Series concept in service of variety

[ThvN]

Deducter, I think it is interesting that you think that upgrading to a new model should not cost more? Not even a little?

I'll give you my philosophy, which is a bit of a compromise between Kamerer's and yours, I suppose.

If my proposed features existed, and you can take most exp and heroes with you, why not a little extra cost compared to buying a green unit? If you allow some experience and the heroes to transfer to the new unit, I would expect a drop in experience to be OK, but also a little cost involved in upgrading. In your Bf-109 example, I personally think that the drop in Exp is a bit too large, but not excessive. It's very reasonably modeled within the game's limitations. But in real life such experienced crew would learn far quicker to get the most out of their new, if somewhat different, equipment than rookies, but that's impossible to model in the game. So your system is the closest achievable I guess.

What you can model with 'Upgradecost' in my eyes is the cost involved in (re)training. A green unit that as only trained on one type of equipment is one thing, but even retraining highly experienced troops on complicated equipment can be quite costly, depending on the type of equipment of course. You should see the amount of equipment and time needed to train even experienced operators on new tanks or aircraft, for example. A highly experienced gunner or radio operator still has to be trained to use new equipment, this costs time and money, resources, in other words prestige.

On the other hand, you could say that since cost of training is already accounted for when purchasing a green unit, the same 'cost' could be used to train veterans. And, to be extremist, you could argue in the same vein that new equipment would be cheaper for veterans, because they can skip almost all training and be competent (with some exp loss), while saving training costs (so upgrading would be cheaper, but with bigger exp loss).

My idea is, if you set it to something 'reasonable' like 105 (5%), and still use a little 'UpgradeExpPenalty' for upgrading out of series, that sounds OK to me. But others may disagree about my ideas of course, I might even change my opinion by myself after a good night's sleep. I think it is a matter of opinion mostly, just like with difficulty levels. For me whats important is that you can both implement my proposal and yours with these new features, but it doesn't have to change a thing to how the 'vanilla' game works, being adjustable settings. So it's still win-win all around. Well, except for the coders, of course...

And thanks for the compliment, BTW. I was thinking of some huge oversight in my idea when I thought it up, but your stamp of approval is very appreciated.

Kamerer, I don't think limiting types of units is a good idea. Maybe for some historical mods or something, but for the base game this would be far to limiting to the gameplay. It's fun experimenting with different core compositions, and roleplayers will have the discipline to self-limit them. I can keep myself from buying several Sturmpanzers in 1939 if I want. But imposing that limit on others is not necessary or desirable I think. There was a similar discussion during the AK beta about Italians vs Germans in the core.

Without freedom of choice to play as you want the game will lose appeal for many people, and I think it should appeal to as many people as possible. This way the playing base will remain large and the game popular and profitable. This is necessary, if we want to see more things like the recent AK expansion. If this means simplifying or 'dumbing down' things, so be it, as long as everybody can have fun. I'm amazed at how willing the developers are to implement optional features, variables and community suggestions. The modders just got quite a few extra toys to play with in 1.10, and as all this extra content keeps coming it will provide even more options to those who want a different playing experience. But they are going to have to work for it.

As long as the base game attracts a lot of players, the people with more specialized demands and wishes have a better chance of getting what they want. Many people seem to forget that.

[Razz1]

Several players have mentioned prestige.

That's one big key element. There is too much prestige.

When prestige is real short like in my MP maps, variety is the best.

1) reduce prestige awards
2) add experience penalty for upgrades 50 outside series, 25 in series
3) some upgrades could be more expensive like the Tiger

[Tarrak]

Careful with the "to much prestige" theory. People vocal here on the boards are only a small minority of all players and they are as well probably the more experienced and skilled part so only because most of the posters here swims in prestige it doesn't necessarily means everyone is. Make the prestige to tight and you may make the game to hard for the majority.

[soldier]

If you have the series concept, you can upgrade to both the Panzer IVH or the Panzer IVG for 0 cost. If you don't have the series concept, you can really confuse a player who sees "hey, I can upgrade my Panzer IVG to another Panzer IVG... for 400 prestige."

I'm not sure if this is right right . There will only ever be one Pz IVG available on the purchase screen as you have adjusted its dates of availablity. The same way the Panzer I or stug IIIb are no longer available for purchase in 1945.

Set original Panzer IVG (costing 500) to finish availability on 31/8/1944
Then set the 2nd Panzer IVG (costing 400) to become available 0n 1/9/1944.

Then the Pz IVG might be more viable or cost effective in late 44/45. I'm not sure why this approach is impossible in the current system.

Of course it makes no difference if the player has 20000 prestige, He will just buy a King Tiger anyway

[orlinos]

Careful with the "to much prestige" theory. [...]

I might also add that with the new file diff.pzdat in the patch (and gamerules.pzdat that can already be different for each DLC) it is trivially easy to customize prestige settings for single player.

For example, I can get through '39 and '40 on -50% to all awards, but in '41 I up the prestige to -35% (there are less cities in Russia and that way they are worth capturing) etc.

I like playing like that - if I get too much prestige I tend to forget tactics and just storm ahead, with enough money to pay for unnecessary damages. Get too little - I get frustrated.

But I also remember how it used to be at the very beginning - I made mistake after a mistake and I needed the abundance of prestige to cover for it.

[MartyWard]

Careful with the "to much prestige" theory. People vocal here on the boards are only a small minority of all players and they are as well probably the more experienced and skilled part so only because most of the posters here swims in prestige it doesn't necessarily means everyone is. Make the prestige to tight and you may make the game to hard for the majority.

Yes, not everone has 40,000 prestige after reinforcing their units to start a scenario. I have started many of the DLC's scenarios with less than 200.

[deducter]

Several players have mentioned prestige.

Careful with the "to much prestige" theory. People vocal here on the boards are only a small minority of all players and they are as well probably the more experienced and skilled part so only because most of the posters here swims in prestige it doesn't necessarily means everyone is. Make the prestige to tight and you may make the game to hard for the majority.

Yes, not everone has 40,000 prestige after reinforcing their units to start a scenario. I have started many of the DLC's scenarios with less than 200.

I think that prestige could be even more generous on Colonel, give the player 125% instead of just 100%. Players should swim in prestige at that setting.

I think the issue is the higher difficulties like FM still has 100% prestige (although -50% exp), so it's not different from Colonel. Once you get good at tactics, you save a lot of prestige. So I think that FM should probably have -50% prestige and Rommel -75%.

[El_Condoro]

Now with the data\diff.pzdat, we can set it to whatever we like and test its effects.

[robman]

Let me chime in from an "upper intermediate" player's perspective. I have played PG and its descendants for years. I am pretty good at the game, but I do not consider myself to be a power player. I play PzC on FM, with the stock equipment file. Lately I have been playing the DLCs. I have never found myself swimming in prestige, and when I go on sudden out-of-series upgrade sprees (ooh! Tigers! ooh! Panthers!), I usually regret it--I wind up with too little prestige to keep going in the field. In other words, to borrow some parenting jargon, "natural consequences" are teaching me to preserve a more mixed, "historical" force, simply because I get hammered if I try to build an über-core too quickly.

My conclusion: the game as it exists, if played at the higher difficulty levels, rewards upgrade caution and therefore force variety. If the game were any harder, I would give up in despair.

That being said, I agree that it is silly to be able to cross-grade from engineers to paratroops to infantry with no experience costs, and many of the suggestions above would add flavor to the game without inflicting unbearable burdens on players like me.

[VPaulus]

Careful with the "to much prestige" theory. People vocal here on the boards are only a small minority of all players and they are as well probably the more experienced and skilled part so only because most of the posters here swims in prestige it doesn't necessarily means everyone is. Make the prestige to tight and you may make the game to hard for the majority.

+1000

[soldier]

Careful with the "to much prestige" theory. People vocal here on the boards are only a small minority of all players and they are as well probably the more experienced and skilled part so only because most of the posters here swims in prestige it doesn't necessarily means everyone is. Make the prestige to tight and you may make the game to hard for the majority.

I don't think its anything anyone has to worry about. There are plenty of difficulty settings and ways to mod your single player game so that prestige isn't a major issue. I'd be very surprised if the developers suddenly made the game too hard.... it won't happen

Regarding too much prestige and its effects on force variety, there are certainly some MP maps which could probably do with a little less prestige though. You can field around 16 super heavy tanks in Steamroller and replace elephants every turn

[deducter]

I really don't understand these MP prestige problems. Who can field 16 super heavy tanks in Steamroller by turn 5? If you sit around for 15 turns, doing nothing, and let your opponent build up, then there's a problem with your strategy, not with the map. I've faced opponents who did nothing but buy Elefants or ISU-122 and it's not an effective strategy. It's quite easy to defeat those opponents actually. On other maps like Frozen North, Hylan, Urban Warfare there is never enough prestige to go around. Against a good player only about a few turns in I'm often down core slots as the Allies on Urban Warfare and Germans on Frozen North/Hylan.

When I see someone buy nothing by IS-2/King Tiger/Me-262 and other expensive units, the match is really easy, because there's no way that player will have enough prestige to afford anything else.

[soldier]

Who can field 16 super heavy tanks in Steamroller

Do the math Deducter
You start of with 5 and $3000 so can buy another 3 taking you to 8 with 1400 left and 5 core slots left to purchase other units.
You also earn 600 a turn and take 3 or 4 towns with your Pz IV 's and Stugs which you then upgrade while sending your existing force forward. This takes you to 12, While covering production with your existing elephants as road blocks.

You can pretty easily get to 13 very early and still have 18 other support units on the field fighting (possibly more). !6's probably a couple too many but its not impossible by any stretch. Weather or not you can beat someone with your eyes closed is beyond the point (and off topic). I was talking about the amount of prestige available.

[deducter]

Who can field 16 super heavy tanks in Steamroller

Do the math Deducter
You start of with 5 and $3000 so can buy another 3 taking you to 8 with 1400 left and 5 core slots left to purchase other units.
You also earn 600 a turn and take 3 or 4 towns with your Pz IV 's and Stugs which you then upgrade while sending your existing force forward. This takes you to 12, While covering production with your existing elephants as road blocks.

You can quite easily get to 13 very early and still have 18 other support units on the field fighting (possibly more). !6's probably a couple too many but its not impossible by any stretch. Weather or not you can beat someone with your eyes closed is beyond the point. I was talking about the amount of prestige available.

And don't buy any infantry, don't buy any fighters, don't buy any artillery, don't buy any recon? Especially now with the no undo feature. I'd be very happy if my opponent wants to field 16 heavy tanks and ignore everything else. The rest of the match is academic at this point. However I can't win with my eyes closed, seeing as how no player can win literally with his eyes closed.

The MP system does allow the player to field whatever core his prestige allows. But at the same time, a pure heavy tank core is not a good idea, unlike in SP. This distinction is very important.

[soldier]

And don't buy any infantry, don't buy any fighters, don't buy any artillery, don't buy any recon? Especially now with the no undo feature.

You already have 9 troops 2 guns and 3 planes on the field (and other units) with 5 core slots left.
You can buy another fighter, stuka and gun with your remaining $ 1000.

[MartyWard]

Several players have mentioned prestige.
I think that prestige could be even more generous on Colonel, give the player 125% instead of just 100%. Players should swim in prestige at that setting.

Now you are really making me feel bad because that its the level I always play on.

[Kamerer]

I think that prestige could be even more generous on Colonel, give the player 125% instead of just 100%. Players should swim in prestige at that setting.

I think the issue is the higher difficulties like FM still has 100% prestige (although -50% exp), so it's not different from Colonel. Once you get good at tactics, you save a lot of prestige. So I think that FM should probably have -50% prestige and Rommel -75%.

These thoughts go, I think, in the right direction. I have felt that the "locked" levels should not be locked, and FM a little tougher. Rommel, etc. (or at least Rommel) should be available on-screen so people know they exist and can aspire to play them.

I had ridiculous amounts of prestige during the GC on my first try through on FM. Constant DVs and I recall 40,000 prestige at one point. Now I am playing through on Rommel and except for a very few early campaigns in Poland where I could not field all the units, also DVs. Adequate prestige with careful tactics, and still powerful units.

FM is just not that much harder than Colonel from the few scenarios I've played on both. Give people a more challenging prestige situation at that level, or make Rommel, etc. available w/o having to discover it via forums and editing if they don't play the main game and luck into it.

And, with these multiple levels available, people can play to their level of choice. If they want the challenge of not being available to just spend away, they can choose so more easily.

[MartyWard]

IAnd, with these multiple levels available, people can play to their level of choice. If they want the challenge of not being available to just spend away, they can choose so more easily.

The beauty of this game is you can easily change everything. If you think you have to much prestige, just use the cheat code and remove as much as you think is required. If you think your core is to big, or to small, change it. If you don't want to field the most powerful units, don't buy them. It is probably the best game for all sorts of players, from raw beginners to experts.

[Kamerer]

The beauty of this game is you can easily change everything. If you think you have to much prestige, just use the cheat code and remove as much as you think is required. If you think your core is to big, or to small, change it. If you don't want to field the most powerful units, don't buy them. It is probably the best game for all sorts of players, from raw beginners to experts.

I agree the game is beautifully flexible; but leaving on-the-fly rule making to the player doesn't coincide with human nature.

People was to win within set rules. If they are allowed to, mid-game, change rules or scenario and equipment parameters, the win is cheapened. Conversely a loss is more easily explained away and rationalized. So the ideal would be pre-set "rule packs" the player can choose to go through a game/campaign with. Thus the idea of "tweaking" the existing levels, or creating a different equipment/prestige scheme like deducter.

[MartyWard]

I guess it depends on why you play the game. I play for the fun of the game and don't worry if I get a DV in every scenario.In fact I bet I didn't get much more than 50% DV's in the full DLC campaign but I had a blast playing.