almost little things punches me hard in the stomache

[brettz123]

The AI's unit composition was something discussed at length during the beta testing. The philosophy is for the AI to have a historical core, which is plenty challenging for the player who wants to use a German historical core, although much easier for someone with only the best equipment. I think this works well, because if you give the AI nothing but KV-85s and JS-1s, then the player will have no choice but to use all Tigers/Panthers. The current setup allows the player to enjoy a fairly easy victory with the best equipment, but also allows those who want to challenge themselves more with a historical core to fight a tough battle too.

I think this was the right decision. If the DLC creators do eventually want to make things harder it should be done with more units not with just harder units.

[JackWulff]

i am playing as General, as far as i know this is the last difficulty without a cheating AI. So i would prefer a difference between the difficultys in better AI or better enemy equitment then an unrealistic enemy elite trained army. With the spamming units at city spawn points, its a terrible way of balancing a game.

Thats my problem. PC is always nice, but i dont know why i should play it again as i do it with PG. PG is nearly perfectly balanced, but has a weak AI. AAA balance plus good AI would be a full of win for me and i swear to buy everything PG you code. The folks need more excellent round strategy.

[brettz123]

i am playing as General, as far as i know this is the last difficulty without a cheating AI. So i would prefer a difference between the difficultys in better AI or better enemy equitment then an unrealistic enemy elite trained army. With the spamming units at city spawn points, its a terrible way of balancing a game.

Thats my problem. PC is always nice, but i dont know why i should play it again as i do it with PG. PG is nearly perfectly balanced, but has a weak AI. AAA balance plus good AI would be a full of win for me and i swear to buy everything PG you code. The folks need more excellent round strategy.

What do you mean cheating AI? There is no cheating AI at any level of this game. In Manstein, Rommel, and Guderian there are special rules but that isn't the case in FM. It seems you may not have played the game enough to know what you are talking about at this point. Not trying to be rude but you really should play the game on harder levels before you complain it is too easy.

And as far as balanced goes I don't see how it is any less balanced than the original PG. I remember romping around the original PG with 15 strength units trouncing the AI. And PG had the same spamming of units at city points too. The only difference was that in PG they only spawned useless units like BA-10s all day long. At least in this game they usually spawn something that might give you some concern (like KV-1c).

FM may not be hard enough for you but it is significantly harder than general.

[soldier]

Yes there was plenty of unit spamming at towns in PG with all those cheap units. Panzer Corps is much improved in that respect and it try's to buy its artillery and AA behind the cities at least
on topic i agree with some of your concerns about infantry and artillery

[Bonners]

Having finished Campaign'43 through Kiev'43 on Field Marshal, about the only thing from the above criticism I agree with is that the AI should fire its artillery first. Playing the game on an easy level and then complaining it is too easy seems illogical to me. So far as 'crap' tanks the Russians had thousands of all kinds. Personally, if I never have to fight another IS 1 it would be alright with me. My prestige is at rock bottom after exchanging fire with those Russian behemoths. Even air took losses attacking them.DLC '44 should see the total depletion of my core quality. I expect to be reduced as in history to sending infantry with panzerfausts/panzerschrecks up against endless hordes of Russian 'crap' tanks. IS IIs should be quite interesting to encounter in the not so distant future.

This rings fairly true for me. Just to add a bit of balance to the thread, I'm still struggling through the '43 DLC on the second easiest level. I've had to re-start several scenarios and a couple of them I've still not managed above a marginal victory. The only thing I would say is that I do try and mix my units up a bit, so I still have PIIIs and IVs and plenty of infantry. So I am left with little choice but to use infantry to do a lot of the spade work. Yes it owuld be easier to be using tigers and the likes to blast strongpoints, I rarely have the opportunity though, they really are my firefighters, much as they were in the real campaigns I guess. It is difficult to use infantry in the later campaigns and maybe they should have a little more anti tank defence (certainly the better units) but I've found i have adapted to using a mixed core and using infantry units on the front line, even if some of my best units are frequently getting torn up; but at this stage in the war shouldnt that be happening to the frontline German infantry? Shouldnt we have to making the tough choices as to where fully trained replacements can go?

I suppose this is a call for a little bit of caution before making changes. There are some not very good players out there like me who are actually having lots of fun battling through on the easier levels and thoroughly loving the DLCs as they stand.

[agandaur88]

I suggest that you could buy for your infantry better equipment for some prestige, like newest rifles, panzershreks, and so on,...

[Tarrak]

I suggest that you could buy for your infantry better equipment for some prestige, like newest rifles, panzershreks, and so on,...

I think you are talking about wrong game here ...

[brettz123]

I suggest that you could buy for your infantry better equipment for some prestige, like newest rifles, panzershreks, and so on,...

That is sort of what you do when yo upgrade to the 43 versions of infantry.

[MartyWard]

^ Maybe there could be more levels of infantry. There are tons of different tank models but only two choices for infantry. How can they be expected to keep up and stay balanced in the game?

[brettz123]

^ Maybe there could be more levels of infantry. There are tons of different tank models but only two choices for infantry. How can they be expected to keep up and stay balanced in the game?

I would love to see something like the ability to upgrade units as time goes on. For instance I would like you to be able to decide what type of mortars you can have or add panzer fausts but I'm not sure how that would work in the current game without a lot of reprogramming. My guess is it will not happen though it would be interesting to be able to change things like that.

My other concern is that there might not be that many things you could upgrade to be honest.

[soldier]

Maybe fix the issues with the current set of infantry before adding more types, more levels, more upgrades etc
(I'm pretty sure a volksturm would get added for DLC 45 anyway).

[brettz123]

Maybe fix the issues with the current set of infantry before adding more types, more levels, more upgrades etc
(I'm pretty sure a volksturm would get added for DLC 45 anyway).

I never checked but were the reserve units that you could get as Auxilliary units available for purchase in DLC 43?

[ivanov]

ANOTHER EXAMPLE FROM THE SERIES "TANKS DO IT BETTER" ( DLC 42 KHARKOV ):


3 star experienced Fallschirmjager vs T 34 in an urban combat




Weakened Panzer III vs the same T 34 in the same town:



I think that an experienced FJ unit should inflict at least 50% casualties on the T 34 in case of a urban combat like this one.

NOTE:

To all the tactics experts and advisers. Of course it is possible in this game, for example to attack T 34 unit with the air power and hurt it severely, prior to the ground combat ( which is also interesting, because I don't see how the WWII aircraft could cause such a damage to the tanks in an urban terrain ):



I think we have another pool on the way...

[deducter]

I don't think emphasizing this point will get you speedy changes from the devs. If you want this to change now, either modify the equipment file yourself, or play my mod. In my mod, just used a Wehrmacht 43 infantry to wipe 8 strength points off a T-34 and lost 2 strength points on a hill, which was exactly the predicted value.

[ivanov]

I don't think emphasizing this point will get you speedy changes from the devs. If you want this to change now, either modify the equipment file yourself, or play my mod. In my mod, just used a Wehrmacht 43 infantry to wipe 8 strength points off a T-34 and lost 2 strength points on a hill, which was exactly the predicted value.

I don't expect a quick change, but a comprehensive discussion on the forum. BTW - I think that your e-file could serve a good reference for the potential future changes in the official stuff.

[soldier]

Those stats don't look to bad to me. Perhaps the FJ units could do better as there elite troops but they were not issued with AT weapons in 42. The 43 Fj will do better and I'm not sure i wan't to see troops belting all tanks in all towns by half anyway. As for the bomber, well it does have 4 stars so it may pack a punch.
Theres hardly anything conclusive in those stats to either prove or disprove anything so I'm not sure its worth a poll.

[ivanov]

Those stats don't look to bad to me. Perhaps the FJ units could do better as there elite troops but they were not issued with AT weapons in 42. The 43 Fj will do better and I'm not sure i wan't to see troops belting all tanks in all towns by half anyway. As for the bomber, well it does have 4 stars so it may pack a punch.
Theres hardly anything conclusive in those stats to either prove or disprove anything so I'm not sure its worth a poll.

I think that the Fallschirmjäger should do better in this situation - in 1942 they were already employed as a regular infantry and fighting an armour-heavy enemy ( for example around Leningrad ).

***

As to the efectivenes of the airpower - it is a completely different story, but my point is that the Ju-87 was not an AH-64

I paste here my post from a diffeent forum:

"It's worth mentioning here a Soviet study from 1942 regarding efficiciency of the attack aircraft in destroying the ground targets. During those tests, three highly experienced Ilyushin Il-2 pilots, were attempting to hit captured German tanks and assault guns. Obviously during those tests the anti aircraft fire was absent, the targets were static and unmasked in an open field. Under the real combat conditions it would be much more difficult to spot and hit targets and the accuracy would be lower. Out of 300 cannon and 1290 machine gun projectiles fired, only 9 hits were scored. Even when the tank was hit, in most of the cases, it didn't mean that the armour was penetrated or any kind of serious damage was done. A theoretical study indicated that Il-2 would need to fly 4-5 missions in order to destroy one medium PzKpw III or IV tank and 12 missions in order to destroy a Stug III assault gun. In another test, also performed under perfect, "clean" conditions, the bombing accuracy was 4.3%. In another words, in order to achieve 50% probability of hitting a targed, at least 12 combat missions were needed. The times when a single missile, fired from an aircraft or an attack helicopter, could destroy a tank or any other target, were at least 30 years ahead".

[soldier]

Your probably right, a tank in a town would be quite for a stuka to hit (let alone spot) and they would often miss but the bombers were often missing targets already before the last patch and a lot of players didn't like it. Aircraft tends to get some bonuses to their accuracy in most war games because people feel ripped off sending in a stuka when nothing happens. Weather its historically more accurate is difficult to say as an attack in PzC is not clearly defined (it could mean multiple sorties).
If anything it just shows me that the defenses a city might offer are not very effective in this game.

[ivanov]

If anything it just shows me that the defenses a city might offer are not very effective in this game.

Spot on

[Kerensky]

Well believe it or not, significant game play decisions, especially changes to a specifically designed system are not taken lightly or even under the control of a single individual either.
There has to be a pretty strong consensus on such matters, not just among the public community but also among the team responsible for planning and actually implementing any such changes.

And currently, in neither place does such a consensus even exist.

We're always listening to good feedback though, and we very much appreciate the efforts of the community.
As deducter mentioned though, if you are looking for speedy/quick fix solutions, you are highly encouraged to mod the game (one of the best points of Panzer Corps is the ability to mod the game, as we can see by the very active design forum!) to suit your individual desires of how gameplay should play out.

Any changes to the base game are simply too far reaching to be made quickly and rashly though, because it effects thousands of players in a variety of ways, with impacts in both single player and multiplayer capacities of the game.