Pack of wishes

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

Moderator: Panzer Corps 2 Moderators

Rudankort
FlashBack Games
FlashBack Games
Posts: 2476
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Rudankort » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:18 pm

Razz1 wrote:I agree, please don't make all AT and AA switchable. Not accurate at all.
Was there some fundamental reason why, for example, other heavy AA guns could not be used against tanks like 88mm?

captainjack
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:42 am

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by captainjack » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:44 pm

There's plenty of examples of multi-role AA guns, but also a lot that were used in a single role. The Russian 85 was used in both roles, while the earlier Birch gun was an AA/field gun and would probably have done a reasonable job as an AT gun if issued with a solid shot.

My understanding is that the British 3.7" was occasionally used in an AT role in an emergency, but wasn't well suited to it due to limited depression which hindered direct fire, along with high profile and slow deployment. Additionally, most heavy AA was supposed to be located away from the front lines, and while the 2 pounder was a bit limited, it was better as an AT gun than the PaK37 and fighting tanks with less armour than a Matilda 2 and Churchill so the need was not as great. I suspect the US 90mm was also intended as a single-purpose AA gun, rather than a dual purpose one.

At the smaller sizes there's a lot of reports of 20mm guns being used against ground targets, but since AA roles would require HE shells rather than AP, they'd probably be better suited as direct fire field artillery against soft and lightly armoured targets rather than against proper armoured targets.

So for me, specific AA guns should be allowed a switch to AT or Artillery roles (generally heavy AA to AT and lighter AA to range 1 artillery), but it should be case by case basis and not a general feature of AA guns.

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

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by KeldorKatarn » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:46 pm

Rudankort wrote:
Razz1 wrote:I agree, please don't make all AT and AA switchable. Not accurate at all.
Was there some fundamental reason why, for example, other heavy AA guns could not be used against tanks like 88mm?
Not really. I mean unless the gun simply couldn't be lowered to provide direct fire I don't think there's any reason why a gun couldn't be fired at a tank.
Anti aircraft guns are simply effective because they're very powerful. They are designed to lob a shell to incredible heights so when fired directly they have insane shell velocity. I think any gun would be effective if fired that way, it's just not the primary role. However a lot of those types of weapons were used historically that way.

For examle it is documented that the German Panzer IIs used their 20milimeter very effectively against french heavy tanks. The french crews simply got scared and surrenered. I mean it's kind of understandable. Imagine what that would feel like in a tank with so many impacts coming in in quick succession.
And this was repeated later in the war. The German troops got issued the Flak Drilling and Vierling cannons and they quickly used them to great effect against T34s. The amount of fire those guns produced was VERY effective. Often they didn't really damage the tank but the tanks either surrenderd or retreated. And lots of tracer fire could also scare infantry off. Those flaks had a crazy fire rate.

So there are clearly documented cases of even the low caliber Flak guns being used AND being effective against ground targets.

And in 1940 in France Rommel didn't just fire with 8.8 Flak at the British matildas, he also let the artillery 10.5cm guns open direct fire.
I also know of several cases where American artillery firing in direct fire mode killed some panther tanks and even some and entire King Tiger group was knocked out in 1945 by artillery firing over open sights.

it probably shouldn't be TOO effective but I see no reason why it should not be allowed. It was certainly done if the situation demanded it.

The only restriction would really be the technical one.. if a gun CAN'T be fired at a ground target because it can't be depressed that low for some reason, then yeah, obviously not.

On the other end of the spectrum the Americans often used their Tank Destroyers for fire support and then those fired indirect fire like a Sturmgeschütz or infantry gun. They had pretty good HE shells with similar blast radius to a howitzer while leaving less of a crater so they were used in that role a lot, especially the M18 Hellcat which was fast enough to run with mechanized cavalry and proovide them with fire support.

So more switching is far from being unhistorical. The switched mode shouldn't be overpowered for weapons that were only used in that role in very rare cases but I see no reason to forbid it. The American TDs were probably used more often as artillery than in the role they were intended to play and the German 88 Flak certainly was used a lot in Africa simply because the germans didn't have any other effective guns at the time. The final 88 Pak was designed based on the Flak but it took a long time until it arrived.
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

Rudankort
FlashBack Games
FlashBack Games
Posts: 2476
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Rudankort » Sat Mar 25, 2017 11:51 pm

My line of thinking is that, from gameplay perspective, making all (or most) AA units switchable is:
- consistent
- improves the usefullness of this class

So, if it's not too much of a bend, I think this might be a good option. After all, the player is supposed to be a kind of innovative general (like Rommel), and he could use those units the way other generals did not, provided that the technical capability was there.

Razz1
Panzer Corps Moderator
Panzer Corps Moderator
Posts: 3276
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:49 am
Location: USA

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Razz1 » Sun Mar 26, 2017 12:00 am

Armies were not trained to do both roles AA and AT. Plus they need Ammo.

Also, look at the weight and mobility of the heavy AA's. Look at the 90mm AA unit for the USA. That was way too heavy and no mobility. Same with French 155 GPF, USA 155 mm Long Tom etc..

Theoretically you could move the gun so it pointed Horizontally, but the width of fire is basically zero. You have to have the enemy tank come straight at you in order to kill it. Your not going to move those Artillery units to AT's or AA's and be usable.

I'm really surprised how mobile the 88 was. Remember this was only discovered by Rommel in the desert as a last minute desperate attempt to stop the Allies. It worked but he was injured in the process.

Then that tactic became widely used by the Germans.

If we are talking about 2017 and the weapons we have today. They are multi role and troops are trained.

A visit to a museum will give you great insight as to what a weapon could do. Also, remember the doctrines and training. The role of the tank and Blitzkrieg was new back then. Switchable AA, AT and Art units was not widely used.

Troops riding on T34's in the offensive was a new tactic by the Russians.

The light version of these units were more prone to being multi role. That's why most light AT's AA's and Art are switchable if I can find proven historical reference to it.

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

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by KeldorKatarn » Sun Mar 26, 2017 12:58 am

Razz1 wrote:I'm really surprised how mobile the 88 was. Remember this was only discovered by Rommel in the desert as a last minute desperate attempt to stop the Allies. It worked but he was injured in the process.
That's actually not correct. He used them the first time during the Battle of France in the Battle of Arras where British Matilda tacks nearly overran his Panzer Division. The used a combination of 88s and direct firing 105mm howitzers to stop them. And yes they were bascially shooting at point blank range sine nothing else could stop the Matildas. His tank AND anti tank guns had only 3.7cm guns which were completely ineffective even at close range.

He uised that mix in Africa again because he already knew the 88 could do it and he still didn't have much better guns available otherwise. Is it easy to aim a Flak gun at a tank? of course not. But it has insane shell velocity and not a bad rate of fire considering the caliber of the gun. So if you line a couple of them up in a row and keep shooting you'll eventually hit the enemy or at least drive them off.

Nobody said the AA direct fire should be super effective. After all their sights are not made for this and they usually only fired at close range (which is why direct fire should always be limited to range 0 i.e. the enemy can always shoot back. But I see no reason at all to forbid that switch completely, especially since histroically they absolutely were used multiple times in that role. In fact rapid fire AA was VERY effective late war against T34 units. no tank commander would just keep sitting there after a barrage of rapid fire keeps peppering his rank. ALl kinds of stuff can break on a tank, vision devices, tracks, road wheels, you can get the turret jammed by a projectile getting stuck in the turret ring and all kinds of crap. This WAS absolutely effective and the rapid fire AA was also very effective against enemy infantry. So if the player has these units, let him use them. Of course it'll waste ammo, it'll make the unit unable to provide AA support fire for that turn and it's not as effective as proper anti tank guns. But it's better than having no effective weapon at all...
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

guille1434
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2028
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by guille1434 » Sun Mar 26, 2017 1:04 am

Thanks Alex for reading all the ideas we are posting here!!
Rudankort wrote:
guille1434 wrote:About recon ability of units, I remember two useful traits some air units (not spaceships, but the craft that could fly over planet's surfaces) had in the game "Star General":
Good ideas from Star General. I looked at Pacific General, but I think I forgot about that game. Need to look at it some more.
Oh yes... Good Star General, I even have the original CD carefully kept in a folder... It was a game that I used to play a lot, it was a very good one to me... Its only problem was that when you played on a big map (as I like to do in any game!) the computer I had at that time took a long time to process a turn (I also liked to play with the seven or eight AI controlled factions present in the game universe :shock: ) but in all it was fun for me... I dont know why was this game forgotten so quickly and got so many negative reviews. If possible, anticipating some adventurous modder who wants to make a Star General conversion of PzCorps2, you could consider to allow the definition of special hexes were space transport units can disembark their surface units on the planet surface map. In fact some special hexes which allow to interconnect two maps while in the same scenario... :) May be I am asking too much, but who knows, sometime dreams come true! This feature can also be useful, for example, if you want to have a naval battle scenario in a large sea map with the possibility of assault transport units to disembark its cargo units on islands, which will be shown as smaller different maps, linked to the main one by those disembark-hexes...
Rudankort wrote:
guille1434 wrote:Which brings me to mind: NIGHT TURNS! Make the possibility of adding night turns to scenarios!
I don't know if this will be in the game from 1.0, but in our graphics design we keep this opportunity open.
Thanks Alex! It would be wonderful to give modders that possibility!
Rudankort wrote:
guille1434 wrote:Would it be possible to design a "trait creation" or "trait programming" system, like some scripting language with a limited, game related grammar, basic logical operators, and variable use.
Trait programming would be awesome, but it's not easy to design system which is simple enough to use and powerful at the same time. I'll think about it, and any ideas would be welcome. We may need a separate topic for this.
That would be another real hit!! But I understand it will not be an easy task... Lets hope for the best...

In fact, even if not all of the good ideas presented here will end being implemented in the new game, at least we can learn from the past: there is no need to release a first version of the game optimized only for the European theater of war, and then having to make a new version of it better suited for the Pacific theater... (Just what happened when Panzer general got upgraded to Pacific General to better simulate Pacific War units, tactics, more detailed naval combat rules, etc...). Lets make out of Panzer Corps 2 a basic wargame engine suitable to simulate combat in any theater of war right from the start, we can all learn from the positive aspects of the previous games we used to enjoy so much!

Again, thanks Alex for giving us this space to express ourselves, and thanks also to all the forum members for contributing with some good ideas!

Yrfin
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 518
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:47 am
Location: Behind your backs

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Yrfin » Fri Mar 31, 2017 7:48 am

32. Together with the Editor of scenarios, there has to be an Editor of parameters (units stats, cost of movements and so on).
33. Game's difficulty must be linked not only with prestige and numbers of turns, but also with other parameters of game (deployment, weather conditions, numbers and quality enemy units and so on).
Shoot first. Ask questions later.

Rudankort
FlashBack Games
FlashBack Games
Posts: 2476
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 2:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Rudankort » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:31 am

Yrfin wrote:32. Together with the Editor of scenarios, there has to be an Editor of parameters (units stats, cost of movements and so on).
Good idea!
Yrfin wrote:33. Game's difficulty must be linked not only with prestige and numbers of turns, but also with other parameters of game (deployment, weather conditions, numbers and quality enemy units and so on).
Ideally yes, but different deployment and enemy units may require much more testing to do right. We'll see what we can do.

Yrfin
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 518
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:47 am
Location: Behind your backs

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Yrfin » Sun Apr 02, 2017 2:55 pm

Thanks for answers, Rudankort !
Rudankort wrote:
Yrfin wrote:33. Game's difficulty must be linked not only with prestige and numbers of turns, but also with other parameters of game (deployment, weather conditions, numbers and quality enemy units and so on).
Ideally yes, but different deployment and enemy units may require much more testing to do right. We'll see what we can do.
Just give to players ability to load and test pre-realize Scenarios (Test Portal idea http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 64&t=76735.)


34. Make Campaign more replayable.

Add more Victory conditions AND Victory branches.
In current situation its DV, MV, Loss. Make it like Victory 1,2,3,4 and Loss.
For example, if we have 2 VH: A and B, then Victory conditions must be:
1.Captured A
2.Captured B
3.Captured A+B
4.Captured B+A
5.No captured VH.
Victory branches: 1,2,3,4.
So, for every Victory branches must be set a different next Scenario (different Map or same Map, but with different deployment/enemy forces).
In this case, player can play ONE scenario by FOUR different ways.
Shoot first. Ask questions later.

Yrfin
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 518
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:47 am
Location: Behind your backs

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Yrfin » Wed Apr 05, 2017 9:17 pm

35. Make scenarios with overlapped maps (10 %).

If player don't capture City (VH) on First Scenario, he can capture this City (VH) at Next scenario.
Shoot first. Ask questions later.

Yrfin
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 518
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2016 6:47 am
Location: Behind your backs

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by Yrfin » Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:15 am

36. Balance unit strenght.
Tank unit [10] must be not equal Artillery unit [10] at firepower.
Shoot first. Ask questions later.

codman
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2013 10:54 pm

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by codman » Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:19 pm

Any chance that you could change the current single fighter escort to multiple? At the moment you can get multiple defensive artillery support and it would make sense that the same code "could" be applied to escorting fighters.

Another option would be to integrate multiple units in the same hex. This way you could units with a range of 1 or 0 stacked to together for both defensive and offensive purposes. If this is impossible then perhaps there might be a way to allow a Stug B ( or similar unit ) positioned behind an infantry unit to provide some type of positive attack bonus to the adjacent unit. This could allow units with a range of 1 to better support units who are attacking.

Cod

captainjack
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:42 am

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by captainjack » Mon Sep 18, 2017 4:25 am

Razz1 wrote:He used them the first time during the Battle of France in the Battle of Arras
I've read that the 88 was first used in an AT role in the Spanish Civil war, but Rommel's use in Arras was a more visible bit of quick thinking and in the desert they were very effective. However, a lightweight mobile and versatile dual (or even triple) purpose gun is only rarely good at all of the jobs and will often be a bit sub-standard at all of the roles. However, the 88 was such a big gun that it could be not that great (but this is not that great for an 88mm AT gun) and still be very useful, especially as the next best thing would be either the PaK50 or the Italian 47mm.

Back to the current topics:
I agree two (or mroe) fighters should provide two (or more) sets of defensive fire (preferably each fighter against one attack, rather than all fighters against the first).

Towed AT should have faster entrenchment. AT generally should also provide some defense to adjacent units who are attacked by tanks or other armoured targets. That makes them fit better in their role as defensive weapons. For game balance you'd probably give a slightly better bonus to towed AT (specialist defensive weapons) over SPAT (emergency mobile defence against tank attacks). Ability to convert towed + truck to portee AT for British (2 and 6 pounder) and French forces (25 and possibly 47) would be nice.

Map resizing in editor would be nice, but porbably more important would be cut and paste (so you could take the west half of map X and attach it to the east half of map Y to make a new map overlapping the two). These two functions would allow creation of a master map from which particular areas could be cut and pasted for individual scenarios.

Easier to understand terrain selection (this could be as simple as a list of images and teh corresponding reference code) so you can more easily create entrenchments, create swamps if a dam is broken, create roads, bridges, fix railways. Maybe add a "block" commande that prevents access to a hex or cancels road/rail/river until lcleared by some action (engineer spends two turns adjacent, bridge engineer makes or demolishes the bridge). Same for fortifications (which maybe should be permannet works and field works)

Valentines with same arour as Matilda 1 (which is what they were designed to have).

Ability to have fortification AND base terrain type. Fortified mountains should present a bit more of a challenge than trenches on a plain.

BigRedJuan
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Private First Class - Wehrmacht Inf
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2017 1:15 am

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by BigRedJuan » Wed Sep 27, 2017 2:05 pm

codman wrote:Any chance that you could change the current single fighter escort to multiple? At the moment you can get multiple defensive artillery support and it would make sense that the same code "could" be applied to escorting fighters.
I like your idea, but think that it would be better applied as a trait to individual fighters. An extreme example would be the P-51 versus the ME 163. The P-51 made its bones escorting bombers, while the ME 163 was a rocket interceptor - allowing the ME 163 multiple escort shots doesn't make sense. I think this trait would also give back some utility to lesser used planes like the P-38.

On a related note, I think using switchable roles would be an interesting way to encourage more variety in a corps instead of going with all of the "best" units, and could still be done in a historically accurate way. For example, make planes switchable over airfields, i.e. P-38 from fighter to recon (like the Avro Anson in PC), the P-39 and P-47 to fighter-bombers (increased ground attack, decreased initiative to account for bomb loads reducing maneuverability, lose ability to escort, etc.) This probably creates balancing problems, but I prefer the carrot method of promoting variety as opposed to the stick of the soft cap.

captainjack
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1402
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:42 am

Re: Pack of wishes

Post by captainjack » Tue Oct 03, 2017 1:52 am

BigRedJuan

The current game can accommodate switching at airfields. Create two (or more) versions of the aircraft at the same cost - eg:
Aircraft A = normal bomber version;
Aircraft B = anti shipping version with enhanced NA and spotting.
Aircraft C = single bunker buster bomb carrier with lower speed and worse defence etc.

You can then "upgrade" between versions for free at airfields only, simulating a change of weapons platform which wouldn't be possible mid-mission.
I believe that this is used in Akkula's modern warfare mod.

You could do the same for different fighter roles - eg interceptor is fast, short range, has high ini, high AA, good AD, low ammo. Intent is to dodge escorting fighters (hence need for higher AD) and smash up bombers (hence high AA).
Escort fighter has longer range, lower ini (less critical for escorting), more ammo, normal AA and AD.

Of course, you'd need to price for the most expensive role and for changeover ability.

Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps 2”