Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design
You don't know how I build my core, so go pound salt. And since you want to play with a limp-wristed core, go for it. Just leave me and other players who enjoy using the best equipment do that.boredatwork wrote:No, again the bottom line is if under the new system, without requiring cheats you can still build YOUR core EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AS YOU CAN NOW and NOT CHANGE THE DIFFICULTY for yourself - how does it impact YOUR enjoyment of the game if the new system will SIMULTANEOUSLY allow me to build MY CORE using greater numbers of cheaper units than I can currently so that both our cores are equally competitive without requiring cheats?Zhivago wrote:
The bottom line is that your proposal should just be an OPTION, not a standard default element of the game.
The game already gives you the freedom of choice to build your core any way that you want to. If you want to use older equipment, nothing in the game is stopping you from doing that.Lamont wrote:Interesting read in this thread (for the most part) and the more I think about it the more I see myself agreeing with both boredatwork and Deducter on opinions on change of balance. Why on earth should everybody buy the best just becouse thats the only optimal strategy ? I thought this was/is a strategy game rather than buy masses of Tiger 2 and rule the world. Thats just plain dumb, of course can be fun at times when you are really angry or need to get some chip of your shoulder.
There should be options for everybody to play a game like this as they see fit (more or less) in whatever way they want without cheat codes!
As it stands now its lacking a little in that department to put it nicely
Love the game but as we can see from this thread its not perfect. I do hope Lordz really take a long hard look at some of the suggestions brought up for future considerations. Now where is that old trusty Pz III N of mine....back to the front
You haven't answered the question - if under the new rules you can still BY DEFAULT build EXACTLY the SAME core as you can now, whatever that core may be, HOW exactly does it impact your enjoyment of the game to give other players more CHOICE of EQUALLY viable strategies?Zhivago wrote: You don't know how I build my core, so go pound salt. And since you want to play with a limp-wristed core, go for it. Just leave me and other players who enjoy using the best equipment do that.
If they decide to change the system I would hope there would be an option to play it the way it is now.boredatwork wrote:No, again the bottom line is if under the new system, without requiring cheats you can still build YOUR core EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AS YOU CAN NOW and NOT CHANGE THE DIFFICULTY for yourself - how does it impact YOUR enjoyment of the game if the new system will SIMULTANEOUSLY allow me to build MY CORE using greater numbers of cheaper units than I can currently so that both our cores are equally competitive without requiring cheats?Zhivago wrote:
The bottom line is that your proposal should just be an OPTION, not a standard default element of the game.
There is no reason for your new rules. If you think your reasons for a weakened core are historical, I already won that argument about 50 posts ago.boredatwork wrote:You haven't answered the question - if under the new rules you can still BY DEFAULT build EXACTLY the SAME core as you can now, whatever that core may be, HOW exactly does it impact your enjoyment of the game to give other players more CHOICE of EQUALLY viable strategies?Zhivago wrote: You don't know how I build my core, so go pound salt. And since you want to play with a limp-wristed core, go for it. Just leave me and other players who enjoy using the best equipment do that.
It won't.boredatwork wrote:You haven't answered the question - if under the new rules you can still BY DEFAULT build EXACTLY the SAME core as you can now, whatever that core may be, HOW exactly does it impact your enjoyment of the game to give other players more CHOICE of EQUALLY viable strategies?Zhivago wrote: You don't know how I build my core, so go pound salt. And since you want to play with a limp-wristed core, go for it. Just leave me and other players who enjoy using the best equipment do that.
You're just mad because I told you to get your shine box.El_Condoro wrote:It won't.boredatwork wrote:You haven't answered the question - if under the new rules you can still BY DEFAULT build EXACTLY the SAME core as you can now, whatever that core may be, HOW exactly does it impact your enjoyment of the game to give other players more CHOICE of EQUALLY viable strategies?Zhivago wrote: You don't know how I build my core, so go pound salt. And since you want to play with a limp-wristed core, go for it. Just leave me and other players who enjoy using the best equipment do that.
I think we're arguing against brick walls. No amount of saying "it won't affect the way you play but it will make it better for the rest of us" seems to be getting through.
I was under the impression that the game was about picking the units YOU want, and using the strategy YOU want, and winning the game. If you suck as a player, having the best units on the board is not going to help you. If you want a game where you are told what units you can or cannot use, call it something other than Panzer Corps, or make this an optional choice.Lamont wrote:I was under the impression that strategy would be the the main thing in a....well strategy game and not only have all elite tanks etc on the board. Probably idiotic of me it seems
Why complain about that at all, you can still choose to have that kind of core. Adding the choice/strategy of deploying more of the cheaper stuff dont really affect a pure elite core in any way if the Devs let you buy as many of those units then as you can now. Sorry dont get that coplaining at all!
Are you joking or pretending to be thick? No-one has argued for choice to be removed - the argument is for more choice. No-one cares how you play the game and no-one wants to change your enjoyment of it - but some of us think we can keep that, and add enjoyment for others. But I suspect you still won't get it...Zhivago wrote:I was under the impression that the game was about picking the units YOU want, and using the strategy YOU want, and winning the game. If you suck as a player, having the best units on the board is not going to help you. If you want a game where you are told what units you can or cannot use, call it something other than Panzer Corps, or make this an optional choice.
Explain that to boredatwork. I said I have no problem with his system being implemented as long as it is OPTIONAL, not the new default standard.El_Condoro wrote:Are you joking or pretending to be thick? No-one has argued for choice to be removed - the argument is for more choice. No-one cares how you play the game and no-one wants to change your enjoyment of it - but some of us think we can keep that, and add enjoyment for others. But I suspect you still won't get it...Zhivago wrote:I was under the impression that the game was about picking the units YOU want, and using the strategy YOU want, and winning the game. If you suck as a player, having the best units on the board is not going to help you. If you want a game where you are told what units you can or cannot use, call it something other than Panzer Corps, or make this an optional choice.
Boy o' boy do you ever miss the point! If you cant grasp it, then I couldnt really try and help make you understand. Besides with that attitude of yours I see no more reason to speak with you at all. How would you know if I am good or bad at PzC anyway and what does that have to do with anything....nothing!Zhivago wrote:I was under the impression that the game was about picking the units YOU want, and using the strategy YOU want, and winning the game. If you suck as a player, having the best units on the board is not going to help you. If you want a game where you are told what units you can or cannot use, call it something other than Panzer Corps, or make this an optional choice.Lamont wrote:I was under the impression that strategy would be the the main thing in a....well strategy game and not only have all elite tanks etc on the board. Probably idiotic of me it seems
Why complain about that at all, you can still choose to have that kind of core. Adding the choice/strategy of deploying more of the cheaper stuff dont really affect a pure elite core in any way if the Devs let you buy as many of those units then as you can now. Sorry dont get that coplaining at all!
Thank you!Lamont wrote:Boy o' boy do you ever miss the point! If you cant grasp it, then I couldnt really try and help make you understand. Besides with that attitude of yours I see no more reason to speak with you at all. How would you know if I am good or bad at PzC anyway and what does that have to do with anything....nothing!Zhivago wrote:I was under the impression that the game was about picking the units YOU want, and using the strategy YOU want, and winning the game. If you suck as a player, having the best units on the board is not going to help you. If you want a game where you are told what units you can or cannot use, call it something other than Panzer Corps, or make this an optional choice.Lamont wrote:I was under the impression that strategy would be the the main thing in a....well strategy game and not only have all elite tanks etc on the board. Probably idiotic of me it seems
Why complain about that at all, you can still choose to have that kind of core. Adding the choice/strategy of deploying more of the cheaper stuff dont really affect a pure elite core in any way if the Devs let you buy as many of those units then as you can now. Sorry dont get that coplaining at all!
Why would a system that does nothing but add more options to the way players play - and takes NONE away - need to be made optional? The proposal would allow EVERY player to choose the core he wants and not just those who are happy to fill limited slots with the best equipment (getting dizzy with going round in circles here). Please don't come back with the cheat codes solution - that's no solution at all.Zhivago wrote:I said I have no problem with his system being implemented as long as it is OPTIONAL, not the new default standard.
His solution is to propose a prestige "cap" per scenario where players are essentially penalized for buying more expensive units than cheaper ones. I call BS on that idea. Instead of this idea, a player should earn more prestige the earlier he achieves the objectives in the scenario. A player should be rewarded for conquering the map quickly and decisively, and prestige is the most tangible way to do that. Perhaps if you are looking to counteract a strong German unit core, the AI could be tuned to be harder against a better German force.El_Condoro wrote:Why would a system that does nothing but add more options to the way players play - and takes NONE away - need to be made optional? The proposal would allow EVERY player to choose the core he wants and not just those who are happy to fill limited slots with the best equipment (getting dizzy with going round in circles here). Please don't come back with the cheat codes solution - that's no solution at all.Zhivago wrote:I said I have no problem with his system being implemented as long as it is OPTIONAL, not the new default standard.
I'd like to--I played Panzer General online in multiplayer for years in the 90'sdeducter wrote:I'm calling a truce! No more point in discussing this, tempers will only rise.
I'm happy with Rudankort's response. As I said, I don't expect anything to change for this game.
PG2 was a better game than PG1, I think. Here's hoping that's true for PzC too.
Zhivago, if you really think you are the superior strategist, perhaps you should play some MP.
makes me happy about the future of PzCRudankort wrote:Let me just say that there is nothing wrong with the points you mention, on the contrary, they were our design goals in the past and they will remain so in the future. I will be the first to admit that we are not quite there yet, especially in SP. The good news is, we have learnt a lot from stock campaign and grand campaign, and we are continuing to learn. Next time we go back to the drawing board, we should do better.
