Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gameplay

A new story begins...
The sequel to a real classic: Panzer Corps is back!

Moderator: Panzer Corps 2 Moderators

Post Reply
StefanDK
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 85
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:57 pm

Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gameplay

Post by StefanDK » Wed Mar 08, 2017 8:28 pm

Maybe there is some place to post this, but else I am starting a "fanboy" page with suggestions, ideas and a wishlist for Panzer Corps 2.

My wishes are:

- Multiplayer campaigns (number ONE priority!!!): To play a campaign against an intelligent human being is the most valuable thing ever. It is fun to play scenarios, but if the outcome of every scenario has an impact on the course of the campaign, it would be absolutely stunning!
- Grand scale scenarios - like the whole world or whole of Europe - much like Battlefield Europe Mod and the like. This should also work for multiplayer.
- Another great scenario modding tool - it seems like the current one is adequate, although not polished. A polished and more user friendly version would go a long way.
- Random events during turns - like extra troops arriving, incoming or outgoing prestige, sudden bombardment of troops to diminish strength etc.
- More specialized abilities that can be gained through experience and/or random events.
- Some of the Order of Battle supply mechanisms (although Panzer Corps is actually quite good).

Edited - a few more:
- Order of battle inspired enemy turn replays - that is the weakest point in PzC - I would really like to get the possibility to pause the replay of a turn so I can dive into statistics and more. Especially since I have been playing some large mods/scenarios that takes approx. 10 minutes to replay - and I almost always miss several actions. Maybe it is true to the real battlefield experience though.

IainMcNeil
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13431
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:19 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by IainMcNeil » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:33 am

Multiplayer campaigns is a tricky one. These type of games assume victory to proceed so how do you imagine it working? What happens to the losing side? How does the campaign deal with core forces as each battle one player loses it all. I don't see how you capture the essence of the game if the player has to lose their core not to mention the snowball balancing issues of the winning player having an upgraded core and the loser starting from scratch.

MickMannock
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 8:09 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by MickMannock » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:16 am

Posted this in another thread and it might be more appropriate here:

If I could make one request for Panzer Corps 2, then it's a bit of improvement to the heroes function. I like it a lot, however I wish it wasn't randomized names and pictures, but rather names of real WW2 participants who become available and to the approriate unit type. So for example, if I get a hero for my fighter plane unit, I get Werner Mölders, but Mölders will never show up on any other unit type. I really keep my fingers crossed for this improvement.

Also keep going with the DLC:s but make them a bit more realistic. For example in the Invasion of France 1940 DLC you first start with Army Group B mopping up Holland. Then suddenly you travel to Army Group A and cross the Meuse. Stick to the action of one actual corps of that campaign and don't jump back and forth between different front sections in an attampt to (unrealistically) cover it all.

Rudankort
FlashBack Games
FlashBack Games
Posts: 2488
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by Rudankort » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:23 am

Great suggestions guys, keep them coming. :)

Ryben
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 2:12 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by Ryben » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:32 am

My suggestions:

- Minor nations should have their infantry unit properly modelled. No more US graphics for Poland or France, please!

- Add more variety in the map graphics. In the long run i get tired of campaigns because all the maps looked the same, their only variation is the arrangement of the hexes. Perhaps adding some unique visuals in certain locations (cities in Eastern Europe have a different look than in France, e.g.).

- Include labels with names of the cities or geographical locations in the map.

- In PC1 its easy to lose track of which units have heroes and what are their bonuses. Display increased stats in a different color.

- Heroes are a bit unforgiving, just a random increase in certain stats. It would be a lot more interesting to make them have "special abilities" like those in PG2 that allow units to make things that usually they can´t.

- Recon units should have a chance to Evade! like subs.

- Add recon planes.

- Pioneer units could destroy/repair bridges and lay minefields.

- Add some visuals when attacking an enemy unit to display bonuses for adjacent friendly units and possible enemy artilley support. Sometimes is easy to lose track of that :)

- Allow some kind of selective "sleep mode" for artillery so they didn´t waste shots in defensive fire against units that they could´t affect (heavy tanks and such).

David105
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 5:50 pm

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by David105 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 1:57 pm

Love it since PG series! Since 1994, and still playing it with great pleasure!) Am I that old)))

There is one thing I always miss in the series:

- Global map continues campaign:
I mean that u can go from Spain revolution to East cost American invasion playing and planning it on global map (I meant the German side). Some missions and campaign u might lose, but that must have no effect on your global play thru (Germans defeated “battle for Britain” but the war isn’t over). U might chose the direction of your global campaign (It could be done with historical accuracy). War period: from 1937 to 1947. Some historians wrote that WWII could take this period and might end in many ways…

Global campaign has it’s core unit deployment (like A army, B and C or North, Centre, South). Some territories you might lose and some direction will be occupied. When you make your turn on global map: it shows you some sceneries or campaign you have to do (defense or offence).

Long story short, Global map continues campaign is what I miss most.

- Do not afraid of “what if” missions and campaign. Here is historical even that actually might happened:

For example: - Czech Rep was well arm and ready for war. It’s not their fault when “Allies” leave it for occupation with no gunshots. - Spain could join the Germany with march on Gibraltar. - North Africa corp might be more powerful and German commands sent the reinforcement and supplies they despaired needed. – Italian army and fleet could be more effective (some Wehrmacht general wrote about Italian army, “They do not have legendary and outstanding generals” (so pretend they do have)). – Let’s take Moscow later, first thing to defeat the Britain’s. – Moscow and Stalingrad is falling, the war is not over. Russian evading government planning fightback from Kuybyshev!
War period: from 1937 to 1947. Some historians wrote that WWII could take this long and might end in many ways…

- War in Atlantic and navy battles. It’s a big part of WWII history

- Oh yeah! Please bring back the sound when unit “suffering heavy loses” (it was in fist PG series)! It will be awesome to hear it again!

- Party play thru – it is fun to playing on one side by two players.

- Ambush mode for units.

- Please, make the army (with core units system) and make the army generals (some generals good in defense, some in offence and didn’t suffer march penalty (like Paul Ludwig Ewald von Kleist), some will be affective with low supply guaranty (like Albert Kesselring), some “fireman” (like Walter Model)).

- Experience makes the real different.

If I remember something more, I don’t hesitate to type it!)

Thank u For Making Dream come true (Panzer Corp series). And Don’t Stop Doing it! I truly believe that the TB strategy game the most exciting! Moreover, I am very glad the TB back in action, back in business!)

Musketeer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 122
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 11:29 pm
Location: Czech Republic

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by Musketeer » Thu Mar 09, 2017 2:02 pm

Battle or even Campaign generator...

dobrodukh
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 72
Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 7:48 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by dobrodukh » Thu Mar 09, 2017 2:19 pm

All modders will have to wait for a simple and intuitive editor for PC2. And it doesn't have to be naked, original UE4.

StefanDK
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 85
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 9:57 pm

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by StefanDK » Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:39 pm

IainMcNeil wrote:Multiplayer campaigns is a tricky one. These type of games assume victory to proceed so how do you imagine it working? What happens to the losing side? How does the campaign deal with core forces as each battle one player loses it all. I don't see how you capture the essence of the game if the player has to lose their core not to mention the snowball balancing issues of the winning player having an upgraded core and the loser starting from scratch.
It is tricky, of course. However, I believe it can be done - in both less demanding or high resource scenarios for the development team.

First of all, CORE forces could be protected in multiple ways: Retreat zones would be a great way, so you decide during battle when or if they should be called back if possible (if not encircled), but also revivement could be an option that could be enabled in multiplayer games. So the CORE forces could be protected and saved for other battles. That would probably mean having the CORE troops functioning as a form of elite or extra force to be inserted whenever the battle needs a boost.

Instead of - or combining - the protection of CORE forces could be battle achievements where you have a set of goals to reach. So even if you know you will lose, you will perhaps keep som CORE forces, but more importantly you would try to reach said goals.

The assumption of victory: PzC is very much build around successes in campaigns and not much "halfway there" victories. And that is fine, but one could assume that losing a battle does not mean losing the entire army, but rather a portion of it (see battle groups below). It could also be implemented by adjusting when a battle ends - maybe make smaller battles, but then again, this would demand more ressources for putting together multiple parts of a battle which eventually might end up in the same result: The germans crushing all of Poland's military so I see the concern. But some of this approach has been covered in some of the DLC where you take large battles bit by bit (but are supposed to have victories after all).

Battle groups/armys: If each player (whether AI or human) - voluntarily, perhaps - had a number of battle groups or corps to choose from, this would make the game harder to control, much less historically accurate, but strategically more diverse and envigorating since each battle would be different from the one before. So you would choose perhaps a battle group with a lot of panzer when blitzing Poland, but if you lose many of these, you might be forced to use more infantry the next time around. It could be either choosing between premade battle groups (e.g. one group with 4 infantry units, 5 panzer and 1 air group and another group with mostly panzer but also artillery - just an example) or just a large portion of different units or maybe just a pool of prestige to combine units from.

Instead of the if/then approach that PzC uses with great succes, you could also base the game around a map and choose to have players go on alternate history paths when applicable, such as you do with the invasion of England and likewise. This would mean an open game where the initiative could be switched either regularly (first Axis choose a battle/battlefield/country, then Allies choose one) or by victory (the one that wins the scenario gets to choose the next). Of course this would break much away from the historically correct path very soon, but would also be very dynamic and fun. I believe I would prefer this battle style, but best would be to be able to follow a mostly locked path, but have some choices along the way, but then lose momentum if you played badly or was unlucky.

If some of this is too "far out", you could also consider a more down to earth approach: Keep with the if/then scenarios in a campaign, but instead of battling the AI, the player battles real human beings that volunteer to play "as the AI". And why would players do that at all, you might ask. I would do it, if I knew that it was quid pro quo - that one play as the AI would enable one play against a human in a campaign. Preferably players would team up to play two separate campaigns, but be stand in for the AI alternately. This would also built up a really good community. I have played something like this in Panzer Corps with a friend of mine from Norway. Some times we played historical battles, that, although unbalanced, was fun to play because you did your best. You knew you were SUPPOSED to lose, but if you did your best, you would NOT lose in a way - you would lose, but have inflicted massive loss which could affect the next battle. And if players team up like that, they commit to it. If they behave badly, the other would just cut off support for their campaign.

Just a note: Some of these suggestions come from Wargame AirLand Battle which I think has a great strategic interface for campaigns (although. You choose much of the action on the map - which battalions you send where - and then the combat is based on the location, the battle groups involved and the dynamics between the players and their use of war material. This works amazingly in multiplayer!

If you need more feedback I would love to participate more.

jeff00t
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 153
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2015 7:08 pm

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by jeff00t » Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:26 pm

some very good ideas ryben!

i add : (sorry for my bad english)

- IA improving should be the first priority

-second priority , the game should be more immersive: more details on the map (if there is 3D in maps, the hills should be strategic for artilley , etc..) , more historical details in event, more names for the ships and planes ( at least the name of the squadron !)

- possibilities to build bunkers, fortifications ... why not a QG with special ability like " can generate prestige" .. ?

- challenges like : " win afrikakorps campaign with only italian units: this was finished by 2% of players". in the principal menu, why not a list of challenges with % of success in the entire world? in pzc there is no information/challenges between players!

- mini-missions / challenges like : u have just 10 infantery units and u must defend the city ( the map is only city hex with specify places like walls wheres units could be more defended or house hex where unit could enter.)

- like challenges , why not to create a collection of small cards of each unit ? each card could be find by winning a challenge or a campaign: u win german campaign? u get the very rare card of the Tiger. some cards could be very rare and hard to find even with several possibilities to find them . ..

- possibility to build a "permanent" " army (not the one u build in campaign! ) : this army or some units could be used as jokers in very hard campaing or challenge. For exemple, in my army i have 1 tiger. And in afrikakorps campaign , i could use only 1 tank of my permanent army : i choose the tiger. (Can be with conditions like: "will appear after 5 turns) : this permanent army could be hard core:" if u use it and if unit die, this unit doesn't come back ! so use it wisely!"
the units in this army could win experience too . the goal is to have his own army we love, as we could improve it, use it, test it , customize it, to promote it ...
my custom single player mini-campaign in order of battle : normandie-niemen: Image
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=374&t=79333&p=676302#p676302

captainjack
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1404
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:42 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by captainjack » Thu Mar 09, 2017 7:27 pm

One of jeff00t's points reminded me that it would be nice to have the ability to carry over tags or similar from one scenario to another.

For example to gain a special unit (scripted upgrade, Unique unit or a bonus core or SE unit) or a limited range of awards (eg increase fuel, ammo or experience), you have to collect a certain set of achievements (say, 3 DV's or destroyed 5 recon aircraft) you get a bonus unit, or a free upgrade or something.

hs1611
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 8:02 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by hs1611 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:27 pm

Two suggestions/requests:

1 - I would like a better unit naming/deployment system.
I like to group my units in divisions and allways use them in the same divisions, for Role Playing purposes.
I would like to be able to create groups and assign units to them.
Those groups to be seen on the deployment screen.

2 - Please do not call German Infantry "Wehrmacht Inf". This has always annoyed me, ever since Panzer General.
Call it "German Inf" and "German HW Inf" or "Schützen" and "Panzer-Grenadier" or even "Heer Inf" and "Heer HW Inf" or whatever, but NOT "Wehrmacht Inf".

goose_2
Tournament Organizer of the Year 2017
Tournament Organizer of the Year 2017
Posts: 2023
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:22 am
Location: Winterset, Iowa

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by goose_2 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:48 pm

hs1611 wrote:Two suggestions/requests:



2 - Please do not call German Infantry "Wehrmacht Inf". This has always annoyed me, ever since Panzer General.
Call it "German Inf" and "German HW Inf" or "Schützen" and "Panzer-Grenadier" or even "Heer Inf" and "Heer HW Inf" or whatever, but NOT "Wehrmacht Inf".

I am curious why this bothers you?
goose_2
Lutheran Multiplayer Tournament Organizer. :-)

hs1611
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 8:02 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by hs1611 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:05 pm

It doesn't bother me, it annoys me.
Mostly because it was a stupid mistake on PG that has been repeated on PzC through ... I don't know, lazyness perhaps?

Wehrmacht were all the Armed Forces of Nazi Germany.
So paratroopers, belonging to the Air Force, fusiliers, belonging to the Navy, and even the SS were part of the Wehrmacht.
They could all be called "Wehrmacht Infantry"

The Army was called Heer.

It's a tiny, tiny thing, I know.
There's really no reason to be annoyed by it.
But there's also no reason not to correct it...


EDIT: Correction, the Waffen-SS, although under the operational command of the Wehrmacht or of the Heer, were actually not part of the Wehrmacht.
They were not part of the German Armed Forces, they were the Party Armed Forces.

Yrfin
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:47 am
Location: Behind your backs

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by Yrfin » Thu Mar 09, 2017 9:41 pm

hs1611 wrote: It's a tiny, tiny thing, I know.
There's really no reason to be annoyed by it.
But there's also no reason not to correct it...
1.Find equipment.pzeqp file at your comp.
2.Make a copy equipment.pzeqp.
3.Open equipment.pzeqp with Notepad
4.Find and replace "Wehrmacht" with "Reichswehr" (or whatever you want)
5.Save file
6.Enjoy !
Shoot first. Ask questions later.

ruskicanuk
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:18 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by ruskicanuk » Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:17 pm

As the humbler winner of this 2012 tournament (viewtopic.php?f=121&t=27344&start=40) I suggest you look hard at the Order of Battle series. As good as Panzer Corps is, that series made it impossible for me to play PC as the latter series elegantly elevated the game on several levels especially in how they handle air and navy.

While I am sure there is lots of cool things you can do with the scenarios/campaigns/etc to scratch players' itches, the core of these titles are all about the tactical battles. The pacing in OoB is near perfect as are many tweaks to how artillery / other softening up weapons differ from assets that are designed to take positions (like infantry). PC does some attempt at this but OoB does it better.

Supply is also much better implemented in OoB and becomes fascinating sub-theme in each battle with game-changing consequences. I actually think that could still be improved much more and is probably how to really ramp up the strategic depth. For instance, you might include distance from supply not just whether you are cut off or not. Of course such additions carry many implications that need to be thought through but getting the creative juices thinking hard about supply could be quite valuable. Another idea is some kind of uncertainty as to how effective a unit would be on a given turn based on its supply status - instead of a 0/1 binary hit (ie. this unit cannot fire), all units can always fire but their strength, etc if a function of supply status + a randomized factor.

I would not depart from the core scenario-approach to campaigns though you may want to play with the reverse approach to many games - for instance, make scenarios HARDER if the player is winning and EASIER if they are losing. You might be able to even avoid a difficulty setting with all the associated variable AI settings and instead have a single AI and manage the player flow via the game. Essentially every campaign would flow start to finish over a similar number of scenarios but your role could change depending on if you are successful or not on a given scenario. This would keep the game fun for any skill level and you could play around with achievements, rate of completion, etc for stronger players. Maybe move away from the idea of "beating a game" and towards the idea of "how well you beat the game"

Some thoughts hopefully useful. PC was/is a great title, looking fwd to what you can do with the next one.

goose_2
Tournament Organizer of the Year 2017
Tournament Organizer of the Year 2017
Posts: 2023
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 5:22 am
Location: Winterset, Iowa

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by goose_2 » Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:32 pm

ruskicanuk wrote:As the humbler winner of this 2012 tournament (viewtopic.php?f=121&t=27344&start=40) I suggest you look hard at the Order of Battle series. As good as Panzer Corps is, that series made it impossible for me to play PC as the latter series elegantly elevated the game on several levels especially in how they handle air and navy.

While I am sure there is lots of cool things you can do with the scenarios/campaigns/etc to scratch players' itches, the core of these titles are all about the tactical battles. The pacing in OoB is near perfect as are many tweaks to how artillery / other softening up weapons differ from assets that are designed to take positions (like infantry). PC does some attempt at this but OoB does it better.

Supply is also much better implemented in OoB and becomes fascinating sub-theme in each battle with game-changing consequences. I actually think that could still be improved much more and is probably how to really ramp up the strategic depth. For instance, you might include distance from supply not just whether you are cut off or not. Of course such additions carry many implications that need to be thought through but getting the creative juices thinking hard about supply could be quite valuable. Another idea is some kind of uncertainty as to how effective a unit would be on a given turn based on its supply status - instead of a 0/1 binary hit (ie. this unit cannot fire), all units can always fire but their strength, etc if a function of supply status + a randomized factor.

I would not depart from the core scenario-approach to campaigns though you may want to play with the reverse approach to many games - for instance, make scenarios HARDER if the player is winning and EASIER if they are losing. You might be able to even avoid a difficulty setting with all the associated variable AI settings and instead have a single AI and manage the player flow via the game. Essentially every campaign would flow start to finish over a similar number of scenarios but your role could change depending on if you are successful or not on a given scenario. This would keep the game fun for any skill level and you could play around with achievements, rate of completion, etc for stronger players. Maybe move away from the idea of "beating a game" and towards the idea of "how well you beat the game"

Some thoughts hopefully useful. PC was/is a great title, looking fwd to what you can do with the next one.

This is a great post and I second it's sentiment
goose_2
Lutheran Multiplayer Tournament Organizer. :-)

texican
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 5:45 pm

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by texican » Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:36 pm

Good news.

Now for the requests:

1) A little more freedom for players in how to fight a battle within the battle. Some of the series have scripted events for the player to follow or forced gameplay (like you WILL retreat in this certain Afrika Korps battle, because it's in the narrative), and while these play dramatically first time around, they get a little dry after awhile. Better example, here's the map, here's the objectives, special units or rules, but you decide if you're going to do a multiple pincer movement or main drive. Mostly this is allowable, but some of the time, it seems there is "one way" to best play out the scenario (Pacific OOB does this often). The player should be the overall operational commander, not a subordinate. He or she is not the theatre commander maybe, but in charge of what's happening on the immediate map. (so none of this, "you must capture the fortress, now move 5 units to this spot, now do this, etc... no micromanagement please).

2) Have some randomization of A.I. events a bit, so maybe an A.I. counterattack, or timing thereof, is not always a certainty in a scenario, but a possibility. Like in a Kursk battle, maybe a pending A.I. Soviet counterattack might come within a certain span of turns, but not "Turn 10, this will happen). This puts an edge on things and heightens the tension.

3) Allow for other nationalities of Axis or Allied units to be in the core unit section, and have them as nationality slots, so a player doesn't do something like ditch all of his Italian units for Germans in a min-max strategy. (I want my Polish Armored division, Australian Infantry, or Italian Motorized unit, etc...)

4) Semi-branching campaign, with some options to return units from Eastern front to Western front, or other direction, and not just once/campaign. Maybe even a 1,000 pt prestige cost to convince the higher ups to shift fronts with your army.

5) Submarines do more damage, but maybe destroyers do auto detect or something to better counter them.

6) A.I. in defensive positions should not counterattack to their disadvantage, especially in towns or victory objectives. They should hold and last.

7) A.I. artillery should not cross into a river next to an enemy unit, but should stay behind friendly lines.

8) Veteran sherman units don't get one-shotted by panthers or tigers. Didn't happen that way in the war, they found a way to fight those tanks, especially in bocage, towns, and forests. Some sherman units traded 1 to 1 with panthers in many skirmishes. (Canadian 2nd Armored, U.S. at Battle of Arracourt)

9) Player presence on map in HQ van or something might be cool. Units in some kind of range are controlled by the player, otherwise A.I. if the HQ van gets blown up, then player is out of it a few rounds and A.I. runs the battle, maybe after a frozen turn or two of inaction/indecision/chaos.

10) Losing a battle does not end the campaign, but sets the player back in the campaign tree, maybe a later year or something.

11) More believable (closer to historical) campaign pathing and less chance of extreme variation. Beating the Soviets ought to be near impossible. Maybe going through with Operation Sea Lion costs 1,000 prestige points to undertake, or maybe a Battle of Britain has to be fought and won to proceed (and this could be an optional battle if player wants to avoid burning through is air units to do). Regular gameplay should not often involve the Germans crossing the Atlantic or the Japanese invading Australia. Sometimes it is challenging to play the losing side late in the war, to be the Japanese trying to hinder the Allied buildup in Leyte Gulf or the Germans trying one last offensive in the Battle of the Bulge. Axis victory should be mostly build around kicking butt early on and outlasting the Allied close in later on, and not "Panzers in Nevada, cruising to the West Coast."

12) Leit motif music, where certain actions start a brief musical score. I remember "Great Naval Battles" and every time I changed my task force direction, this music played and it gave the feeling like I had made some critical decision or something, was pretty cool. Moving a panzer unit ought to set off the PanzerLied score. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEIm3pe5wbA There are other great musical scores, and they don't have to play continously, just on and off for atmosphere.

13) Campaign tree scenarios should not be too numerous nor too few. Some of the $5 expansion packs went on and on and on with endless petty battles.

grozny
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:08 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by grozny » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:28 am

First - thanks for the game, I am still playing it and collected all DLCs.

1. Better AI. AI should not send arty first and heavy armor last. It should be able to combine arms - soften with arty first, then bomb, then attack - right now it's usually other way around. BTW, I don't care about multiplayer (except PBEM or hot-seat) - so improved AI is critical for me. Deep learning all the rage now - try feeding maps+forces to DP and pick best outcome.

2. Better pathfinding for user units. Right now there are no means to set waypoints. It always a straight (geodesic in hex space) line. At least one waypoint, so I could arc a geodesic the way I want. E.g. ctrl-left-click sets a waypoint, shift-left-click - clears.

3. Better fog of war. When unit is detected at far range, it could be dimmed and to strength might be added ? to indicate uncertainty. Even exact unit type could be uncertain. Ability to camouflage one unit to another could add depth - ambushes with AT are weak in PzCorp.

4. Assignable Leaders (possibly as separate HQ unit) with customizable characters/traits/awards for actions - which player could develop over campaign(s). Let player pick from a list of available awards when unit gained certain experience/# of kills over scenario or in campaign, maybe let it accumulate for even better traits etc.). Combined-arms battlegroups with HQs. Also, I second that veteran units should not be killed outright - even T-70 with experience scored Tiger kills.

5. 3D is cool - LOS could be clearly portrayed and tied to terrain. Giving good options for freezing animations, visual effects, low-res meshes and textures would help with low-end HW (e.g. ultrabooks on the go)

6. Weather - local weather (e.g. fog/rain only in certain areas of map).

7. More flexibility with game engine settings. Enable/disable undo after unit is deselected, fine-grain control over dice (right now it's just 3 positions). Maybe allow plugging in custom formula or even mods for calculating damage/whole AI mod? I like to experiment with extreme set-up (e.g. 1 strong unit vs many weak, no-loss battles, fastest possible win etc.) and in PzCorp it's somewhat difficult to try alternatives. Stopping AI mid-turn (to restart scenario or to load a save) would be huge for me (I like experimenting - did I mention that? And 90% of time experiment ends in flop :mrgreen: )

8. Improved game autosaves. Autosave at the beginning of the turn is almost useless, autosave is more valuable to me at the end of my turn. Saving games into subfolders - right now game hangs when >~100s of saves from various scenarios and campaigns are present.

...
:shock: and I'm not done... :P

KeldorKatarn
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1248
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2012 2:22 am

Re: Suggestions, wishlist and ideas for Panzer Corps 2 gamep

Post by KeldorKatarn » Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:50 am

grozny wrote:LOS could be clearly portrayed and tied to terrain. Giving good options for freezing animations, visual effects, low-res meshes and textures would help with low-end HW (e.g. ultrabooks on the go)
While I agree with most of the points, if THIS one comes, I'll go. I do NOT want to see crap like line of sight, armor facing and other stuff that might make sense on a tactical level but makes absolutely ZERO sense on the level of abstraction that Panzer Corps is at. Bataillons and Regiments don't have line of sight. They're spread out over kilometers. None of that makes any sense and if PzC2 is using 3D to act as if a Panzer on the map was really a Panzer while in reality it represents thousands of fighting men, then I'm not interested. it's nice to have units that look historical simply for the coolness factor but I do NOT want a TIger on the map act as if it was an individual Tiger. That's where I draw the line.

I also do NOT want to see low-res stuff for low end hardware. That is NOT ok. This game should look fine on everys single hardware it runs on. If that cannot be achieved, stay the hell away from 3D. It can't be that low end users pay the prize of crappy graphics just so high end users can enjoy flashy stuff that adds absolutely nothing to the gameplay. If that happens, I will also not be a buyer, despite having a high end PC. I do not want to see this happen. Strategy gamers are people who are not graphics crazy, who enjoy a historically accurate battlefield a lot more than flashy explosions and usually have lowe end stuff and want to be able to play a turn or two on their tablet while in a hotel or on vacation. If that can't be done without the Tiger looking like ass, give me well rendered sprites instead. Modern engines can run shaders and lighting on 2D sprites as well so I see absolutely no reason why this needs to be 3D if it can't be done on every hardware in the same way.

This is exactly what I fear will happen. Useless high poly crap that nobody needs, causes slowdowns or memory issues on low end hardware for zero advantage but flashy animations that everbody will turn off anyway after the first our of playing and never turn them on again because they take too much time and you've already seen them all. it's pointless. it's just for having something to show off in a video for a gaming conference and after that nobody gives a crap.

Stay true to what PzC is. It's a board game. it's high level abstraction and not World of Tanks.
Panzer Corps - Dossier Tool - http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=121&t=39151
Epic Chronological Let's Play - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLb_qLVfViPTbD7C7gN8cVOxG_mEgDYO91

Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps 2”