Germany Grand Campaign

[GabeKnight]

Oh man, I'm really writing quite much today, but a promise is a promise...
(And it's nice to practice my English from time to time )

So back to "25Dijon": I've tried out the modifications as shown in the screenshot.

Screenshot 30.jpg (356.38 KiB) Viewed 3137 times

Nothing very interesting. Mainly just like all of the official maps are designed: Every town and most of the marked locations were assigned supply. Most of the time I just used the default "10". My consideration was, that the AI may not retreat or guard a "3" supply hex with a tank. After all, I've never understood your quite scarce supply management. If not designed as such, e.g. a defensive scenario, what's wrong with "over-supplying" the player or the AI? This doesn't impede encirclements and the use of strat. bombers. A "10" supply works quite nicely with an encircled fortified position (usually consisting of a few units) to reduce their efficiency but leaving them still capable of moderate defense (as should be). Some bigger positions around VPs may require more supply, of course.

My observations:
- picking the Dijon map to test the annoying behaviour I mentioned was a bad idea. It didn't show that much
- this scenario just needs more turns IMO. I played it twice with different approaches and I still needed exactly 19 turns both times. Granted, I could've used paratroopers to capture the southern most VP, but this being the only feasible approach cannot be what the designer had in mind, right? So I'd recommend adding about 3-4 turns for first time players

Still, by removing the border-supply-hexes (BSH from now on ), some unwanted behaviour, like infantry, AA or even arty leaving its post to "guard" a nearby BSH, vanished. If you allow this question, why the heck did you put the BSH into the scenarios in the first place?

I have already removed the 3 supply points on towns to make it easier to surround and kill un-supplied enemy units.

My observation was about just the opposite, to be honest. Because of the lack of supply these units don't retreat to towns but to the BSH instead. Thus I have to divert units from my main drive to hunt them down some road to the map's edges to destroy them. And this can become quite tiresome and more imortantly time consuming when you have to divert at least two units to kill some stray infantry that keeps repairing themselves all the time on a well covered forest hex. But I have to, because, as said before, otherwise they'll recover and come back to seize supply and victory hexes in the far back. This wouldn't happen without BSH, or at least not that explicit, as I could encircle them to zero supply and thus zero repair. I'd rather they stayed in the towns where the whole of my army is.

Adding to that, the BSH leave my frontline with many holes (e.g. below screenshot, which is not the best example, but you get my point why I'd wish the "5" supply on the top border weren't there ) and thus quite vulnerable to these "stray" units.

Screenshot 27.jpg (562.11 KiB) Viewed 3137 times

In conclusion I'm inclined to say, that the BSH's may not be an overall problem per se, but within many scenarios I've played so far, this can cause quite the frustration and delays - and the tight turn limits don't allow much reasonable latitude that way.

My final recommendations would be:
- remove the BSH altogether, or at least in the "back" and flanks of the players main drive. For example: in "25Dijon" the main drive is constantly southwards, beginning north. So you could remove the BSH in the north completely and most of them at the east and west edges (but this may involve quite some work, I'd imagine, so I don't know)

but more importantly:

- add a few turns to the sceanrio turn limit. On some tough scenarios, at least. And don't forget the new arty and train mechanic! If I'd paid more attention to this issue before, I could help with previous missions, but I don't remember them exactly, sorry. But I 'm going to, from now on

It would be nice to reduce this income by 1 RP for each (enemy and friendly?) unit killed.
I have to ask a grown-up if this is feasible.

- one would have to test this, but it could work as well

So far from me, I hope I could give you some pointers from my point of view on some issues and help to improve this great campaign further and for other players still to come...

[Erik2]

GabeKnight

This is a very useful test. Thank you.
Look like I have to revisit most if not all of the scenarios in the campaign
I haven't decided if I'll move the border supply to objectives only or add selective amounts to villages/towns/cities.

[GabeKnight]

GabeKnight

This is a very useful test. Thank you.
Look like I have to revisit most if not all of the scenarios in the campaign

...you're welcome. But from my perspective, I still owe you.
I've got time on my hands right now, so...

I haven't decided if I'll move the border supply to objectives only or add selective amounts to villages/towns/cities.

But please don't make the "mistake" of adding just one or two "big" supply hexes for the enemy, like you did on some of the "Kokoda Trail" scenarios. Exploiting this with a bold move to capture/encircle/cut-off said hexes early rendered some scenarios useless (of course, if not intended like this).

For now I'll just take an alternate route of "Sea Lion" until the next update and post on as I go.

[Erik2]

I'll use some common sense when I redo the supply locations.

There's a number of things to fix/improve in this campaign. I may wait with the next release until the game itself is patched up.

[steevodeevo]

Probably wise. I and I'm thinking a number of players have reluctantly put the grand campaign on ice pending a game engine update in hope. It fixes the game turn AI freeze.

[Erik2]

Some of the AI freezes are my fault.
I cropped the larger Norwegian maps and a few AI spawned units lost their deploying location on the map edges
This is at least one cause.

[WarHomer]

How do you make the supply planes drop supplies for the paratroopers in "den Haag"-scenario?

[GabeKnight]

Concerning my earlier post about scenario "16Sedan": I get it now. The trigger "capture VP" wouldn't work if the city has no supply and thus no marker.
(This was problably clear to you from the beginning...but it feels like a small breakthrough for me... )

[GabeKnight]

Some of the AI freezes are my fault.
I cropped the larger Norwegian maps and a few AI spawned units lost their deploying location on the map edges
This is at least one cause.

So far, I've just noticed those freezes on some of the "reworked" (e.g. Denmark) maps of yours, too. And have not encountered anything similar during the rest of the campaign since!

[GabeKnight]

"38Brighton"
- the sec. obj. "don't lose paratroopers" may have the same issue as I posted about scn. "14Albert" before (if a core paratrooper would've been killed at some previous scn.), didn't test it though
- with the second wave of units arriving, I'd remove the "core" setting, as by that time, more core-units are not needed IMO (or allow more core deployment instead)
- sec. obj. trigger / "Airstip-2" / Check Hex Owner -> wrong target hex (thus activated too late for me)
- having deployed all CP and WaffenSS-CP, and after my supply ships got several hits, my army was quite undersupplied. If I didn't know about the ports' advantage, it wouldn't have been enough with the reinforcements arriving. It made the sceanario challenging, though
- all three sec. obj. repair bridges triggers: check bridge status are set to "destroyed", thus leaving the obj. completed from the beginning
- suggestion: the reward for repairing the bridges is a non-core tank, but as achieving this objective's possible very late into the scenario only, I'd recommend either a "core" unit or the tank to be spawned somewhere else
- sec. obj. supply dumps: the "Supply-1/2/3" trigger's frequencies are set to "-1"
... meaning I get the (up to 3x) 20RP reward on "any event" (combat, movement, enemy or mine) since successful completion. At scenario's end I had about 32000RP

"39Newick"
- the scenario is undersupplied: 79 wehrmacht-CP + 8 WaffenSS-CP > 81 supply at the moment
- the "capture Uckfield" objective popup has no pic
- because the Event Popup activation of the Uckfield objective is linked within the prim. obj. "Ger Newick" (and "-1" frequency) and with "Capture VP event" trigger activation: I've got the "Uckfield" popop message every time I captured any (marked) city hex
- because of missing sec. obj. there's only a Minor Victory possible? Maybe edit and override the texts. Although I get the game's logic behind this, my victory did NOT feel minor.
- the Waffen-SS core you gave me was a good one this time, finally some reasonable units for them. And I could deploy most of these new units directly on the following scenario. Good thinking!

Thanks, good scenario.

"40Guildford"
- the scenario is undersupplied: 62 wehrmacht-CP + 50 WaffenSS-CP > 110 supply at the moment (minor)
- sec.obj. RN award: commander's assigned to the wehrmacht, but should be to the Kriegsmarine faction instead (makes him unusable otherwise)
- the Portsmouth prim. obj. didn't check, maybe bacause of the check turn / "scenario turn limit" trigger
- in the sec. obj. of the coastal batteries you say: "This is essential before debarking troops to invade Isle of Wight and capture Newport". But I didn't see any implementation other than failing the sec. objectives, if not completed. And I captured Newport way before the coastal guns.
- the Fairey Battle plane near Haslemere did nothing
- the new objectives popup at turn 6 had no picture
- the sec. obj. trigger / Airstrip / both "Check unit near hex" conditions had no target hex specified => no construction group, no airstrip, no major victory
- and maybe you should mention in the obj. tips somewhere, that a 2-hex radius around the airstrip has to be enemy-free
- the turn limit was tight, maybe add a few
- Overall I liked the setup of this one!
- still, beginning to feel like a beta tester of this branch...

[Erik2]

GabeKnight

You know, beta testers get a free campaign after testing is finished

Seriously, thanks for the feedback so far.
My to-do list is growing.

[GabeKnight]

GGC general suggestions/observations:
- I'd really like an armored train in my core forces way earlier, somewhere at the first BK39-40 part of the campaign (Please? )
- Really liked the air exit hexes in the scenarios, wish the devs would put them in the official missions/DLCs also
- Being more attentive to the matter now, the elimination of inland supply and placing them on the border really produces unwanted behaviour, like units leaving strategically important positions, because they're off to a nearby supply hex
- finally plenty of air-CP and waffen-SS-CP (at SeaLion branch) to release a storm of fire on my enemies
- the overall enemy strenght and numbers are almost always quite well balanced, well done

EDIT: It was by error, I guess, but I remember having got two core "construction group" units in an earlier version of the BK campaign once - and I didn't use them in the specified scenario then. And they really came in handy in some of the later missions. I'd recommend to use such super useful units as secondary obj. "rewards" sometimes.

"41Reading"
- sec. obj. Kennet & Thames bridges checked as complete from the beginning
- sec. obj. London bridges cannot be completed
- sec. obj. "occupy and repair br. at Reading" cannot be completed (so I spawned myself an armored train at "43Milton"... if I knew how easy that was, sooner...I've missed those trains... )
- you seriously have to recheck the logic and settings of both the bridge sec. objectives triggers and the "bridge-blow-up"-triggers
- there's often a "check bridge status" check linked to a rail bridge
- is it even possible to repair a railway bridge, once blown??? (engineer -> ponton bridge = road bridge <- or not?)
- the Matador sec. obj. didn't check as complete, possibly because of the unit killed/removed trigger you set as to "remove". maybe "killed" would work.

"42Farnborough"
- everything worked properly this time, finally a major victory again!
suggestions:
- the prim. obj. "free German officers" was checked as failed from the beginning. Maybe set it to "open", instead?
- sec. obj. "Prevent JU52s from escaping": maybe you could add the 8-turn limit description to main text. I mean something like this: "objective2_2_2 = Prevent the captured Ju52s from escaping within 8 turns"
- this time it was a bit too easy. Finished on turn 11/24. I know it's like a mini-bonus-mission, but still could use either more enemy units or less CP for the player, IMO

"43Milton"
- The spawn worked, gave myself the arm. train I "missed" at Reading... I love my armoured train...
- there was a minimal undersupply going on (1-3 points)
- the sec. obj. "capture airfield 2" didn't check, because you linked it to the wrong objective ID (airfield 1). I guess you copied and forgot to adjust
- I've got 42 spec. point for this mission. My guess would be, it's because the "-1" frequency and "Capture VP event" settings within the "Ger airfield-1/2" objective-triggers. So I'll get the "add spec. points" trigger reward every time I capture a marked hex
- sec. obj. capture tanks: I've got the three M2 tanks as reward. Too much, in my opinion. How about one heavy american tank instead? Sherman or something. My core's that massive at this point, can't really use them. At least in my core forces. And .. you forgot the sec. obj. trigger ("set objective state") to update this obj. as completed!
- I think the "British activations" / counter-attack trigger never happened. Looking at the conditions, I'd have to have captured "St. Albans" on turn 4 exactly. I guess it wasn't intended like this and you should change the setting to ">4" turn or similar
- both Fairey Battle planes near "Saffron Walden" did nothing: hover, land, repair and take-off. Sorry, didn't figure out how to check the unit's AI team designations and such in the editor, yet.

"50LondonA"
- seriously? no railroads around London? Oh man, what about my armoured train?

[GabeKnight]

You know, beta testers get a free campaign after testing is finished .

How about placing an armoured train early in the campaign and naming it something like "The GabeBrigade"... j/k

...and here's a screenshot of something I mentioned before: Being around the GGC once, I knew that I could chose an alternate branch around London (Assault/Siege), but I doubt anyone else would notice that there's actually TWO markers:

Screenshot 32.jpg (386.94 KiB) Viewed 2977 times

EDIT: And how about moving this thread to "scenario design"?

[ctskelly]

@Gabeknight, Erik: This is so cool. Awesome. All hail Erik.

I am a super Erik fan. I like his scenarios better than some of the OOB DLCs. I found Panzerkrieg in particular tends to force you into one particular strategy sometimes. Not Erik's offered him money, presents, etc, but he hasn't taken me up on those yet. So at least let me give my deepest thanks for year another new set of games to play.

[Erik2]

A few quick comments.

Air exit hexes as a scenario default was suggested by a player whose moniker escape me right now. It was an excellent idea.

Remember that most of these campaigns scenarios are enhanced convertions/variations of existing PzCorps scenarios/campaigns.
So if British Rail forget to add rails in the london area, I blame the original designer

[w_erewolf]

Hi Erik

I have a problem with scenario 71 Vyazma

https://www.pixeltopic.com/image/unpzvlftccpngm/
The game will not accept that Mozhaysk is under control.
So I will never get the "perfect ending" that lets me continue the campaign.
If I dot the nuke cheat all objectives turns green and major victory in displayed.
But it will not let me continue the campaign either.

[Erik2]

Hi Erik

I have a problem with scenario 71 Vyazma

https://www.pixeltopic.com/image/unpzvlftccpngm/
The game will not accept that Mozhaysk is under control.
So I will never get the "perfect ending" that lets me continue the campaign.
If I dot the nuke cheat all objectives turns green and major victory in displayed.
But it will not let me continue the campaign either.

Vyazma is currently the last scenario in the campaign.
There's an issue in the campaign editor making it impossible to add scenarios due to the large number.
There are number of scenarios that are impossible to display and select in the editor.

[w_erewolf]

Hi Erik

I have a problem with scenario 71 Vyazma

https://www.pixeltopic.com/image/unpzvlftccpngm/
The game will not accept that Mozhaysk is under control.
So I will never get the "perfect ending" that lets me continue the campaign.
If I dot the nuke cheat all objectives turns green and major victory in displayed.
But it will not let me continue the campaign either.

Vyazma is currently the last scenario in the campaign.
There's an issue in the campaign editor making it impossible to add scenarios due to the large number.
There are number of scenarios that are impossible to display and select in the editor.

Ah I see, I tried to finish that level in all kind of ways
But thank you for your answer

[wgferd]

How do you make the supply planes drop supplies for the paratroopers in "den Haag"-scenario?

I second this question.

[Horst]

Air exit hexes as a scenario default was suggested by a player whose moniker escape me right now. It was an excellent idea.

*cough*
Well, I remembered the original OOB campaigns also had such exit points here and there, so it sounded very useful for a fighter-bomber switch-point. I think these exit points are still a little bit unfair compared to airfields as you can repair and return to the battlefield in the same turn.