1.06

[Rudankort]

The list of changes in AK will be made available shortly - by the time we enter beta. And yes, all features I'm working on for Africa will be available for all the other mods out there. As for a list of future changes which MAY be implemented beyond Africa... would it be of any real use? I can already hear rezaf telling me that he has heard it all before but nothing was implemented. Are there many people here willing to have such a list? Let me know.

[MickMannock]

The list of changes in AK will be made available shortly - by the time we enter beta. And yes, all features I'm working on for Africa will be available for all the other mods out there. As for a list of future changes which MAY be implemented beyond Africa... would it be of any real use? I can already hear rezaf telling me that he has heard it all before but nothing was implemented. Are there many people here willing to have such a list? Let me know.

I find rezaf to be overly critical, and I don't think he should be seen as a representative for the entire community.

I would find any list/information interesting. Bring it on.

[El_Condoro]

For the MAY BE list, I was only thinking of changes for AK but perhaps it's closer to 'lock down' than that. A list would be interesting, but if it is going much beyond AK it may not be that useful and potentially devisive if one 'camp' sees a particular feature as a must-have and another does not. Your call.

Anyway, I can wait.

[VPaulus]

I want.
And rezaf might want it too.

[El_Condoro]

I don't think he should be seen as a representative for the entire community.

I don't think rezaf is trying to represent the whole community - he is just asking some pertinent questions. It got this discussion going.

[VPaulus]

I don't think he should be seen as a representative for the entire community.

I don't think rezaf is trying to represent the whole community - he is just asking some pertinent questions. It got this discussion going.

+1

[MickMannock]

I don't think he should be seen as a representative for the entire community.

I don't think rezaf is trying to represent the whole community - he is just asking some pertinent questions. It got this discussion going.

+1

Well Rudankort was basing his response off of rezaf, one persons comment, so I was just pointing out that rezaf is just one person of many.

And I think you can get a discussion going without being rude, which I find rezaf being at the moment. Justifiably so or not.

[bebro]

Interesting debate overall. I just stumbled about the point regarding unit switches - yes it has a lot of potential, and I remember for example DMP doing some nice things with this feature (transport switches, unit that turn into aux airfields), but the question remains - will the AI be able to do unit switching in a reasonable way as well at some point?

Esp. with the more "exotic" switches I am wondering how the AI would decide what to use.

[Rudankort]

will the AI be able to do unit switching in a reasonable way as well at some point?

The AI using switches is a LIKELY change.

[VPaulus]

And I think you can get a discussion going without being rude, which I find rezaf being at the moment. Justifiably so or not.

I wouldn't call it rude, but rather more sharped tongue and I do agree that some of the remarks were unnecessary in good will discussion.
But I understand we may have different perceptions, specially when we all have different native languages.
Besides Alex, seems to answer well, in the same manner.
It is an interesting debate.

[rezaf]

I don't think he should be seen as a representative for the entire community.

I don't think rezaf is trying to represent the whole community - he is just asking some pertinent questions. It got this discussion going.

Yeah, of course I'm not the representative of the community in any shape or form. No way.
As I wrote in my initial paragraph about this, the questions I raised were purely egoistical, in a way.

And I think you can get a discussion going without being rude, which I find rezaf being at the moment. Justifiably so or not.

As Rudankort wrote himself, I have my reasons for doubts. It's a fact that cannot be denied, many things were "promised" and nothing was actually ever done in most cases.
We'll see what the future will bring.

As for being rude, I don't intend to. To the point, yes, but not rude.
If it comes across that way, I apologize. It must be a german thing. Just look at HBalck.

I haven't heard back from Rudankort on my last PM, but I hope we've sorta come to terms in a way - at least for the time being. So no more offensive posts are to be expected from me on this thread.
I hope. Hold me accountable.
_____
rezaf

[VPaulus]

It must be a german thing. Just look at HBalck.

I've to disappoint you in this regard, but unfortunately it's not exclusive to the Germans.

[soldier]

That said, from a tactical standpoint, you should open up modding to include certain hardcoded things, like how entrenchment contributes to defense, how quickly units entrench/max level of entrenchment, the AT vs infantry defense rule, the AT vs turreted units initiative rules. You can't say you shouldn't do this because players won't notice, because you already have stuff like this in the game. You already have the simplified combat predictor for those who don't care, and those who do like myself can look at the combat log, which is a very useful tool.

Basically, it'd be nice to be able to mod "entrenchment contributes +1 to defense for each level if attacked by infantry, +2 by anything else" as opposed to the current values of 0.5 and 1 respectively. Add in a few more AI scripts like "attack towards X and hold it" or the "kamikaze" reckless attack mode, you can create even more amazing scenarios.

+++ to Deductor for this

There were some very long threads, a while ago about the way Panzer Corps handles entrenchments and artillery suppression. Some players (myself included) wanted to make suppression slightly less effective and entrenchments tougher to break open. I also felt infantry experience didn't have any impact in these situations making troop combat with these three factors less than satisfying. Basically we were told no changes were being considered and if you did'nt like it, mod it, but guess what... these very important factors in ground combat cannot be modified .

please allow entrenchments and suppression to be moddable in the future. New scenarios, terrain files and units are very nice but mean little to me if these fundamentals cannot (or will not) be altered.

[bebro]

will the AI be able to do unit switching in a reasonable way as well at some point?

The AI using switches is a LIKELY change.

Thanks for that info, sounds good to me.

[fliegenderstaub]

Is there anything new about a possible patch 1.06?

I know, that Afrika Korps seems to have prioriotity right now. And three more DLC for the Grand Camapign are alo in the queue. I just wanted to know, if 1.06 is planned at all and if yes, how the outlook is.

Thanks in advance! (oops, I typed "tanks in advance" first, must be a psychological thing... )

[Chris10]

Is there anything new about a possible patch 1.06?

I know, that Afrika Korps seems to have prioriotity right now. And three more DLC for the Grand Camapign are alo in the queue. I just wanted to know, if 1.06 is planned at all and if yes, how the outlook is.

Thanks in advance! (oops, I typed "tanks in advance" first, must be a psychological thing... )

Iam not 100% positive but I think that somebody sometime somewhere said that once AK is released that PzC would get patched up in order to take advantage of the new features implemented with AK...but hey...dont take my word for it...

[Rudankort]

Chris is correct. Next patch will be 1.10, and it will be released together with AK, so hopefully very soon.

[fliegenderstaub]

Thanks to you both!

Well, looking forward to AK and the patch then!

[IainMcNeil]

Yes 1.06 will release at the same time as Afrika Corps

[MartyWard]

If you buy Africa Corp will the update automatically be applied or will it be a separate instal?