Battlefield: Europe MOD v2.4

[George_Parr]

Most sources seem to agree that the T-34 and KV-1 ruled until the Germans introduced the long 75 mm AT guns in numbers from mid/late 1942. The effect of these tanks were so significant that they forced to Germans to introduce a new generation of tanks (which interfered with the production of the well proven but less effective Pz.III and Pz.IV models) and to start to improvise until the Panthers and Tigers arrived by creating the Marder series and using all kinds of captured guns in AT role until enough Pak 40s could be produced.

That stems largely from miscommunication though. The KV indeed caused a shock, the T-34 didn't. It's just that German soldiers heard there was a new Soviet tank, the name of the T-34 made the rounds quicker than the KV-1, and so anything they didn't recognize was called a T-34. You can find plenty of pictures from German reports about issues facing T-34s which are in fact showing KV-1. The armor of the T-34 also wasn't any better than what the French had to offer, unlike the KV-1, which was by far the best protected tank of the early period. Doesn't help that there are some post-war reports from certain German generals that tried to shift the blame away from themselves, often by trying to make the enemy seem superior. That way you have Guderian talking about how they first ran into these extremely powerful tanks that they had no means to deal with sometime during the later summer, right when their advance started to slow down, even though they had already encountered them in significant numbers on the first day of the operation, and handily cast them aside that day.

Most T-34s were in fact destroyed by 5cm guns, not by stronger guns or planes. In the first engagement with German tanks (well, Czech ones), the T-34 got annihilated while causing few losses on their own (about 40 to 10). If they even managed to get into combat that is. The early T-34 was so dramatically unreliable that it makes the early Panther look good. The engine had an average life expectency of 100km under ideal conditions and 50km in combat. Almost every tank at the outbreak of Barbarossa had not been driven once it had left the factory, out of fear that it would break down. Leaving units with zero experience with the tank, which made the reliability-issues even worse. Some units lost 50%+ of its tanks prior to engaging the enemy. Add bad optics, a not particularly powerful gun early on, and a bad internal setup, and the T-34 wasn't nearly as strong as it should have been. Lack of radios and giving the commander way too much to do made the tanks not act as a unit and left them completely blind to flank attacks. Which played right into Germany's hands. Things did eventually improve massively though. Once they got the reliability under control, the T-34 certainly had an advantage over the German tanks in terms of armor, firepower and mobility. At least until the Pz IV G or H. The KV-1, didn't have the issue in the same way as its armor was massively better, making it tougher to crack even from the side.

I think the mod does represent those tanks relatively well though. I guess you could take away experience to represent the complete lack of training they had, but that's about it.

[McGuba]

Yes, I also read that in some cases the KV-1 was misidentified as being T-34. Just as the Soviets later misidentified German tanks resulting in Tigers and Elefants being seen everywhere where they were taking a beating.

However, I would argue that the armour of the T-34 wasn't any better than what the French had: the most numerous French tanks, the Hotchkiss H35 and Renault H35 had 40 mm armour in most of the front hull but were less sloped than the 45 mm frontal armour of the T-34. Thus the effective armour thickness of the T-34 in the front was around 75 mm against rounds coming horizontally and the afformentioned French tanks had a lower effective armour thickness for the most part. Plus these had two man crew which greatly reduced their effectiveness even compared to the (early) T-34 which had a crew of four.

As for T-34 tanks being mainly destroyed by 5 cm guns, it is probably true, but I guess mainly for the later long barrel version and the Pak 38, and not for the early war short 5 cm Kwk 38 (L/42):

a German report of May 1942 noted the ineffectiveness of their 50 mm gun as well, noting that "Combating the T-34 with the 5 cm KwK tank gun is possible only at short ranges from the flank or rear, where it is important to achieve a hit as perpendicular to the surface as possible."

and also:

According to an examination of damaged T-34 tanks in several repair workshops in August to September 1942, collected by the People's Commissariat for Tank Industry in January 1943, 54.3% of all T-34 losses were caused by the German long-barreled 50 mm KwK 39 gun.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-34

I think the unreliability of the early T-34 tanks is well represented in the mod (given the limitations of the game engine) by their low max fuel value and the fact that most are basically immobile or "frozen" in 1941. Other than that I am glad that you agree that the mod does represent these tanks relatively well though.

[Locarnus]

Hey, there are some interesting comments here.

But seeing the statement on the previous page about 2.3 being the last version for a while,
perhaps there is some wider interest into what started as a private experimental mod standing on the shoulders of this giant mod?
And maybe some parts can be considered for future versions, especially if the big mod is not being worked on for the time being?

Yes, development is currently in limbo, and I do not know when I will have the time to work on in again, but I think the current 2.3 version is stable enough that it may not be necessary to rush with it. However, some tweaks may be possible later.

It is a fantastic mod! No hurry, perhaps this limbo allows some discussion of my experimental changes? Due to the all in one map and scenario and scripting structure of PzC, it would be extremely hard for me to adjust them to new versions on the fly (I would have to essentially redo them). Better to have them discussed before a new version supersedes them.

map/scenario changes, eg important raillines like Baku-Poti/Batumi and the ones through the Alps to reinforce Italy

The Baku-Batumi railway line could indeed be added, however, as far as I know it was a single line railroad in the 1940's therefore it could really handle high traffic. And at this map and time scale all railroad traffic is supposed to be high.

I am not so sure about the railroads through the Alps, I mean how developed they were in this era, as far as I am aware most tunnels were built after the war.

Baku-Batumi/Poti was important enough for the oil transport to be electrified before WW2. I originally wanted to test a "Black Sea seaborne/airborne invasion strategy" to get to the oil fields on the route south of the Caucasus, thats what pushed me to look into this map aspect.

The "Brennerbahn" from Innsbruck to Verona was probably the most important North-South transit link "through" the Alps, since it did not require tunnels. I added some additional East-West lines, but those are more about testing a "maximum viable transitlines" in the Alps scenario.

eastern Prussian topography

I am not sure what you mean by this, are there any errors in the map in this area?

Nothing wrong, just personal preference, since I looked at this area soo much and I'm trying out different ways. The whole thing started very experimental.

4) In one recent playthrough while having all of england but not scotland I had a unreal massive wave of large numbers of air including bombers which experienced 88mm's COULD NOT DAMAGE!!! (even on dice chess) dominate play despite the fact I have a full strength, maximum latest model and numerous airforce. (part of mystyle has always been air dominance first - I dont usually lose ANY german fighters).

The Allies produced several times more aircraft than the Axis in WW2 and it is reflected in the mod.

By mid 1944 the limitations of the German 8.8 cm AA gun had started to become obvious as the US heavy bombers flew at the limit of its effective vertical firing range. Therefore the Germans started to prioritize the 10.5 cm and 12.8 cm AA guns instead, and used them for the defense of the most important objectives.

Losing units is part of this mod. I am perfectly aware that most players hate to lose even a single unit of their own but in reality all the nations in WW2 suffered heavy losses, including the fighter arm of the German Luftwaffe.

About the flak, in the recent episode of goose_2, he has a 2cm Flakvierling strongly outperforming a 8.8cm Flak due to their rate of fire differences. I commented on that with a timestamp. Not sure how that can be balanced without also nerfing the Flakvierling a lot.

Yeah, the inofficial Dwarf Fortress slogan of "losing is fun" is very different to the way PzC is typically played. Requires quite a bit of adjustment on the player side and is not for everyone. This mod goes a bit against the PzC grain. It would probably have a lot more players if it was known about in circles where the "losing is fun" slogan is more prominent.

6) The extra level of difficulty makes it evenmore probable to run out of time to do all the things you want to do. If you take out uk first you run out of time to finish off russia and take all the middle eat, any chance of a 'completely unrealistic' version with extra time/turns?

If you load the scenario in the editor you can edit the number of turns to whatever you want. However the game will only show the last two digits of the turn number so turn 101 will be shown as turn 1 again, but it should not affect the game in any way. The other issue is that no more per turn prestige will be given after turn 99 as that's how I set the prestige in the editor. Changing this may require some more editing, but I think it is possible to increase the number of turns by a few extra and just live with the lack of prestige in the last turns after turn 99, if this is what someone really wants.

Very interesting, I'll have to tinker with that sometime.

Without good weather (airforce) the mines are pretty hard to dislodge. Do the minekiller and minesweeper traits work against naval mines (both moored and bottom)? Would it make sense to add a new minesweeper shiptype or give some other ships such a trait?

Naval mines can also be attacked by destroyers, they have a 50% chance for reducing the strength of a bottom mine by 1 in each attack and a naval mine can be attacked by several destroyers in the same turn.

The minesweeper trait would only work against bottom mines I think, but I would not add it to the mod as it would make it too easy in my opinion. Additionally the AI would be unable to use these minesweeper units properly and effectively, just as it does not use recon move or massed attacks. Which means it would further increase the disparity between the human player and the AI. There would be yet another unit that the human player can use effectively but the AI cannot.

Perhaps the problem is that coming from PzC without BE, fleet handling is not a strength of new players (myself included). Coupled with the inability to buy new ships at will and the Italian fleet being not the most reliable, there might be some lack of destroyers (or air superiority) to handle mines for a late Sealion. Also looking at the playthrough by goose_2.

Unit stat balance was the main reason why I started looking into mods for this game back in the day and recently started modding this mod in particular. Imho there are quite a few inconsistencies, which can not be totally avoided considering game engine limitations and the size of the mod.

I would be interested to learn what inconsistencies you have found so far. So that perhaps I can fix or explain them.

But some stuff could be tweaked, like similar calibers having widely different characteristics for some units.

I wonder what you mean by this, it would be nice to learn what the specific issue is.

Or cost comparisons between eg Stugs and PzIII and PzIV, or Panzers and infantry and such.

Again, it is hard to react to this without knowing the specific issue. Unit prices in the mod in general are affected by the historical unit price (where available) and historical production numbers. Vehicles which were produced in larger numbers are usually cheaper than similar ones that were produced in small numbers.

My equipment file is a bit messy at the moment, due to trying out different ways to do some stuff (especially unit upgrade paths) while also experimenting with some balancing changes. I'll try to bring some order into it during the next weekend or so.
I somewhat remember tinkering with the hard attack values of the various 150/152mm guns (also the self-propelled versions) of the Germans and Russians, in arty mode. I'll have to check that next weekend. Afair the German Brummbär had relatively high hard attack value compared to Russian arty of essentially the same caliber.

Or the early T-34 models being unrealistically overpowered.

Most sources seem to agree that the T-34 and KV-1 ruled until the Germans introduced the long 75 mm AT guns in numbers from mid/late 1942. The effect of these tanks were so significant that they forced to Germans to introduce a new generation of tanks (which interfered with the production of the well proven but less effective Pz.III and Pz.IV models) and to start to improvise until the Panthers and Tigers arrived by creating the Marder series and using all kinds of captured guns in AT role until enough Pak 40s could be produced.

Nevertheless, in the mod even the T-34 and KV-1 can be defeated in early war by using the right tactics i.e. using combined arms and massed attacks as it is nicely shown in goose_2's youtube videos. And historically the Germans used similar tactics to overcome these.

I agree that the T-34 was a shock to the Germans in 1941 and was far superior in terms of gun, armor (even though the armor quality had issues) and ground pressure. Which translates well to the 3 traditional "rating aspects" of firepower, protection and mobility. So on paper, the superior T-34s of 1941 should have wiped the floor with their German counterparts or the German army in general. But except for ambush occasions, that was not the case. Quite the opposite actually, the T-34s were wiped in astonishing numbers.

The problem of the early T-34s was, (until finally the great T34-85 variant showed up), that they were really bad as a "weapon system". Field of view, 2-man turret, bad optics, generally bad ergonomics, pretty much no communication between vehicles and so on, the list is pretty long. Essentially they were far behind on nearly everything that really mattered in a dynamic, combined arms engagement, or any engagement aside from static ambushes or literally driving over the enemy. Additionally, the 1941 T-34s were pretty unreliable compared to the much more reliable Pz IIIs and Pz IVs and even the shorter German 50mm gun was enough to defeat the somewhat "blind" T-34 with shots to the turret sides and so on.

The T-34s could go to more places, were hard to crack and they hit hard, when they hit. But they were really bad at situational awareness, and then hitting stuff. And just like the on paper superior French tanks from 1940, the results show what really mattered. So when I tinkered with their stats, I kept them hard to kill for the German tanks, but also tried to somewhat limit their ability to kill stuff on the battlefield. The KV-1 was a different beast though, with its superior 3-man turret.

[Locarnus]

Most sources seem to agree that the T-34 and KV-1 ruled until the Germans introduced the long 75 mm AT guns in numbers from mid/late 1942. The effect of these tanks were so significant that they forced to Germans to introduce a new generation of tanks (which interfered with the production of the well proven but less effective Pz.III and Pz.IV models) and to start to improvise until the Panthers and Tigers arrived by creating the Marder series and using all kinds of captured guns in AT role until enough Pak 40s could be produced.

That stems largely from miscommunication though. The KV indeed caused a shock, the T-34 didn't. It's just that German soldiers heard there was a new Soviet tank, the name of the T-34 made the rounds quicker than the KV-1, and so anything they didn't recognize was called a T-34. You can find plenty of pictures from German reports about issues facing T-34s which are in fact showing KV-1. The armor of the T-34 also wasn't any better than what the French had to offer, unlike the KV-1, which was by far the best protected tank of the early period. Doesn't help that there are some post-war reports from certain German generals that tried to shift the blame away from themselves, often by trying to make the enemy seem superior. That way you have Guderian talking about how they first ran into these extremely powerful tanks that they had no means to deal with sometime during the later summer, right when their advance started to slow down, even though they had already encountered them in significant numbers on the first day of the operation, and handily cast them aside that day.

Most T-34s were in fact destroyed by 5cm guns, not by stronger guns or planes. In the first engagement with German tanks (well, Czech ones), the T-34 got annihilated while causing few losses on their own (about 40 to 10). If they even managed to get into combat that is. The early T-34 was so dramatically unreliable that it makes the early Panther look good. The engine had an average life expectency of 100km under ideal conditions and 50km in combat. Almost every tank at the outbreak of Barbarossa had not been driven once it had left the factory, out of fear that it would break down. Leaving units with zero experience with the tank, which made the reliability-issues even worse. Some units lost 50%+ of its tanks prior to engaging the enemy. Add bad optics, a not particularly powerful gun early on, and a bad internal setup, and the T-34 wasn't nearly as strong as it should have been. Lack of radios and giving the commander way too much to do made the tanks not act as a unit and left them completely blind to flank attacks. Which played right into Germany's hands. Things did eventually improve massively though. Once they got the reliability under control, the T-34 certainly had an advantage over the German tanks in terms of armor, firepower and mobility. At least until the Pz IV G or H. The KV-1, didn't have the issue in the same way as its armor was massively better, making it tougher to crack even from the side.

I think the mod does represent those tanks relatively well though. I guess you could take away experience to represent the complete lack of training they had, but that's about it.

Great post, lots of information! I agree, blind and unreliable at first, but really good once they got those issues under control.

[...] Plus these had two man crew which greatly reduced their effectiveness even compared to the (early) T-34 which had a crew of four.

As for T-34 tanks being mainly destroyed by 5 cm guns, it is probably true, but I guess mainly for the later long barrel version and the Pak 38, and not for the early war short 5 cm Kwk 38 (L/42):

[...]

I think the unreliability of the early T-34 tanks is well represented in the mod (given the limitations of the game engine) by their low max fuel value and the fact that most are basically immobile or "frozen" in 1941. Other than that I am glad that you agree that the mod does represent these tanks relatively well though.

Yep, your mod reaches levels of immersion which would warrant a standalone or DLC release. Wondering why Slitherine missed that so far.

If I remember correctly, I only lowered the pre T-34/85 initiative and rate of fire a bit (to 8 or so?) to reduce their offensive effectiveness. The overall stats fit really well. I considered experimenting with a single aggressive "hero" T-34 unit to give the Germans a thrashing, using the additional zones from patch 1.32. Like a peek at what could have been, with more training and experienced crews on the Russian side. But perhaps that is more fitting for a KV-1, considering Kolobanov or the Battle of Raseiniai and similar occasions.

[hugh2711]

Upon reflection I think the surplus useless subs may be from:
When taking uk from the east coast you take london first. To get to that point you have to have already dealt with the british navy since it is triggered by german units on the mainland- I did it largely with strategic bombers and sacrificing some subs and ships that were there at the time. It does however take quite a while from comfortably having london to getting the outlying areas (wales, cornwall, the north and scotland). During that time-gap the (useless) sub production ramps up as well as the usual producing subs because of the delay. Once that british navy is dealt with it would be a better/more realistic? to divert (most?) sub production elswhere. Could that be easily triggered/scripted/modelled?.

[Marginaldefeat]

FInally some posts again It was really nice to read them. And yes, I managed to win a Realistic+ Field Marshall TOTAL VICTORY, but that was not my first playthrough.
It was the 4. Even I paused the first 2 around turn 40 and 55, They probably would have ended in a draw and Marginal victory, and I played them only on General. After that I played from Poland and earned a Minor Victory first ( that was my first total playtrhrough until the end) and then next try I ended with a Total.
Some people asked me some advices what to do and how to do, I think actually I wrote a LOT after I ended the campaign, but some additional thoughts:

1: The whole campaign is based on your decisions what to do at spring, in 1942. When the russian winter ends, you have to make some serious decisions ....
Upgrade all your units but only use normal replacements ( if you do Total Victory is not possible anymore at least not on FM) ?
Or you can try to use elite replacements, but if you use too much... a lof of units will stuck in the background with str 1-5 which is again, not good and prevent Total Victory.

2: WHat is your main goal? You have to decide you want rush Moscow+ Leningrad fast for additional prestige boost and only after that turn south, however then you will not reach the 2. oilfield in 1942, and have to face the huge russsian counterattack.
Or you can go South immediately, but lack of prestige will cause serious issues, you will not be able to use elite replecaments on clutch units or you won t be able to upgrade your units, and both is serious problem.

3: You can decide to go for Sealion in 42, the advantage is obvious, but this will give you nothing immediately ( neither prestige nor oil) and you will face bigger problems on the Russian front.

Obviously, you have to be prepared to counter the Allied offensive in Tunisia and win there ( ALWAYS send the Tiger there guys, ALWAYS and send some air defense too ) and you should capture El Alamein before turn 30, otherwise the allied counter attack will catch you off guard. Plus MAAAALTA. NEVER FORGET MALTA. You should ALWAYS capture by May- June 42 by latest. First, you should bomb with 1level bomber+ 1 bomber in every turn, but as soon as decreased entracnhments you should bomb with 2 normal bombers, ( one of them should be stuka if possible )

4: THE MOST IMPORTANT thing in the game on harder difficulties is obviously to find the balance how much and on which units you use elite replacements...I can t say what is the best in general, you have to feel it
++++++++++++1: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALWAYS when the game begins use the opportunity to IMMEDIATELY turn 4 level bomber to fighter ( send them to Wien ASAP) because you will need the additional figthers as soon as possible.

[faos333]

Good job Marginal def thanks for the sharing

[Locarnus]

DV on Fieldmarschall is really something, impressive!

A few questions to everyone:
1. What are your thoughts on unit upgrades and upgrade paths? StratBombers to fighters via scripted event was mentioned. What are your preferences? What are your thoughts on potential cross class upgrades, eg turning a Panzer 38(t) into a self propelled Grille on 38(t) chassis?

2. And buying new units in addition to the ones gifted to you, eg as replacements for losses? While it probably depends a lot on the type of units you lose, do you have preferences for spending on new units classes or types?

3. What about shipping units around to other fronts, like the mentioned airforce to Malta, or the gifted Tiger to Tunisia? Or that Elefant and the flak and radars?

One thing that happened to me was, that an enemy strat bomber neutralized the finnish airfield with the fixed flak tower on it. Because I was "escorting" my single Pz II Flammpanzer to the northern Leningrad front and somewhat not taking the Soviet air force too seriously at that time.

[Marginaldefeat]

DV on Fieldmarschall is really something, impressive!

A few questions to everyone:
1. What are your thoughts on unit upgrades and upgrade paths? StratBombers to fighters via scripted event was mentioned. What are your preferences? What are your thoughts on potential cross class upgrades, eg turning a Panzer 38(t) into a self propelled Grille on 38(t) chassis?

2. And buying new units in addition to the ones gifted to you, eg as replacements for losses? While it probably depends a lot on the type of units you lose, do you have preferences for spending on new units classes or types?

3. What about shipping units around to other fronts, like the mentioned airforce to Malta, or the gifted Tiger to Tunisia? Or that Elefant and the flak and radars?

One thing that happened to me was, that an enemy strat bomber neutralized the finnish airfield with the fixed flak tower on it. Because I was "escorting" my single Pz II Flammpanzer to the northern Leningrad front and somewhat not taking the Soviet air force too seriously at that time.

I forgot to mention two really important thing, Sending 4 level bombers back to Wien ASAP is one thing, but I think you should send the Ju88A ones. Why ? Because He111H is much more cheaper, so way more cheap to use replacements on them.Plus we can upgrade them later on in 1943 to He177A which is far the best german level bomber in the war.
Second, I started the game by sending obviously nearly all of my infantries from Europe to Russian front, BUT all of my air defense from russian front back to Germany and France. Even the Hungarian and Romanian ones. Except the 8.8Flaks which I sent to Africa immediately.

1: Honestly, I didn t use any cross upgrades. I used the opprtunity to upgrade the 2 PZ38 tanks to Marder, the other ones.... I used them around Leningrad to keep the blockade and the rest I either lost or used them against Partisans, or even against small local russsian counterattacks where they mostly used only infantry and light tanks.

2: Buying units ? Well we cannot do it in 2.2 and 2.3 versions until mid 1942, and after that you play it on higher difficulty, you will NEVER have the prestige to buy a lot of units. Instead, you should spend all the prestige to use elite replacements on your best heroes, plus AAAAAAAAAAAAALWAYS keep an eye on upgrades and IMMEDIATELY upgrade the units. Not only the German ones, the Italian and other minor allies unit upgrades are equally important.
ESPECIALLY the figther upgrades.The horrible Cr 42 to Reggiana, the Mc 202 all the way till Centauro, the Finnish and Romanian ones to BF 109 G2, etc.

All in all, all what I bought in 1942 and 1943 was a very few ( 2-3) 105mm artilleries, and a few more air defenses. Better not to lose the units than buying new ones But if we have to lose some ( and we will definitely lose some) then better lose those ones, which are like dead ends and have no upgrade opportunities later on ( like the PZ 38 tanks)

3: I mentioned the Tiger to Tunisia ( and then back to Europe and to England) and the 8.8 flaks which I sent to Africa Korps. I sent the other 2 italian units ( an anti tank and a tank ) which I received to Egypt as well, and 2 more infantries plus one more artillery, with the help of the Italian fleet, that was enough to capture El Alamein in time, and continue my advance and reach and capture the last oilfield in the Middle East around turn 95.
The Elephant and Stug I got, should be sent to either Moscow or Kursk, the Russians are keep trying with huge armoured counterattacks in early 43. I think I spoke about flaks, the radars are obvious choices , should be spread around allied bomber target cities. I didn t send any german bomber against Malta, just one my best fighter ( I started the Barbarossa campaign from Poland so I had 2 BF 109 one Stuka and 2 Panzer4F ) to cover my bombers against Malta. After the entranchment reached zero, even an SM 79 Italian bomber with 0 exp has 50% chance to cause 1 dmg, and the chances are even better later on as the bombers get experience. Using 2 bombers against Malta in every turn when it s possible is enough to capture in the first part of 1942.

++++++ : What I wrote is my choice, I don t say there are not equal or even slightly better alternatives. Just ONE example ( I could write dozens ): We can argue that using level bombers on the Russian front is better alternative than sending them back and it s possible to send them back only in late 41 as soon as the bad weather arrives. And with the additional help it might be possible to capture Moscow in 1941. But in my opinion, it s a high risk medium reward choice, because capturing Moscow in 41 is nice and make it easier to win the campaign, but not essential.
But if you still fail, then this decision will probably have major consequences, like Total Victory will be near impossible to achieve. OR you are forced to do Sealion in 42 at least.

[Locarnus]

Very insteresting, thank you!

ad1: Hm, I have the feeling that the famous German vehicle diversity somewhat goes down later on in the war. As you said, upgrading the small Panzers to another dead end is of limited use and thus they are prone to be sacrificed.

ad2: McGuba: Perhaps the core slot limit can be increased? While prestige is often readily available in normal campaigns, imho BE does such a great job at balancing prestige income, that the core limit is less necessary. It would give the player more agency as a "supreme commander", eg diverting funds from repairing the fleet or reinforcements, to new units. And it would also help with the balancing between scenario and campaign start (where you get 5 extra experienced core units).

What 105 did you buy? I guess the range 4 one?

ad3: Ah, I'll have to try the simple fighters against Malta, would probably make it less costly to take.

Those high level strategic decisions are really something I enjoy in this great mod! Where to set a Schwerpunkt, in terms of spending presige, (re)deploying units and so on.


McGuba: I'm currently working on a still pretty experimental, but at least playable version of my changes and I'm hoping to be able to release it for public critique. Not sure where to do it though. It would fit into this thread, but perhaps it would clutter it and thus a new thread would be better?

[McGuba]

McGuba: Perhaps the core slot limit can be increased? While prestige is often readily available in normal campaigns, imho BE does such a great job at balancing prestige income, that the core limit is less necessary. It would give the player more agency as a "supreme commander", eg diverting funds from repairing the fleet or reinforcements, to new units. And it would also help with the balancing between scenario and campaign start (where you get 5 extra experienced core units).

My original idea was to place the player in the position of the new supreme commander of the Axis forces in June 1941 and to see if there was a chance for an Axis victory from that point. With that, the number and type of the starting units at that point is fixed and is based on the historical numbers. Historically in June 1941 all available units were mobilized and most were sent to the east for Barbarossa. If the Germans had more resources and tanks available they would have used them as well for the attack. But they did not really had so they just used what was available at that time and this is modelled in the mod.

However, the core slot is lifted a bit a year later, from mid 1942, and then even further from mid 1943, which indicates that as a new leader the player gets more freedom but changing factory output and production priorities takes time and hence the one year delay.

McGuba: I'm currently working on a still pretty experimental, but at least playable version of my changes and I'm hoping to be able to release it for public critique. Not sure where to do it though. It would fit into this thread, but perhaps it would clutter it and thus a new thread would be better?

Yes, I think a new thread would be better, but it looks like you have already done so, so its OK.

[PeteMitchell]

In the long term, it helps to upgrade most German tanks to PzIII.

A similar argument could be made for the FW 190 series.

(different opinions exist on these of course)

[Marginaldefeat]

In the long term, it helps to upgrade most German tanks to PzIII.

A similar argument could be made for the FW 190 series.

(different opinions exist on these of course)

I highly disagree with the second, in my opinion it s NEVER worth upgrading ME 109 to FW 190 for full money.Even on lover difficulty levels. The tank upgrades sounds good on paper, and make some sense on General or lower level, but then again, on FM it s also out of question, because of the lack of prestige.

[Locarnus]

McGuba: Perhaps the core slot limit can be increased? While prestige is often readily available in normal campaigns, imho BE does such a great job at balancing prestige income, that the core limit is less necessary. It would give the player more agency as a "supreme commander", eg diverting funds from repairing the fleet or reinforcements, to new units. And it would also help with the balancing between scenario and campaign start (where you get 5 extra experienced core units).

My original idea was to place the player in the position of the new supreme commander of the Axis forces in June 1941 and to see if there was a chance for an Axis victory from that point. With that, the number and type of the starting units at that point is fixed and is based on the historical numbers. Historically in June 1941 all available units were mobilized and most were sent to the east for Barbarossa. If the Germans had more resources and tanks available they would have used them as well for the attack. But they did not really had so they just used what was available at that time and this is modelled in the mod.

However, the core slot is lifted a bit a year later, from mid 1942, and then even further from mid 1943, which indicates that as a new leader the player gets more freedom but changing factory output and production priorities takes time and hence the one year delay.

Thank you for your feedback, I'll readjust the starting position in the next version to be closer to your original idea. I would still like to have more options on where to spend prestige, reflecting the new role of supreme commander. I'll try lowering the prestige again and expanding the core slot count only on the second turn. If the player invests his prestige on the navy, there might not be much left for new units anyway. Thus the player has to at least start with the historical forces, but can then decide where to spend the pretty limited prestige (navy, army reinforcements, army new units, air force, saving and so on). And due to the rearward deployment of new units, it will take some more time for them to reach the front.

[criscarlucci]

Hi dears,
I'm a rookie and I passed last 3 weeks to read your posts and trying to understand how much as possible on this game and its mods. I admit having bought PzC only for this MOD
I’m co-founder for the Italian forum Battleground of Paradox (bopitalia.org), I think a “must” for the paradox gamers in Italy, and a former modder of the Paradox’s Hearts of Iron 1, 2 and 3: I worked for several projects but above all for C.O.R.E. 1 & 2, SuperAI and my latest projects were one with Luxor (for HoI 2) and a very personal MOD. Both of the latest mods were realistic with very in-depth research on raw materials, manpower, historical events and so on around the world and in every countries. Even my last personal project was more realistic ... hyper-realistic: it called N.O.I.S. MOD (No One Is Innocent) and no one hosted it cause too much realism

First of all: is there any way to “program” the AI? I mean: how may I say what to do to the AI?
Second: To create a new unit I need its graphic and its statistic, right? Is there any limits on how many units I can create and/or how many units the game engine may to manage? I think about the recommendation to use the /nocache option with the MOD
3. I still not played the MOD in deep (I admit just 10/12 turns) but I’ve the sensation that the large SOVIET counter-offensive (that I did read in your posts/AARs) are possible because this is a “cheat” that spawn units for the AI instead to have “AI that program itself an offensive on that moment”, right? I ask it because in HoI we were able to program the AI, say to it when and on what to switch his production and when and under specific circumstances. If here it’s not possible… well… for me it’s important just to know it
4. Events: are them planned to start in base at the number of the turn or in base a specific situation on the battleground? How is possible to program an event? How?
5. What is the “scale” of the unit in the game? Land unit is a division of how many… 10.000 men? It means that 1 point of strength is almost 1.000 men? And a flight unit is a squadron? It means that 1 point of strength are… how many planes? 6? Less, more? And Naval? Major unit has 1 unit per unit?
6. If I’d like to create a State into another State… I mean: to have Waffen-SS inside the Germany force and the NKDV into the Soviet one, or other situation like it in other Countries, is it possible? If yes, how? May someone teach me?

Thanks for your time used to MOD this game and to answer to me

[Locarnus]

Hi dears,
I'm a rookie and I passed last 3 weeks to read your posts and trying to understand how much as possible on this game and its mods. I admit having bought PzC only for this MOD
I’m co-founder for the Italian forum Battleground of Paradox (bopitalia.org), I think a “must” for the paradox gamers in Italy, and a former modder of the Paradox’s Hearts of Iron 1, 2 and 3: I worked for several projects but above all for C.O.R.E. 1 & 2, SuperAI and my latest projects were one with Luxor (for HoI 2) and a very personal MOD. Both of the latest mods were realistic with very in-depth research on raw materials, manpower, historical events and so on around the world and in every countries. Even my last personal project was more realistic ... hyper-realistic: it called N.O.I.S. MOD (No One Is Innocent) and no one hosted it cause too much realism

First of all: is there any way to “program” the AI? I mean: how may I say what to do to the AI?
Second: To create a new unit I need its graphic and its statistic, right? Is there any limits on how many units I can create and/or how many units the game engine may to manage? I think about the recommendation to use the /nocache option with the MOD
3. I still not played the MOD in deep (I admit just 10/12 turns) but I’ve the sensation that the large SOVIET counter-offensive (that I did read in your posts/AARs) are possible because this is a “cheat” that spawn units for the AI instead to have “AI that program itself an offensive on that moment”, right? I ask it because in HoI we were able to program the AI, say to it when and on what to switch his production and when and under specific circumstances. If here it’s not possible… well… for me it’s important just to know it
4. Events: are them planned to start in base at the number of the turn or in base a specific situation on the battleground? How is possible to program an event? How?
5. What is the “scale” of the unit in the game? Land unit is a division of how many… 10.000 men? It means that 1 point of strength is almost 1.000 men? And a flight unit is a squadron? It means that 1 point of strength are… how many planes? 6? Less, more? And Naval? Major unit has 1 unit per unit?
6. If I’d like to create a State into another State… I mean: to have Waffen-SS inside the Germany force and the NKDV into the Soviet one, or other situation like it in other Countries, is it possible? If yes, how? May someone teach me?

Thanks for your time used to MOD this game and to answer to me

Hello,
great to see new people in the old PanzerCorps forum, even after PanzerCorps 2.

From my limited experience, Panzer Corps and Panzer Corps modding is not as deep or comfortable as it it could be. It is an old, limited budget "remake" of an even older game (Panzer General). The even older game was known for making computer wargames more accessible for a wider audience (aka more casual). And therefore gameplay trumps depth and realism. But because even the remake is old and limited budget, it does not offer the dynamics or quality of life you might expect. That includes modding. Which is possible but not comfortable.

Take a look at the scenario editor. There are separate layers for function and appearance of the map. And for example the list of scripts is just ordered chronological by date of creation, with no other ordering function that I know of. So you might have a script affecting turn 16 at the beginning of the list, then a script affecting turn 1, then another 20 scripts, then another script affecting turn 1, then another 50, then another one affecting turn 1 and so on. Depending on when you made each script for the first time. And you can not copy them, you can only create, delete or edit each entry. It is a huge mess.

It was not meant for huge, complex scenarios. It was "good enough" for the smallish scenarios with limited scripting, that are used by Panzer Corps without modding.

That said, my limited experience answers to your questions:
ad1: When you place units in a scenario, you can give them a trigger (saying when they should appear) and an AI stance (eg "hold position") which ignores the general AI. You can also add scripts to the scenario, which may use triggers and "zones"
and so on. So not really "AI changes", but scenario specific scripting. Afaik, BE 2.3 does not allow the AI to actually purchase new units at all, but instead uses lots of scripting. The AI is probably a bit too underwhelming in this regard, for such a huge scenario.

ad2: Unit icon, unit portrait, equipment.pzeqp entry, efx.pzdat entry for the unit icon (for the firing animation and sound info) as far as I know. Don't know about the limit, but a unit ID can only be used once. When going through the equipment.pzeqp of eg BE 2.3, you find different ID ranges. And for example for my BE 2.3 Locarnus addon, I add units in the ID ranges 31000-34000, to prevent conflict with existing unit IDs from others who for example use 20000-25000 or 10xxx or whatever (without having to check each new ID).

ad3: As mentioned above, the PzC AI is a bit underdeveloped. Scenario scripting is used as a workaround. The whole "deeper" PzC modding largely consists of workarounds, as far as I experienced it so far. Imho it is sometimes less of a "dictating what you want to happen" and more like a quest, finding out how close you can get to what you actually want to happen.

ad4: Open this mods Kursk3 scenario in the scenario editor, go to Edit/Scenario Params... go to "Scripts" tab. Marvel at the glorious mess that is PzC scenario scripting.

ad5: A unit is a unit. What you want to represent by it depends on the scale of the scenario. Same thing for hexes. A hex is a hex. It may represent a kilometer across, or 4 or 16 or whatever. As written above, this is about "casual" gameplay, realism and consistency is an afterthought. Realism is served by eg Gary Grigsby's War in the East/West, Panzer Corps is much more abstract and casual.

ad6: What would be the purpose of this "state within the state"? edit: In terms of gameplay effect.

[McGuba]

I'm a rookie and I passed last 3 weeks to read your posts and trying to understand how much as possible on this game and its mods. I admit having bought PzC only for this MOD

Hi, thanks. You are not the first who only bought the game because of this mod. Maybe it is time for me to ask some bonus from Slitherine?

First of all: is there any way to “program” the AI? I mean: how may I say what to do to the AI?

The AI can be programmed quite well at the strategic level, especially if one uses the 256 AI zone version of the exe. For this mod I only used 32 AI zones though. But it was a lot of fun to figure out how to add so many events with so few zones. I would like to see someone to do the same.

However, the AI is quite silly at the tactical level, and it is easy to exploit it once the player finds out how it works. And it cannot really be improved by modding, just indirectly and just a bit.

Second: To create a new unit I need its graphic and its statistic, right? Is there any limits on how many units I can create and/or how many units the game engine may to manage? I think about the recommendation to use the /nocache option with the MOD

Here you can find modding guides, including how to add new units to the game:
viewtopic.php?t=27036

I do not know how many units the game can handle, I guess there is no limitation, however the base game only uses 1 Gb memory as far as I know and if too many things are added it may crash when it reaches that limit. But as far as I know the PAK mod uses some 4 Gb patch or what, which may extend this. I might be wrong, though.

3. I still not played the MOD in deep (I admit just 10/12 turns) but I’ve the sensation that the large SOVIET counter-offensive (that I did read in your posts/AARs) are possible because this is a “cheat” that spawn units for the AI instead to have “AI that program itself an offensive on that moment”, right?

Yes, and no. Some of the Soviet units involved in this counter attack are indeed only spawned at that moment (which simulates that historically a number of new Soviet units were sent to the frontline right after being formed), but others are already there and just change their behaviour from passive to active (offensive).

4. Events: are them planned to start in base at the number of the turn or in base a specific situation on the battleground?

Can be either of these or a combination of both or other things as well like the existance of tags.

How is possible to program an event? How?

The editor has its own manual which should explain it and there are guides as well scattered here in this forum.

5. What is the “scale” of the unit in the game? Land unit is a division of how many… 10.000 men? It means that 1 point of strength is almost 1.000 men? And a flight unit is a squadron? It means that 1 point of strength are… how many planes?

The base game does not have a fixed unit scale, this mod has. You can read about that in detail in the in-game library of the mod in the "Changes" section. In a nutshell, in the BE mod infantry units represents 20-40 thousand men, air units represent 100-125 planes, tank units represent 200 tanks, artillery (and AT, AA etc.) guns represent 1000 guns. My other mod uses a different scale. It is really just a decision of the the campaign designer if he wants to have a fixed units scale and what would that be, which is great as it gives a lot of freedom and both small and large scale scenarios and campagins can be made.

6. If I’d like to create a State into another State… I mean: to have Waffen-SS inside the Germany force and the NKDV into the Soviet one, or other situation like it in other Countries, is it possible? If yes, how? May someone teach me?

Additional nations can be added to the game, "state into another state" cannot be added. Every nation is being dealt seperately by the game and each side can have a number of nations. And there can only be two opposing sides in the game - there can be no neutral or "third" party sides.

[criscarlucci]

Hello,
great to see new people in the old PanzerCorps forum, even after PanzerCorps 2.
...

Thank you for your welcome,
I understand a little more bit the "sense" of this game and its dynamic

That said, my limited experience answers to your questions:
ad1: When you place units in a scenario, you can give them a trigger (saying when they should appear) and an AI stance (eg "hold position") which ignores the general AI. You can also add scripts to the scenario, which may use triggers and "zones"
and so on. So not really "AI changes", but scenario specific scripting. Afaik, BE 2.3 does not allow the AI to actually purchase new units at all, but instead uses lots of scripting. The AI is probably a bit too underwhelming in this regard, for such a huge scenario.

Ok, it's clear

ad2: Unit icon, unit portrait, equipment.pzeqp entry, efx.pzdat entry for the unit icon (for the firing animation and sound info) as far as I know. Don't know about the limit, but a unit ID can only be used once. When going through the equipment.pzeqp of eg BE 2.3, you find different ID ranges. And for example for my BE 2.3 Locarnus addon, I add units in the ID ranges 31000-34000, to prevent conflict with existing unit IDs from others who for example use 20000-25000 or 10xxx or whatever (without having to check each new ID).

Ok, thanks. This is important: now I have some points from where to start

ad3: As mentioned above, the PzC AI is a bit underdeveloped. Scenario scripting is used as a workaround. The whole "deeper" PzC modding largely consists of workarounds, as far as I experienced it so far. Imho it is sometimes less of a "dictating what you want to happen" and more like a quest, finding out how close you can get to what you actually want to happen.

Another point quite clear now

ad4: Open this mods Kursk3 scenario in the scenario editor, go to Edit/Scenario Params... go to "Scripts" tab. Marvel at the glorious mess that is PzC scenario scripting.

Wow! I'll take a look

ad5: A unit is a unit. What you want to represent by it depends on the scale of the scenario. Same thing for hexes. A hex is a hex. It may represent a kilometer across, or 4 or 16 or whatever. As written above, this is about "casual" gameplay, realism and consistency is an afterthought. Realism is served by eg Gary Grigsby's War in the East/West, Panzer Corps is much more abstract and casual.

Right, correct

ad6: What would be the purpose of this "state within the state"? edit: In terms of gameplay effect.

As I wrote, I'm a fanatic of the realism and I believe - strongly - that is impossible to rappresente the Hystory without to considere EVRY aspect of the Hystory itself. I mean - and sorry to come back on HoI one more time - when I modded Germany I added Waffen-SS not only thinking about the Army but over all keeping in mind the "cost" of this decision. Yes, I added the W-SS Divs and thier leaders but I also added ALL other not-combat ascpects that were a "cost" in manpower, raw materials, morale, etc. etc. To do this I realized that I needed a "nation" (because all these aspects are specific to a nation) but without a real entity: a ghost nation. To achieve it, I created a state with an off-map capital and giving it some territories - even with events - and generating its resources from the German ones (literally: stolen from the German ones). Believe me: play the game as German player with or without my mods was strongly different. I gave a lot but I also took a lot: imagine that your manpower, which you planned to use to reinforce your divisions on the Eastern front, perhaps for a new offensive, are partially stolen from you and diverted to the SS to manage "certain things"
Now, image it done for almost EVERY nation

[criscarlucci]

Hi McGuba, thanks for your work!

Hi, thanks. You are not the first who only bought the game because of this mod. Maybe it is time for me to ask some bonus from Slitherine?

Maybe the case, yes

The AI can be programmed quite well at the strategic level, especially if one uses the 256 AI zone version of the exe. For this mod I only used 32 AI zones though. But it was a lot of fun to figure out how to add so many events with so few zones. I would like to see someone to do the same.
However, the AI is quite silly at the tactical level, and it is easy to exploit it once the player finds out how it works. And it cannot really be improved by modding, just indirectly and just a bit.

Really interesting... but It means re-write the MOD, right? May you let me understand how to switch (and use) between the 256 AI zone and the 32 one?

Here you can find modding guides, including how to add new units to the game:
viewtopic.php?t=27036

Yes, I saw

I do not know how many units the game can handle, I guess there is no limitation, however the base game only uses 1 Gb memory as far as I know and if too many things are added it may crash when it reaches that limit. But as far as I know the PAK mod uses some 4 Gb patch or what, which may extend this. I might be wrong, though.

So I have to look for this "patch" if I want to go over 1GB limit, right?

Yes, and no. Some of the Soviet units involved in this counter attack are indeed only spawned at that moment (which simulates that historically a number of new Soviet units were sent to the frontline right after being formed), but others are already there and just change their behaviour from passive to active (offensive).

Yes, it's clear

Can be either of these or a combination of both or other things as well like the existance of tags.

Yes, I did read some other posts about it

The editor has its own manual which should explain it and there are guides as well scattered here in this forum.

I did read but it's not so clear at the first look... I have to read it again, probably trying while read

The base game does not have a fixed unit scale, this mod has. You can read about that in detail in the in-game library of the mod in the "Changes" section. In a nutshell, in the BE mod infantry units represents 20-40 thousand men, air units represent 100-125 planes, tank units represent 200 tanks, artillery (and AT, AA etc.) guns represent 1000 guns. My other mod uses a different scale. It is really just a decision of the the campaign designer if he wants to have a fixed units scale and what would that be, which is great as it gives a lot of freedom and both small and large scale scenarios and campagins can be made.

Clear

Additional nations can be added to the game, "state into another state" cannot be added. Every nation is being dealt seperately by the game and each side can have a number of nations. And there can only be two opposing sides in the game - there can be no neutral or "third" party sides.

Understood. I still can - in game and by event - turn a Country from neutral to belligerent status?

Sorry for all my questions

[criscarlucci]

I'm embarrassed to write it but I'm using the editor and notepad++ and I'm looking for files about event, AI and the scenario but nothing! I only found what I think are of the basic game