Panzer Corps 2

[Soldberg]

- 64-bit architecture -> larger map etc.
- 2D / 3D not matter, as long as the graphic is modifiable...


Think about it ...
"Panzer Tactics HD" and "Order of Battle" look good, but are probably not nearly as popular as "Panzer Corps" because they are difficult to not modifiable games.

[Magic1111]

- 2D / 3D not matter, as long as the graphic is modifiable...

A better graphic as base for the game, AND modifiable! I think this combination is the best!

[verstaubtgesicht]

Variable AI deployment. The biggest problem is that once you play a scenario, it becomes predictable and therefore useless for subsequent plays. Not knowing what to expect in any given play would make the game "evergreen"

[goose_2]

Variable AI deployment. The biggest problem is that once you play a scenario, it becomes predictable and therefore useless for subsequent plays. Not knowing what to expect in any given play would make the game "evergreen"

+1 this is what I was trying to say in my previous post.

Not sure how that is possible but if it is it would change everything when it comes to these strategy games.

[TSPC37730]

Variable AI deployment. The biggest problem is that once you play a scenario, it becomes predictable and therefore useless for subsequent plays. Not knowing what to expect in any given play would make the game "evergreen"

+1 this is what I was trying to say in my previous post.

Not sure how that is possible but if it is it would change everything when it comes to these strategy games.

I've often daydreamed about this one myself. However, a pitfall might run like this. Suppose there are two different deployments for a given scenario. One of these deployments might wind up being somewhat easier due to say, terrain or a host of other issues. One could "game" the scenario by reloading until the favorable deployment was loaded. Despite this, I think this idea could be a plus. Having to cope with possible alternate deployments is probably the best way to lessen the advantage of knowing where they're coming from.

One totally off-topic wish-list item for PC2 would be SE artillery, AT & fighter units - perhaps limited to a max of 1 each. Cheers.

[goose_2]

One totally off-topic wish-list item for PC2 would be SE artillery, AT & fighter units - perhaps limited to a max of 1 each. Cheers.

Again another killer suggestion, as to have them restricted to tanks and inf for Germans makes it a necessity to focus only on tanks especially when considering the soft cap.

When you are only able to get 1 of each SE unit it becomes exciting when you finally get that SE Fighter or that SE Arty, AA , or Tac Bomber.

Oh the fun of this game is limitless.

[captainjack]

I like to field SE army groups with mixed infantry and tanks and the odd aircraft, so would be all for having a wider range of SE units. Unfortunately, under the current soft cap, the only SE units worth having are the most expensive ones that repay overstrength - tanks and maybe strategic bombers or fighters. Sadly, until the soft cap is modified or made selectable (my preference) as a game option, adding other forms of SE units will have little value for most people.

[ptje63]

In random order:

-not go direction of the PG 3 version in adding theatrical moving graphics please...
-choice for soft cap on/off, at least make its effects easily viewable, understandable and changable for everyone, from novice to "diehard" users
-choice of path for unit
-heroes appropriate for its unit - but I would not recommend a total freedom of selection what hero, since it would ruin the surprise of the awarded hero selection and to prevent the appearance of unrealistical super-units with three +3 attack heroes, etc.
-use part of movement "points" for other activity, for instance: bridge-engineer if 1 hex away from river: one point for movement, 2nd point for bridgebuilding (in one turn) / infantry can move three hexes: use two for movement and third one for digging in to +2.
-most incorrect values at the moment in my opinion are:
= range of view for surface ships: why can a recon see 3 hexes away (no matter what terrain!) and a battleship only 1 or 2... on a clear sky and quiet seas...
= 88mm hard attack value: set at 8 while it was capable of doing much more harm than that...
-more in between choices during a campaign with greater variations, for instance: use of only 6 core units to take a certain key city. I know this would be less realistical as to the size of the army/groupsize, as elsewhere mentioned in this topic.

[Akkula]

- 2D / 3D not matter, as long as the graphic is modifiable...

I think it does matter. 2D is MUCH easier to mod than 3D, any modder can tell you that.
To make a 3D engine would reduce the amount of modding activity by A LOT.

Regards.
Akkula.

[captainjack]

Good point Akkula.
I can just manage some basic cut and paste work, but would have no hope of doing this with full 3D icons.

[robman]

I would like to see some modeling of supra-unit military organization and command: an incentive to keep "divisions" together and/or a penalty for reforming battle groups on the fly. This would definitely be a "PC2" innovation, as I can't think of any meaningful way to implement it in the existing game.

I agree with the above posters who caution against focusing on fancy graphics--that is not why any of us play the game.

[r13exphantom]

I like 2D graphics, and it's faster.Please keep 2D graphics.

[ptje63]

I would very much like an additional short key that makes you jump from several options while clicking on a unit on the main screen. Now it (only) shows how many hexes movement is possible. Please add short key for view and range. When moving recon around I always have to use a pencil on the screen counting the hexes around my unit to check how far it can see... nostalgic but inaffective .

[captainjack]

an incentive to keep "divisions" together and/or a penalty for reforming battle groups

Maybe you could have it so you get to rename units the scenario after you get them for free, and after that it costs prestige (10 might be enough).

Variable AI deployment.

Well, you can sort of do this now by setting AI deployments in a zone rather than on a specific hex, and adding random triggers for deployment of other units. This would be much easier if you could trigger a deployment by name rather than by each unit: Eg 3rd Panzer division deploys in Zone 1, but this action has a 40% chance each turn, so their deployment time varies a bit but they all come at once; 4th Panzer deploys in Zone 2, but Zone 2 is long and thin forcing deployment in a semi random line or column.

A good refinement would be to add an option to deploy randomly into more than one zone. Of course you could split a zone into several parts, so the units appear in different locations (and maybe at different times) but to script 5th Panzer Division deploys in either Zone 1 or Zone 2 would be good.

Next step would be to allow a separate deployment table, so you can say things like "deploy in this formation" which would need some protocols for managing deployment in an area smaller than the formation; deploy in this sequence (so your armour arrives, then motorized flak then motorised infantry than other units rather than your truck mounted artillery arrive on the front line, and of course allow random selection.

The other nice touch would be conditional deployment, so that 6th Panzer deploys in Zone 6 around Munich, but if Zone 6 is occupied it either deploys somewhere else (defined or a random zone) or doesn't deploy at all. That would make seizing an objective very rewarding in some cases.

[KnobiWahn]

Savegames: Creating own subfolders
Mapsize/Playtime for Szenarios about an hour

[Messmann]

- Visible Frontlines. It should be possible to starve units out.
- More unit traits, programmable at best. The indiviual traits such as hidden or nopurchase of a unit should be visible when double-clicking on the unit. No more guess work!
- Assign maximum prestige values to unit slots of core armies, while at the same, giving players the possiblity to buy units for a lot of cheap slots. Give few expensive slots, and many cheap slots. This makes it much more interesting to look out for cheaper units, many of them playing no role right now. No more automatic maxing out of core slots!
- Bridges. Allow units to blow up bridges; this should cripple supplies. (See frontlines).
- 2 D units. Idealliy, the modded and self-created units should be usable.
- Form battle groups ? Staying together could be beneficial.
- A I needs to be improved.
- Refined replay mode. It should be programmable, for each turn; a single replay move should be stored automatically as mp 4. Perhaps it could be possible to genareate individual replays for a group of units, or a singe unit. Would be great for lets play videos, and generate attention for the game.

[proline]

- re-balancing of artillery and air (tactical bombers), too powerful now

What do you mean? For the human player, tac bombers are at best niche units at the moment. I usually only deploy 2 or so (and that includes Rudel). 1943 onward they need to be escorted by a fighter at all times, which limits the usefulness of your fighters, and the enemies always have tons of mobile AA which makes tac bombers less cost-effective than other units. If you mean that you hate it when the AI bombs one of your tanks in the clear and does expensive damage to it, that is preventable so many ways.

[Apokryph]

- More Unit Traits please !!! It would be great to choose a trait each time a unit levels up (= Gains an experience star). This way you'd have more control over unit development instead of complete randomness and endless save/reload.

- Alternatively a system of traits based on a unit's deeds so far. If it excelled in tankhunting it receives a corresponding trait. If it suffered severe losses it might get more resilient and so on.

- Scaled down battles. Although it is fun to play historical battles it also sets tight limits to campaign trees. When you scale down, you could fight skirmishes (instead of battles) on maps specially designed by the developers without compromising historical accuracy too much.

[lsnoop]

+ Panzer Corps 2 (II Corps) should be as demanding as the original Panzer Corps - or even less - hope the developers take time to make it compatible with any low/medium PC and test the whole thing thoroughly

NB. OOB is a prime example why Unity Engine is not the right thing for games like this. Constant lags and fps drops. Please. No Unity Engine anymore, please.

+ You can borrow some ideas from Blitz krieg I (2003) - the best WW2 strategy ever, which only lacked turn-based gameplay.

+ Add unit speech and unit voices, these were missing since the start. You can make it on/off in the options, but this feature is a must. Use native languages for voice acting. If it's too expensive, you can open a topic in the forums, where users would record and share voice acting samples for units or briefings I'm sure there will be lots of volunteers

+ Change briefings and victory reports. Reading the whole thing was a strain in the original game and listening to that horrible voice was even worse. Replace it with some footage or something. You can make it on/off in the options.

+ Add rank progress/gaining experience for player. It was boring to begin and play the whole campaign with the same rank (Colonel).

+ Add pictures and messages with unit information, historical events etc. like in PHCAS mod. This feature can be on/off in the options.

+ Do not overcomplicate with extra traits or units - just renew the existing ones, add more details like dust, snow and smoke on screen, add at least 10 random animations (10 moving, 10 attacking) and sounds. Do not forget unit speech.

+ Destroyed units should remain for a couple of turns as wrecks. If another unit comes through, animate the vehicle shredding.

+ Add an option to limit core unit roster to 6/12/24/36 units - this can be merged with difficulty (6-lieutenant, 12-colonel etc). I prefer to play with a small core force (up to 12 units max) and for me it's very annoying to control more than this.

+ Improve the AI. This should be easy as the game is like chess

[captainjack]

+ Add rank progress/gaining experience for player.

I like that idea. Maybe you could tie promotion with number of DV/MV and losses so you get recognised faster for continued good performance.

Weather - maybe add theatre-dependent alternatives for sandstorm - fog in western and central Europe, (the sandstorm effects and animation would work) and freezing fog which combines the fog effect with freezing for northern and eastern europe.
While on this you could consider Night as an alternative to FIne in some conditions. Later war units with IR scopes and some other special units (eg SAS, Commando) could retain normal movement and/or spotting.

Destroyed units should remain for a couple of turns as wrecks

If it was possible to add an extra layer like for air movement, you could have structures such as bridges and castles and trenches that you could move other units into or onto. You could then destroy a bunker, castle, factory etc and even trenches (with a bulldozer or engineer unit). Some of these could be given a trait to leave rubble or ruins, which would offer cover for units (lots in the case of Cassino monastery, less in most cases). This would also make it easier to include destroyable bridges or to create bailey bridges in game. At the moment this requires setting hex actions and scripting rather than - see that bridge - kaboom! - what bridge?
This would also allow some units to be set to leave wrecks that could provide an obstacle to movement, provide cover, or indicate that salvage was possible.