para's on their own are doomed.

All this is of course not Nico's fault but rather one of the game mechanics - so sorry for ranting about it here.
_____
rezaf

[Horst]

My paratrooper "raids" utterly failed too in the past. One mistake is often that you don't recon the area before you are going to drop your paras, preferably in close terrain. It's very important that they drop where no enemy unit can see them. Also, it's often wise to wait a few turns at beginning until the first wave of enemy fighters are dealt with, so these can't dakkadakka your transports down. Luckily, transport planes need no fuel, so they can hover forever somewhere.

One way to solve this unbalanced Tiger-only core force issue is to disallow the regular heavy tanks to be purchased and upgraded to. It would not be too unplausible if heavy tanks may only be used as bonus/elite units, either given by scenario script or by chance between scenarios. You could also do that with heavy artillery units that are only available as aux units you have to carry over by exit zones. Naturally, it would demand editing the e-file for such restricted unit campaign.

[naughtybalrog]

Hey Niki,
Just a quick note of gratitude for all your, Churchy and the rest's efforts with LOV. Looking forward to Churchy's units and the campaign in the east...

[brdrumz]

Aside from playing your GTPG Campaigns, I also have your .01 version of LOV. (Vanilla)
What are the major differences between .01 and .02? I think I'm interested in upgrading to the newest version if it's significant.
So far, I really like the LOV Campaign. Thanks again for all your hard work!

[nikivdd]

08.02.14 Legacy of Versailles V0.2
- Lots of "dots and kommas" in briefings and pzloc files
- Dunkirk made a lot easier
- E-File further tweaked to negate early effect of prestige cap (values of ships and railguns decreased drastically)

[naughtybalrog]

Hi Niki!
What is this "scenario designer" tag at the end of your last post
Guy

[nikivdd]

Hi Niki!
What is this "scenario designer" tag at the end of your last post
Guy

Exactly as it says
That is until my Tiger I avatar is replaced