Slitherine

These changes only affect new games (started after you did the change in the files). If you load an older save, they won't apply.

Hey guys,

Just wanted to weight in... I think the game is fantastic and I'd love to be able to play it without getting so frustrated I have to turn it off after anywhere from 10 to 30 minutes... I have two gripes, and I'd love to see them addressed. First, it seems the "realism vs. playability" argument put forth by the game designers around the issue of why Poland has more tanks than Russia in the late part of the war is sort of... fantastic, to say the least. I keep running into pockets of Polish tanks and other forces that make my core look pretty sad, and as far as I recall this is so out of synch with reality that it makes the game hard to play, whether it is called "Panzer Corp" (meaning there must be a lot of armor at all times on the map... because of the name?) or not. Come on, guys... this is TOTALLY unrealistic, and yes, I know I can change the difficulty settings... it doesn't feel like I'm invading Poland. More like Russia...

Second, the odds calculator is so wildly off 2/3 of the time that I find even after a well considered set up using three or four combined arms units (including air power) my forces take ridiculous losses in the most menial of battles. Is this intentional? I'm playing the mid difficulty level... seems like the designers erred on the side of making things a LOT more unpredictable in the interest of making it harder? This isn't THAT big of a deal, but it seems consistently to do anywhere from a little more damage (to my units, mostly) than indicated to a whopping double or triple the predicted value... frustrating when you set up by nearly surrounding a foe, hitting it with artillery and air support (and yes, I am familiar with suppression...) I think I'll try the game on a level lower in difficulty next, to see if this persists.

All that having been said, I'm glad Panzer General has been so faithfully resurrected by Slitherine (so please, designers, don't think I don't appreciate the game... I'd just love to see what I see as some pretty distracting kinks to be ironed out) and I look forward to checking future DLC to see if it's been balanced a bit better... once again, it just seems a trifle out of whack on the realism and odds fronts.

Thanks for listening!

agreed to above - tanks is no problem - but the dice and little prestige

Still pay for Eprestige at the start of the scenario - maybe I need to change something else also?

I just try to summarize the biggest fun killer:

1. Too little prestige and to high elite replacement costs - it is historically correct and just more fun to have a small but elite core unit with high tech units - therefore both points above are counting.
I tried to put the elite replacement costs to double the price of normal replacments and the elite replacement to 4x and suddenly the game is still challeging but not so frustrating anymore...I can still not afford all upgrades or oversize...

2. Dice rolls - my suggestion would be 60% the expected results 20% for 205 against player - soldiers did not so crazily underperform all the time - especially not the German ones
2 bad dice rolls or 3 which is quite common kills a whole scenario - one can restart or load an old save and cheat - both is annoying and unnescessary...most players will give upt at this point - I do not cause I really love this game...just some inprovments and it is clos to perfect

3. Free or less expensive elite replacements at scenario start

4. I just have to write this long part again - especially in a long campaign like in the DLCs it would be such a great motivation to foster the units. I mean you guys have spend so much effort - there is a Biography, medals, Heroes and then because of the above theya are sometimes just canon fodder....why not even individualize units more with a logo for example I have been playing turn based games since 25 years now and the most motivating ones were always those with a great core mode...you did mostly everything right and I believe you could even go to greater hights also in test scores if you just consequently stiock to that core mentality...Oh, I would be willing to bets test - would be great if you could appy the above also in the old campaigns through ptaches - thanks!

Thanks for the great game and thanks for a possibly even greater one

Guy, who are having problems with the too many polish armour and saying, that it is unhistorical - well, I think, it is a misunderstandig of the situation. The DLCs are not modelling the whole battlefield, the whole german army and the whole polish (etc.) army. There is only a part modelled: therefore I think, it is quite realistic, that the polish army send the best of his troops (let say, armour) against the most advancing and most successful fist of the german army (that are we - if we do well ).
In historic books, there are mostly universal information about the war. But certain fights could quite different from the overall situation.

Uhu wrote:Guy, who are having problems with the too many polish armour and saying, that it is unhistorical - well, I think, it is a misunderstandig of the situation. The DLCs are not modelling the whole battlefield, the whole german army and the whole polish (etc.) army. There is only a part modelled: therefore I think, it is quite realistic, that the polish army send the best of his troops (let say, armour) against the most advancing and most successful fist of the german army (that are we - if we do well ).
In historic books, there are mostly universal information about the war. But certain fights could quite different from the overall situation.

An excellent reminder.

Also, keep in mind the DLC Campaigns are focused to Tank Combat. Starting 1939 with a few tanks gets players into the spirit of the DLCs right off the bat. Don't worry though, Infantry:Tank ratios of 1939 is something in the order of 3:1. Later war scenarios, such as Prokhorovka, players will expect to see Infantry:Tank ratios of 2:1 or possibly even 1.5:1.

3. Free or less expensive elite replacements at scenario start

Elite reinforcements cost is reduced by 50% during deployment phase, including overstrength costs. Now if you want it to be even lower, that's a whole separate issue.

Ahh... been playing a bit more in the DLC and I begin to understand the attraction. Forgive my earlier analysis as it was based on an old concept and expectation of the game. Good stuff!

Abraxes12 wrote:Ahh... been playing a bit more in the DLC and I begin to understand the attraction. Forgive my earlier analysis as it was based on an old concept and expectation of the game. Good stuff!

Good... good another convert.

I suggest, this fact, and also, that green reinforcements costs zero at the deployment phase, should be more, "louder" presented in the manual. I played the game first time, till to USA, until I read about these facts, here in the forum!
OK, the fact about the free, green replacements is in the manual (which I not read carefully, because I thought, "why to read, I played PG so many times"), but the 50% less cost of elite reinforcements is nowhere written, as I know. And these two facts really deep influence the tactics (at least on harder levels)! I make reinforcements since that knowledge almost never at the fights, only at the deployment phase.
So, I would suggest, the manual should be edited to show these two facts with bigger presentation.

deducter wrote:

3. Free or less expensive elite replacements at scenario start

Elite reinforcements cost is reduced by 50% during deployment phase, including overstrength costs. Now if you want it to be even lower, that's a whole separate issue.

Elite reinforcements cost is reduced by 50% during deployment phase, including overstrength costs. Now if you want it to be even lower, that's a whole separate issue.

I didn´t know that either. Very usefull info!

The game is in general good, I love the detailed styled of the long history, 70 scenarios for the overall DLC is great.
But it's a bit simple. e.g. for 39, if you play general, even for spoils of war is not too difficult. Maybe I need to try the marshell or even higher level.

One question, how many core units could we carry in the latter campaigns? Always 15-17? or could we have more? It will impact what types of units I purchase.

But it's a bit simple. e.g. for 39, if you play general, even for spoils of war is not too difficult. Maybe I need to try the marshell or even higher level.

I guarantee you won't find Spoils of War "simple" on Manstein difficulty.

qypanzer wrote:The game is in general good, I love the detailed styled of the long history, 70 scenarios for the overall DLC is great.
But it's a bit simple. e.g. for 39, if you play general, even for spoils of war is not too difficult. Maybe I need to try the marshell or even higher level.

One question, how many core units could we carry in the latter campaigns? Always 15-17? or could we have more? It will impact what types of units I purchase.

As my friend stated above, Spoils of War on Manstein is extremely difficult. You wouldn't be disappointed by that difficulty setting.

To answer your question, your ENTIRE core carries over into later campaigns. Even if you have too many core units (a Reserve) they also carry along into future DLC campaigns.

Finished the '40 DLC yesterday.

The '39 DLC feels pretty good. I love the fact that there's hardly a mission (I can't remember a single one) where DV means the same as MV, just in less turns. There's always something else to achieve, which was a nice change from the base campaign.
At least for my playing style, this also made the campaign less difficult - only in few missions did I have to struggle to keep up with the time limit.
The sweet spot for difficulty is on a different place for everyone, so I realize it's hard to please all players, but for me, the DLC on standard difficulty is pretty much spot-on.
I can see myself wanting more challenge eventually, but that's what the higher difficulties are there for. Splendid balancing, overall.
Well, there's one exception, I felt the Spoils of War scenario was an outlier. Once you know what you're doing, it's not really THAT hard either, though. It just requires you to know what will happen, else it's easy to get into a hopeless situation.

The '40 DLC left a more mixed impression. The varied victory conditions thing begins to show it's wear - there's only so many things the engine will allow you to do...
Generally, it feels that there are far too many tanks in the scenarios, especially heavy ones. The "hornet's nest" design in which you haplessly move your units to any arbitary hex and all hell breaks loose (I'm exaggerating a bit) and a massive counterattack by french tanks starts is used too often.
The mission in which you are to capture and evacuate the french general is a bad joke, without knowing what's going to happen, your odds of pulling off a victory are extremely reliant on luck, as french troops spawn literally everywhere and in huge numbers. I do realize you can always go for a marginal victory, but even that is impossible without knowing what will happen. Worst mission of both DLCs, in my opinion.
It'll be exciting to see how you approach the issues that present themselves in future DLCs.
Finally, is it just me or is there PLENTY prestige if you manage to pull off DVs in the '40 DLC?

Some overall observations:
Now, really, what is it that makes Cavalry such a deadly killer unit, even against tanks? I'm not sure if there isn't something strange going on there...

Stop using the "hornet's nest" tactic so often. No, really.

I find the lack of branching disturbing. Meaning, even spectacular performance no longer allows you to change the course of war - a single DLC doesn't cover such opportunities, and I doubt you are even handling variables between the DLCs. No matter how good you play, you cannot get to a Sealion 40, and as it's not historical, and it remains to be seen whether there'll be a Sealion at all. This is just one example.
Part of this is naturally owed to the fact that you've made these all standalone affairs, i.e. one can only buy and play the '40 DLC without ever playing the '39 one, but it's a bit disappointing to me, anyway. Maybe you'll make a "Changing the course of war" DLC when all "historical" ones are done that'll link the DLCs together, maybe modders will have to step in, maybe additional scripting will become available, who knows. But for now, the linearity was a bit disappointing.

While I liked the scenario design far better than in the vanilla campaign, I feel you missed the opportunity to pick a theme for each campaign (Poland, Norway, Low Countries, France) and run with it.

The combat predictions ARE off. (There's a seperate thread dedicated to this, so I won't go into any details.)

The glass-ceiling approach to limiting XP is too omnipresent and in-your-face. Like I wrote elsewhere, I suggest everyone to tweak the XP growth to lower numbers starting at 20 or 25 instead of 100, slowly dropping from there. You'll still hit the glass ceiling, but only much later, as opposed to the first or second mission of the DLC.

I missed briefing VOs. Yeah, the reasoning was explained and all - I still missed them.

There should be message boxes. There, you captured a unit!

It'd be nice to have a way to check victory conditions and see if you have fulfilled one during your turn. (You have destroyed 5/8 trains required for a DV.)

Hmm. I think that's it for now. More than I intended to write anyway.
_____
rezaf

That... was actually some pretty constructive feedback. Thanks for sharing.

Just a question: Do I get lesser PP for a DV on General level -looks like only 100 PP in the 39 DLC - thats really very small....

Just out of curiosity rezaf, are you playing on Colonel difficulty? On Field Marshall, in addition to the better AI, EXP growth is halved, so that might be more your thing.

Kerensky wrote:

qypanzer wrote:The game is in general good, I love the detailed styled of the long history, 70 scenarios for the overall DLC is great.
But it's a bit simple. e.g. for 39, if you play general, even for spoils of war is not too difficult. Maybe I need to try the marshell or even higher level.

One question, how many core units could we carry in the latter campaigns? Always 15-17? or could we have more? It will impact what types of units I purchase.

As my friend stated above, Spoils of War on Manstein is extremely difficult. You wouldn't be disappointed by that difficulty setting.

To answer your question, your ENTIRE core carries over into later campaigns. Even if you have too many core units (a Reserve) they also carry along into future DLC campaigns.

Thanks Kerensky,

I should make it clear, my question is: how many core units could I use in the latter campaigns, then I could plan how many units I will train (I agree that my trained and carried units should be larger than the units I could use in each campaign).

Besides, could it be possible to introduce more "strategy" into the DLC difficult campaigns? I feel that when playing DLC, what I need to do is just be careful enough and be skilled to fight each time, but I feel less interest from planning the whole attracking route and strategy, also including supply. If there are a few choices for each scenario, and as a commandor, I need to plan everything carefully, utilizing some breaking through, instead of push the battlefront step by step. It would be more interesting. Also if the supply system can be more complex, e.g. I can decide how many points to supply for the soldier instead of supply to 10 if aviable (some thing similar to operation barbarossa), it would also be nice, then I need to think about how to supply and how to plan the attack route to save gas (now gas is free in PC).

Maybe in Mainstein level, I need to consider these issues more carefully I'll try that later.

If there are a few choices for each scenario, and as a commandor, I need to plan everything carefully, utilizing some breaking through, instead of push the battlefront step by step.

Strategy is very important in MP, which sounds like more your thing. For instance, I am fond of the breakthrough/encirclement doctrine in MP, which I have used on multiple occasions to great effect. There are various other strategies too. You may also find that supply/ammunition is quite a bit more important in MP.

Edit:

Maybe in Mainstein level, I need to consider these issues more carefully Surprised I'll try that later.

From my personal experience, ammunition/supply/good planning of a route of attack can be the difference between DV and MV on Manstein. I still use the 10.5 cm artillery in part because of their nifty 8 ammunition, and their great effect on units with low ground defense.

I suggest, this fact, and also, that green reinforcements costs zero at the deployment phase, should be more, "louder" presented in the manual. I played the game first time, till to USA, until I read about these facts, here in the forum!
OK, the fact about the free, green replacements is in the manual (which I not read carefully, because I thought, "why to read, I played PG so many times"), but the 50% less cost of elite reinforcements is nowhere written, as I know. And these two facts really deep influence the tactics (at least on harder levels)! I make reinforcements since that knowledge almost never at the fights, only at the deployment phase.
So, I would suggest, the manual should be edited to show these two facts with bigger presentation.

I've been saying for some time that documentation needs to be better, so nice to see someone else think so. There are a very large number of rules not listed in the manual, which I think is just sloppy writing and documentation, and there is no excuse for not making all the combat rules transparent to the player in a game with relatively simple rules like Panzer Corps.

The biggest offenders I can think of is that infantry shoot at anything's close defense (including other infantry) in close terrain, the rules of surrender/retreat, the rules for resupply, and the various modifiers to combat rules (infantry get +2 defense vs AT, defense bonus to defenders in bad weather). These rules have a huge effective on gameplay on a higher level and especially in MP.