Slitherine

Hello All!

Beta 4 is available. This is a Release Candidate build. This means that it is pretty close to what we will release to public. If everything goes according to plan, Allied Corps will release on D-Day, 6th of June. To meet this date, we'll need to go into production mid next week. This means that we have ~3 days for any bug fixes and tweaks. If you know any bug which was reported, but was not fixed in beta 4, please give a link or reminder in this topic. I want all remaining bugs in one place.

Here is a rough list of changes, compared to previous beta (beta 3).
- A number of tweaks in unit list, SP and MP scenarios, based on your feedback.
- All maps have been visually polished.
- All scenarios have got their images.
- Allied skin should be final. Alas, allied eagle did not change, but other than that, we've tried to fix all issues reported.
- Skins should now correctly switch when you switch between PzC/AK/AC campaigns.
- The game now adds scenario name, difficulty and victory conditions to Messages window (where the briefings was already shown).
- The entire Library has been updated using Thomas' (ThvN's) edits.
- Some changes in the game rules (details here)
- German and russian translation of the campaign was added. UI and Library translation is not finished yet.

You can continue playing the campaign using your saves from beta 3. In this beta test later scenarios received less attention than earlier ones, so we encourage everyone to try them and post your feedback - ideally in campaign mode, but if you play those scenarios in single scenario mode, this will help too.

The two biggest thing I was hoping:

1. Forward/rewind turn and pause buttons for replays. Replays are great, but without those features (standard to most games with replays) it is very difficult to watch them.
If necessarily, just use the current UI buttons but repurpose them (forward is "next unit", rewind is "previous unit" pause is "purchase unit).

2. Custom scenario can be loaded from any folder, and the scenario will always check its current folder for *.pzeqp and *.pzdat files first. If the problem is the UI, just use the default Windows UI. Basically, when clicking on "custom" in the scenario windows, a Windows box will pop up, and the player can select the folder and then the file. The only valid option is a .pzscn file.

Rudankort wrote:- German and russian translation of the campaign was added. UI and Library translation is not finished yet.

Just as a reminder: the german localization of the awards seems to be missing:

Coincidence or intentional? I was been rewarded with a hero for the fourth time and I got always a +1-Movement-Hero.

zappel wrote:Coincidence or intentional? I was been rewarded with a hero for the fourth time and I got always a +1-Movement-Hero.

Coincidence most likely.

Rudankort wrote:

zappel wrote:Coincidence or intentional? I was been rewarded with a hero for the fourth time and I got always a +1-Movement-Hero.

Coincidence most likely.

Confirmed, got a +1-Initiative-Hero.

Ridge terrain tiles in second alamein are still randomly aligned.

Upgrade no longer restores full strength...

Hurricane 2C Upgrade to 2D still not viable.

Would still like to see 'RASC Truck' rather than the inaccurate ahistoric Service Corps references.

George Cross is still a regularly awarded medal.
Victoria Cross would be more appropriate.

Allied Corps should really appear on splash screens rather than Panzer Corps / Panzer Corps, perhaps Panzer Corps / Allied Corps

Balla

Ballacraine wrote:Ridge terrain tiles in second alamein are still randomly aligned.

I've loaded this scen, and all tiles are aligned properly. Are you loading a saved game from beta 3, perhaps?

Ballacraine wrote: Hurricane 2C Upgrade to 2D still not viable.

You mean, 2D variant is not in the game?

Rudankort wrote:- All maps have been visually polished.
...
- Allied skin should be final.

Just a little graphical unattractiveness:
- streets are not matchingI noticed this tile in GC40 and GC41 too but don't remember where.

- two stars for the bonus Generals and three stars for the standard Fieldmarshall (shouldn't it be five stars?)

Rudankort wrote:

Ballacraine wrote:Ridge terrain tiles in second alamein are still randomly aligned.

I've loaded this scen, and all tiles are aligned properly. Are you loading a saved game from beta 3, perhaps?

Ballacraine wrote: Hurricane 2C Upgrade to 2D still not viable.

You mean, 2D variant is not in the game?

1) Yes, I am.

2) No, I was referring to the upgrade path. The former is classified as a fighter, the latter as a tactical bomber.

On a different topic, I don't think Engineers & mineclearing units should suffer any casualties when clearing mines.
Perhaps just lose one round of supplies?

Balla.

Thank you, thank you, thank you for un-nerfing the artillery! It was incredibly frustrating. It made Arty, especially Naval Guns almost useless. I had taken to playing every scenario twice, once with Arty, and once with no Arty, and extra Tac & Strat bombers. I did better every time without Arty.
Can the Brits get Calliopes? They did have them, but you cant buy them in game.
Also, love to see more Commonwealth units like Gurkhas (Mountain Troops that are also Commandos), and Canadian units in general.
is the M3 Satan in the game? If not, it should be.
I will give more feedback after I have played it more.

zappel wrote:

Rudankort wrote:- German and russian translation of the campaign was added. UI and Library translation is not finished yet.

Just as a reminder: the german localization of the awards seems to be missing:

Award.png

The screenshot above was taken by a game I started with Beta3 and loaded in Beta4. Now I got a award in a scenario which I started in Beta4 and the name of the award was displayed correctly. I'll observe the awards but I assume that the problem is fixed with Beta4.

No chance to get switch while deploying or randomly retreat mechanics?

zappel wrote:No chance to get switch while deploying or randomly retreat mechanics?

I don't plan to randomize retreat mechanics. The way things stand now, good players can carefully plan their moves and use retreats to their advantage (e. g. make a unit retreat to close terrain, and then finish it off there with infantry). With random retreats, we lose this tactical depth, and what do we get in return? Nothing, except maybe some very questionable increase in realism. In my opinion, this game has more than enough randomness. In fact, some existing randomness is pretty annoying already (e. g. submarine evades), so I would rather reduce it, not increase.

As for switch during deploy, I can see how it can be useful, but it is rather tricky to implement and will have very limited effect on gameplay (only on first turn, only if you are defending, only for switchable units, and only if switching them to their secondary role gives some advantage). Given these considerations, I'm not sure we really need it in the game. But I would love to hear more opinions from players regarding this.

Rudankort wrote:

zappel wrote:No chance to get switch while deploying or randomly retreat mechanics?

I don't plan to randomize retreat mechanics. The way things stand now, good players can carefully plan their moves and use retreats to their advantage (e. g. make a unit retreat to close terrain, and then finish it off there with infantry). With random retreats, we lose this tactical depth, and what do we get in return? Nothing, except maybe some very questionable increase in realism. In my opinion, this game has more than enough randomness. In fact, some existing randomness is pretty annoying already (e. g. submarine evades), so I would rather reduce it, not increase.

Yes, absolutly correct. I use the retreat direction for my advantage but it would increase my fun if I would not know the direction the unit could retreat. For now it is easy for me to forecast in this situation how to smash an AI-unit by attack: look where the unit will retreat, look if a strong unit is around this field and attack it with a light-weight unit to destroy it with the strong unit. For me this mechanism is too foreseeable, I want to be surprised if the unit turns to the left or right hand. And, also regarding to the submarine evading, nothing in war is foreseeable and also nothing should be foreseeable in game. Right this time I could get a possible attack-result of many losses on the AI-side and none loss on my side but get a completly different result after the real combat. That's the fasination of the game: if any result would be clear before, I could play with statistics (and would play PzC only once). No: the random results are what makes the game playable for many times.

Rudankort wrote:As for switch during deploy, I can see how it can be useful, but it is rather tricky to implement and will have very limited effect on gameplay (only on first turn, only if you are defending, only for switchable units, and only if switching them to their secondary role gives some advantage). Given these considerations, I'm not sure we really need it in the game. But I would love to hear more opinions from players regarding this.

I understand: much effort for low effect.

The Crocodile has no sound.

zappel wrote: I use the retreat direction for my advantage but it would increase my fun if I would not know the direction the unit could retreat. For now it is easy for me to forecast in this situation how to smash an AI-unit by attack: look where the unit will retreat, look if a strong unit is around this field and attack it with a light-weight unit to destroy it with the strong unit. For me this mechanism is too foreseeable, I want to be surprised if the unit turns to the left or right hand. And, also regarding to the submarine evading, nothing in war is foreseeable and also nothing should be foreseeable in game. Right this time I could get a possible attack-result of many losses on the AI-side and none loss on my side but get a completly different result after the real combat. That's the fasination of the game: if any result would be clear before, I could play with statistics (and would play PzC only once). No: the random results are what makes the game playable for many times.

- You already don't know if the unit will retreat or not. In case of tough units this is a big uncertainty. If on top of that you don't know where it retreats, it is too much for my taste.
- Combat is random, but at least you can shift the odds in your favor by knowing game mechanics and using this knowledge to your advantage. Good combat results are a blend of luck and skill. Mechanics like evade (and retreats too if we randomize them) are beyond your control, it is just a dice roll. Such mechanics are usually less fun. It is pure luck, no skill.

I really don't see how the game will benefit from what you propose. Nobody says there must be no random in the game, but it must be carefully balanced with deterministic rules, or the game will turn into competition of luck. For this reason I disagree with your statement that "nothing should be foreseeable in game". It is a game, not a war simulation. For me chess is more fun than roulette, and its replayability does not suffer in the slightest by the fact that it is fully deterministic, there is no random or FoW.

Gotta say I agree with zappel. I never knew that the retreat always went the same direction, but now I know, I somewhat feel disappointed.
For me, it's not a discussion about randomness, but about realism. How can a general ever know for sure in which direction the enemy will retreat? In my opinion game mechanics should be aimed at realism (althoug there is always the fine balance between realism and complexity). Changing the rule to make the retreat random, doesn't increase complexity imo. I know Panzer Corps is not a simulation, but having a unrealistic rule for 'fun' and 'to shift the odds' sounds a bit gamy.
Knowing in which direction the enemy retreats has nothing to do with skill. I skillfull commander knows how to deal with the retreat, not matter what direction.
Just my 2 cents.

I will take a look at map polish, as Beta 3 didn't have it. While waiting for this soccer game to start in Wembley.

Rudankort wrote:- You already don't know if the unit will retreat or not. In case of tough units this is a big uncertainty. If on top of that you don't know where it retreats, it is too much for my taste.
- Combat is random, but at least you can shift the odds in your favor by knowing game mechanics and using this knowledge to your advantage. Good combat results are a blend of luck and skill. Mechanics like evade (and retreats too if we randomize them) are beyond your control, it is just a dice roll. Such mechanics are usually less fun. It is pure luck, no skill.

Yes, a really controverse discussion, I hope you enjoy it like me. I have to answer you back: if I want an AI-unit to retreat I know in at least 90-95% before combat if it will. In this case I use all equipment which can supress strength-points like bombers, artillery, naval guns or fortresses before I attack the unit. I played Anzio from AC and even the Elefant can be retreated easily then 9 or 10 or their strength-points are surpressed. Even an infantry unit can retreat the Elefant in this time (in almost 90-95 times of 100). And this is my favorite tactic, supress an unit before attack.
And to win a scenario has little relation to luck, you have to gain local superiority to eliminate AI-units one after the other. I don't use the chess-mode because this will be to predictable: I hate it when a overstrength Tiger went in a rugged defense and instead of the total loss of the AI-unit my Tiger losses much strength points but that is the game: nothing should be forseeable.
I repeat: the game lives from the unforseeable results, this is the main reason to play PzC more than one time.

Regards,
Thomas