What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

PC : Turn based WW2 goodness in the mold of Panzer General. This promises to be a true classic!

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design

timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

Never reinforce during a scenario. Just don't do it.

This is probably the main reason for such high prestige. While I do understand having astounding amount of prestige is a well, uh question of one's prestige :) I also think that that renders game uninteresting.

But hey if it's your thing that go for that 200k prestige :)

Surely no reinforcing in the mission saves a huge amount of prestige. This also requires skillful preservation of badly wounded units. But ultimately and optimally yes, one can win a DV without reinforcing if played cleverly. Often times I reinforce just to FEEL power of my units in late phases of battle instead of attacking with 5-6-7 strength units...
brettz123
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by brettz123 »

Well the point is not to get any units down that low in points. During 39 and 40 I was able to do this very easily with an average point loss of somewhere around 10 strength points a scenario.

41 is a different story when you have to deal with KVs and T-34s. Probably once or twice in several scenarios I would get hit hard by a KV or T-34 for 7-8 points of damage in a single attack. It isn't an issue to then just retire that unit to the rear and out of combat.

I have gotten all DVs so far though I would guess my average amount of damage was around 35 or even more in 1941 and this has probably dropped to 25 in 1942 so far. I don't see it as being clever so much as having an optimized CORE with overstrength units.

My attempt to get 200,000 prestige came about because in another thread deducter said he has been pm'd by people claiming to have done this. My first thought was no way that's not possible! So I thought I would give it a try. My gurss is now that it really isn't that hard as long as you use overstrengthed units and an optimized CORE. At this point my tanks are pretty good as compared to the Russians but not as good as they will be in I'd 43. And honestly when you have played through the grand campaign 4 complete times you might as well challenge yourself.
Messmann
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by Messmann »

brettz123 wrote: 3. Have your entire CORE set by the end of 1941 or even the beginning of 1941. I have everything bought by Crete and then just add in some captured tanks. I like to have 1 char b1, 1 matilda, 3 KV-1, and 4 T-34s in my CORE. So everything is bought at the beginning of Crete and during Demyansk Pocket I have my last captured tank.

The reason you want your CORE early is that it will allow you to gain experience with multiple units.
How do you integrate the captured tanks? If your core is set up after Crete, you won't be able to train the old tanks if you use the captured ones. Do you rotate?
Amulet Mod: Massive unit, graphics and sound mod. :) At this time, for German units only.
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=63616&p=541656#p541656
Messmann
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by Messmann »

By the way, Modlin is a difficult one in 39. How do you finish that one with 10 losses average? Air power?
Amulet Mod: Massive unit, graphics and sound mod. :) At this time, for German units only.
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=63616&p=541656#p541656
brettz123
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by brettz123 »

Answer some questions.

Rotation is the key. I think the max deployable CORE size is 45 units. I like to have this all set earlier so that I don't have inexperienced units going into the end of 43 and into 44. So basically I have a core force within my CORE that usually consists of 4-5 tanks, most of my artillery, 3 Me-109, 4 Ju-87, and 1 of my Me-110s. This allows me to rotate in enough units to get everyone plussed up. My goal in the current DLC campaign is to have all my units with three stars by the end of DLC 1942. My two StuG IIIfs will probably only be lucky to get two stars.

Ok so I went over my notes and did the math. Average scenario point damage was 15.18 per scenario with Kampinsoka Forest, Modlin, Warsaw South, and Narvik being the ones that cased the most damage. I took 20 points of damage during Modlin. I see two keys to Modlin.

1. Lots of air power. This is where I get both of my strategic bombers.

2. Don't be cute. There isn't anyway to not get hit by artillery a little bit so get stuck in and take down the right hand fortress first and then then Smeirc and the other fort. Sturmpanzer is awesome here because you don't lose a turn dismounting and you can actually damage the fort on your way in.

3. Don't be too afraid of the Polish AA. It won't damage you that much so if you need to take a hit to damage one ofthe fortresses go ahead and do it.
timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

brettz123 wrote: And honestly when you have played through the grand campaign 4 complete times you might as well challenge yourself.
I like this discussion :)

I think the main point here is the mentioning of optimized core, and lots of air power. Such things can greatly improve odds. I would like someone to achieve same on AK though as it is harder then GC since you are pressed on defense after few initial missions and optimization is not easy. Not to mention air superiority which is hardly achievable.

On the other hand trying to loose as little units as possible or trying to gain as much prestige as possible is of second nature to me. Sure it is good to have enormous prestige and almost no losses. But to me it is just a product of playing GC 4-5 times like you say and memorizing everything and extremely predictable AI. And like I said I see no fun in that, and with predictable AI I have no intention of playing game more than twice. Well maybe one day I will play it third time :) But congrats for you on having enough time and nerves to go through it that many times :) Practice sure makes it perfect, and it probably helps in online matches and that counts the most.
deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by deducter »

timek28 wrote:Well maybe one day I will play it third time :) But congrats for you on having enough time and nerves to go through it that many times :) Practice sure makes it perfect, and it probably helps in online matches and that counts the most.
Actually, online matches and SP are completely different. Playing more SP probably will only hurt your online play, since you can't rely on a core advantage to beat your opponents, and tactical skill matters a lot more. You also can't rely on SP strategy; for instance, artillery, heavy tanks, and air power are no longer necessarily the best way to win. Cores that focus overly on super units will lose against experience players.
Messmann
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 245
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:09 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by Messmann »

If you really reach 200.000 it will show that they have to change something.

Preferably the AI, I'd suggest. :evil:
Amulet Mod: Massive unit, graphics and sound mod. :) At this time, for German units only.
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=147&t=63616&p=541656#p541656
brettz123
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by brettz123 »

Messmann wrote:If you really reach 200.000 it will show that they have to change something.

Preferably the AI, I'd suggest. :evil:
I am hoping they change the AI but it doesn't seem likely as Rudankort has pretty much shot that idea down. But we can hope :)

I am almost to Stalingrad with about 80k prestige so I am hoping to finish 42 with almost 90k prestige.
timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

brettz123 wrote: I am hoping they change the AI but it doesn't seem likely as Rudankort has pretty much shot that idea down. But we can hope :)
.
Why not change AI? Too much work I guess...
brettz123
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by brettz123 »

timek28 wrote:
brettz123 wrote: I am hoping they change the AI but it doesn't seem likely as Rudankort has pretty much shot that idea down. But we can hope :)
.
Why not change AI? Too much work I guess...
My guess is that you are correct. And it actually would be a lot of work. At the end of the day I'm sure the AI is challenging for the vast majority of the players so it isn't a priority when there are a lot of other things they want to work on. It is understandable. And at the end of the day how much should they really care about challenging people who rack up multiple hundreds of thousands of prestige.
timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

In my opinion AI is completely OK apart for specific scenarios. It's completely adequate on the first walk-through.

The only problem I have with AI is in certain missions where it is passive so you can bypass it's units units without them attacking you (even if you are next to them). Persia is most blatant example in my opinion. Also suicidal waves of attacking Soviets in GC44 and GC45 are also examples of bad AI. However if it was any different I'm sure that AI would crush player due to sheer amount of it's units. For example if AI tried it's best to destroy players artillery first and then attack city hexes that contain Tiger2s with Guards, SMG and Engineer infantry then it would be very hard to defend such attack. Instead of this AI attacks by brute forcing it's tanks across the rivers rarely attacking players artillery or AA batteries, and ends up annihilated wave after wave.

brettz123 wrote: And at the end of the day how much should they really care about challenging people who rack up multiple hundreds of thousands of prestige.
Good for them :)
soldier
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 522
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2011 6:31 am

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by soldier »

If you really reach 200.000 it will show that they have to change something.
Players finishing 42 with 90 000 prestige already says somethings wrong with standard FM difficulty and provides a few reasons for the so called "bonus" levels
timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

soldier wrote:
If you really reach 200.000 it will show that they have to change something.
Players finishing 42 with 90 000 prestige already says somethings wrong with standard FM difficulty and provides a few reasons for the so called "bonus" levels
`
Yes. But, if extra difficulty levels depend only on tricks like less prestige for player or twice as many enemy units in missions, I don't see much meaning playing through that, except maybe to show off.

Sure it might be very challanging (like it is for most of us), but ultimatelly it brings notihng new to gameplay and excitement. I don't want to do the missions all over again and have 15 Crusaders attack me (instead of 7 of them waiting me to attack them) right from the beginning. I would like them to be of the same strength but placed maybe in different place, so they can make a flanking move when right for example.

AI is way to passive when player is on attacking side. The counterattacks are always scripted and start from the same place. This is just plain boring (although I appriciate the effort by developers no doubt - I''m just tring to improve the game).

I also think that having same AI difficulty setting of 3 (am I right?) for General, FM, Romell, Manstein and Guderian is not good. There should be more versatility in AI settings (4,5,6 or something simillar). I'm a programmer (I don't create games though) but I cannot imagine that writing good or versatile AI is extremely hard. Or maybe it is...
deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by deducter »

If the AI plays anywhere remotely near a human level, then losses will be much, much higher. In MP matches, it is not unusual to have your core destroyed several times over the course of a game. Most players don't even like to lose a single core unit, ever. Of course, this can be solved with a much expanded reform units feature.

Also, no amount of AI improvement will help against a strong core. Even if a human plays the AIlied/Soviet side for the late war GC scenarios, he will be easily brushed aside.
timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

deducter wrote:If the AI plays anywhere remotely near a human level, then losses will be much, much higher. In MP matches, it is not unusual to have your core destroyed several times over the course of a game. Most players don't even like to lose a single core unit, ever. Of course, this can be solved with a much expanded reform units feature.
AI should try to make some clever moves in order to avoid predicatability. But the point of those moves should be to keep player alert and on the edge and not to "create high losses for the player per se". High losses in that case would be only product of players complaicancy and not AI tricks (like knowing where player units are). Losses should come from not protecting your flanks or your rear for example...

What is reform unit feature btw? :)
deducter wrote: Also, no amount of AI improvement will help against a strong core. Even if a human plays the AIlied/Soviet side for the late war GC scenarios, he will be easily brushed aside.
I agree. However it was sad seeing so many veteran Soviet tanks getting wiped out with my Tiger2s in GC. Sure it felt good, but in the same time it was kind of boring. It created mixed feelings.

There are couple of AI flaws that I can remember of:

1) There where some specific scenarios where AI was getting ambushed in the same place over and over and over again. This is unacceptable. As if it hasn't learned that my unit was there in previous turn. This was especially blatant on river crossings and bridges.

2) AI sending artillery units FIRST next to my tanks inststead of putting them behind tanks and infantry. This is especially evident on river crossings.

3) Basra paratrooper massive airborne action without a single figheter escort!?! How realistic is that???

4) AI deosn't look for different attacking options apart from sending units into oblivion when one type of attacking fails (several times). Berlin is the most blatant example. While unrealistic in nature this scenario is fun. However If you force AI to attack on river banks only it will just keep dying on them. AI does this Instead of trying to do what is only logical option in that case - a massive airborne operation (redirect prestige into lots of aircraft - instead of lots of tanks) in order to gain air superioirty and bomb the hell out of my defending tanks. This is only way IMO of breaking through wall of panzers that defend river banks.

There are probably more things, but these I remembered now...
Tarrak
Panzer Corps Moderator
Panzer Corps Moderator
Posts: 1183
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:01 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by Tarrak »

I want to remind everyone about one thing in the whole discussion: The people being able to amass huge amounts of prestige on FM difficulty are rare and far between when compared to the amount of people playing the game. This forum is giving a bit wrong picture as people active here are the most dedicated and active PC players. You can not balance the difficulty with only 1% of the best players in mind.
timek28
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 459
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 1:18 am
Location: Novi Sad, Serbia

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by timek28 »

Tarrak wrote:I want to remind everyone about one thing in the whole discussion: The people being able to amass huge amounts of prestige on FM difficulty are rare and far between when compared to the amount of people playing the game. This forum is giving a bit wrong picture as people active here are the most dedicated and active PC players. You can not balance the difficulty with only 1% of the best players in mind.
I agree. There seem to be a group of elite players complaining about too much prestige all the time. While I understand them, I think that if the game was changed drastically in order to accomodate them a lot of less experienced players would loose their enthusiasm. Maybe some special difficulty setting would be good for them with all the wishes they have - but this setting would have to be unlocked when all 3 extra difficulties are won :) I do believe there is somewhere mentioned ultra difficulty. Anyone tried that out? Still not hard enough? :)

I was just trying to make my point that too much prestige was not an issue for me - as it is probably not for 95% of the players. Actually often opposite is the case and I find gane optimal in terms of resources that you get.

I just have problem with harder difficulties being tighly connected with lack of prestige or overstrenghtned enemies. Altghough honestly when I recall most of games work this way on higher difficulties. They either throw less resources to you and/or much more enemeis that spawn in the same places with little or no change in AI.

What might be better instead is to tackle some of the AI problems I noticed and mentioned in previous posts. For example:

1) More versatile attacking styles of AI. For example different starting positions - or different unit composition. Different attacking formations, backdoor moves, AI should try to avoid bulk of my forces head on if he is weaker etc...

2) Avoiding static and inert defense groups which contribute nothing to AI success. AI should recognize threat to their rear and try to pinch advanceing forces and cut them off. There are several AK missions that have problem with this. Gazala line, Alam Haifa and Persia for example. Same flanking tactc from the south can be used in these missions and AI fails to recognize flankig time and time again. Some GC East campaigns have similar problem too (I remember insertion of elite forces to capture AA equipment for example). There are around 10 Soviet IS2s that do absolutely nothing while you destroy and capture supplies near them.

3) Avoiding scripted paratrooper or amphibious counterattacks that have no figher support (and are thus doomed from the beginning). Sure if there was 14 paratrooper planes and 14 fighters to escort them than it would be almost impossible for the player, but 0 is also bad. It would be better to have something like 5 paratroopers with 5 fighters escorting them. Or even 10 paratroopers with 5 fighers would be more fun, optimized and realistic.

4) Avoid at any cost moving artilerry next to player tanks or any of player units actually. Try always to gather some troops with artillery behind it or if no tanks or infantry are availabe - fire the artillery and retreat until reinforcements arive. Don't try to move artillery forward alone (as if artillery was able to capture hexes on itself - which it is not).

5) If river crossings seem to prove tough obstacle either try to bombard the hell out of them (long range SUs - lots of them, lots of bombers or whatever), throw in paratroopers, try to destroy player AA and artillery behind the desired hex first. Do whatever it takes. Just don't try to cross in the same place again and again without destroying or suppresing heavily the units that stall you. Ultimatelly if possible (in Berlin this is impossible though - try to create or dynamically move different bridgeheads instead of forcing only one or two). This would force player to shift forces and create opportunities for a breakthrough on at least one bridgehead.

6) Remember positions of player units in the previous turn. Don't fall into ambushes all the time in the same place.

Ultimatelly I know that all these changes would be not enough of a challange for good players. But at least they would make game look more realistic and AI would seem more dangerous and respected, and less prone to exploits.
deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1140
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by deducter »

Tarrak wrote:I want to remind everyone about one thing in the whole discussion: The people being able to amass huge amounts of prestige on FM difficulty are rare and far between when compared to the amount of people playing the game. This forum is giving a bit wrong picture as people active here are the most dedicated and active PC players. You can not balance the difficulty with only 1% of the best players in mind.
I always say in any discussions of adding new difficulty-enhancing mechanics that it should be tied to difficulty, and that new difficulty levels should be created.

The fact is that difficulty has less to do with Colonel/General/FM than the quality of your core. Because the difficulty levels don't feel sufficiently different, any proposals to tweak mechanics are automatically assumed to mean tweak all the mechanics,. For instance, if player prestige is too high, well, that must mean you should reduce prestige for all players on all levels. This is not the suggestion, but rather, that a player playing on what is ostensibly the hardest default difficulty (FM) should feel challenged. If there aren't enough difficulty levels, then create new ones.

Changing the AI is a mechanics/rule change. I am a big proponent of rule changes for higher difficulties rather than global changes like reducing prestige or increasing AI strength. It can potentially make gameplay much more interesting and varied, in addition to more difficult. I think this sort of difficulty increase is more fun to play than something like +5 strength of Manstein or the unplayable "Ultimate" difficulty level. At a certain point, global changes will make the game too tough. It's just as if a human player were controlling the AI armies in the late war against a strong core; there's nothing the human can do.
brettz123
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 586
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: What's the point of 3 extra difficulites?

Post by brettz123 »

Tarrak wrote:I want to remind everyone about one thing in the whole discussion: The people being able to amass huge amounts of prestige on FM difficulty are rare and far between when compared to the amount of people playing the game. This forum is giving a bit wrong picture as people active here are the most dedicated and active PC players. You can not balance the difficulty with only 1% of the best players in mind.
Totally agree. Not only is it the better players it is also a specific CORE style that is optimized. I like Deducters idea of different difficulty levels. Personally I would prefer no specific difficulty levels but just options that add certain percentage to your difficulty rating. For instance weather would be +10% and supply would be +20% and then if you picked both you could just tell people you played at +30% difficulty.
Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps”