prestige-39 campaign

PC : Turn based WW2 goodness in the mold of Panzer General. This promises to be a true classic!

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Panzer Corps Moderators, Panzer Corps Design

blacknight13
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:33 pm

prestige-39 campaign

Post by blacknight13 » Sun Nov 06, 2011 1:47 pm

is it just me or is the prestige awarded at the end of scenarios too low? i just get a decisive victory at the end of the kampisoka forest and my forces were pretty chewed up...i dont even have enough prestige to bring my forces up to regular strength heading into modlin...i'm playing on colonel level...i dont think the germans had this much trouble with poland

VPaulus
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 7998
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:33 pm
Location: Portugal

Post by VPaulus » Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:01 pm

It's a question of adapting your tactics to the new AI in the DLC.
The AI is more challenging, IMO.
If you find it too hard, you can always play at other difficult level.

Shrike
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2011 8:44 pm
Location: Belgium

Post by Shrike » Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:12 pm

Besides, bringing your forces up to strength can be done for "free" between scenarios, provided you accept the drop in experience.

rezaf
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:27 pm

Post by rezaf » Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:15 pm

Awarded prestige IS very low, regardless of adaptation to the AI.
Thing is, if you run into a chain of bad random numbers, this can really be a kick in the guts now.

That said, it didn't happen to me. I finished the '39 DLC with a little more than 1000 prestige.
Sometimes I had to wait a bit before I could upgrade things, and my Infantry is still running on Opel Blitzes, but there aren't that many opportinities to get new gear in '39 anyway, so it wasn't that constraining.
This will definately call for improved balancing in the later war DLCs, when the contrast to Panzer General comes into full swing and everything costs a friggin fortune.

Edit: About Shrike's comment, of course he' right. I like quite a few things of the style things are done in the DLCs, but they really highlight the problem of PzCs XP system, namely that it's hardly worth bothering despite costing a fortune.
I wonder what the game would play like if XP was a LOT harder to attain (i.e. it'd take longer for stars to build up), but in turn Elite Replacements would be worth it because those nurtured units would live up to the "Elite" part, able to swing the tide of battle single-handedly and HARD to kill off.
_____
rezaf

VPaulus
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 7998
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:33 pm
Location: Portugal

Post by VPaulus » Sun Nov 06, 2011 2:58 pm

rezaf wrote:About Shrike's comment, of course he' right. I like quite a few things of the style things are done in the DLCs, but they really highlight the problem of PzCs XP system, namely that it's hardly worth bothering despite costing a fortune.
This question was raised during beta DLC by Kerensky, and there were some nice suggestions.
But it's a sensible area, and most people don't want many changes.
I already said, your voice matters rezaf, and you should apply for beta.

alex0809
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 9:41 am

Post by alex0809 » Sun Nov 06, 2011 4:44 pm

I'd say in the DLC it depends even more on knowledge of the map than in the main GC. I can't say if it's a good thing or a bad thing but I don't have a problem with it ;)
For example: there are missions without a single airplane -> no need for any fighter/aa unit; or there's this one mission where the three auxiliary units have to survive - if you know that there will be a few AT guns coming from Fog of War soon you can just send some Stukas, but knowing it in the first playthrough is impossible. So, if (like me) you don't like losing units and replay a scenario if it goes bad, then the DLC is really easy. I am at the last mission now and have over 5k prestige remaining (normal dificulty).

Ranta
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 6:35 am

Post by Ranta » Sun Nov 06, 2011 5:50 pm

though I am reloading scenarios every now and then, I think the most scenarios are well designed, not to easy/hard but the prestige is to high, I got some 3-4k left in the last scenario on fm settings.

rezaf
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:27 pm

Post by rezaf » Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:03 pm

Ranta wrote:though I am reloading scenarios every now and then, I think the most scenarios are well designed, not to easy/hard but the prestige is to high, I got some 3-4k left in the last scenario on fm settings.
There were crazy guys (no offense) like you in the original campaign as well, raking up prestige in the thousands while was barely surviving on breadcrumbs.
So for me, prestige is about ideal in the DLC, and I hope future DLCs will be balanced along the same lines.

But maybe another checkbox could be added to the difficulty settings when starting a new campaign?
[x] Weather. [x] Supply. [x] Fog of War. [x] Ebenezer Scrooge.
_____
rezaf

rezaf
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:27 pm

Post by rezaf » Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:35 pm

VPaulus wrote:This question was raised during beta DLC by Kerensky, and there were some nice suggestions.
But it's a sensible area, and most people don't want many changes.
I already said, your voice matters rezaf, and you should apply for beta.
What would my humble voice mean if Kerensky can't make his heard? (Freely quoting Civ2: My words are backed by Moderator power!)
But maybe I'll join the beta for the next DLCs, we'll see.

I just read El_Condoro's (another moderator now) old thread about too little XP impact, and his word appearantly didn't garner much results either...

First of all, I'll be running a few tests with these settings modded. I'm thinking about 3/100 instead of 1/10, with drastically reduced XP growth rates.
_____
rezaf

VPaulus
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 7998
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 8:33 pm
Location: Portugal

Post by VPaulus » Sun Nov 06, 2011 6:59 pm

rezaf wrote:What would my humble voice mean if Kerensky can't make his heard? (Freely quoting Civ2: My words are backed by Moderator power!)
But maybe I'll join the beta for the next DLCs, we'll see.
Kerensky is heard, I'm sure. This was raised for future DLC. I might not agree with you all the times, but you articulate well your ideas, IMO.
Besides 3 is greater than 2.

There are other forum members that would like to see also in the beta. Not that I'm complaining about the quality of the beta testers. They have been doing a great job, and Slitherine and The Lordz, must be thankful to them.
Only some times some question are raised, and some voices should be also present, to give their opinion.

deducter
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1126
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:00 pm

Post by deducter » Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:16 pm

Part of the issue with having experience be very powerful is that to balance it properly, the AI units must be given high experience to counterbalance your units in late scenarios. That makes it so that you can't afford to lose any of your 4-5 star units, and force you to restart.

I personally think that the experience is a bit weak, but if you factor in the ability to overstrength (esp. artillery, bombers, air units) it makes a big difference.

You also do have the option to adjust the EXP bonus yourself, like you said, and play with those settings. But changing the balance in the base game should not be undertaken lightly.

Longasc
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1230
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:38 pm

Post by Longasc » Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:16 pm

The issue with too much / too little Prestige is difficult.

Please think about that: When I ran out of Prestige, it was due to me spending Prestige generously for ELITE replacements.
Don't do that in Poland. You will get used to NOT using elite replacements all the time and suddenly you are back to having a generous Prestige buffer.

We have a difficult issue here:
39,40,41,42,43,44,45 and who says that some years might not have 2 DLCs... -> the imported core units and Prestige will become an extreme problem to balance.

Take this in mind, not being too generous early on isn't the worst choice given this lengthy campaign chain.


We also might have to get used to something else: From 1943 on Germany wasn't invading anymore. The gameplay will change, and this will be a dramatic change to defense and being outnumbered and facing equal if not better enemy equipment.

Longasc
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1230
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 6:38 pm

Post by Longasc » Sun Nov 06, 2011 7:18 pm

P.S. no worries, playing through the 1939 and 1940 campaign will make you a much better player. Give you a stimulus to improve and adapt new strategies.
That's good design IMO.

Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 5428
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky » Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:18 pm

In terms of prestige... it's a very tricky situation. Everyone has the same prestige, but some are really struggling and at the same time other people are really overflowing with extra prestige. We have some ideas for handling this in the future, but for the moment I would follow these recommendations if you are struggling with prestige:

1. Ease up on the elite reinforcement button and switch to regulars.
2. Go for minor victories instead of pushing your forces for decisive victory every time. Marginal victories are now much easier to acquire, and you can afford to move at a slower/more cautious pace that is highly conducive to preserving your core units.
3. Try a lower difficulty setting. There's no shame in this, that's what they are there for. And for those people with too MUCH prestige asking for us to implement less... Same goes for you. Try a harder difficulty setting! :twisted:
4. Throw a cheat out there. Bottom line this is a game and you should be having fun. If you need an injection of 2000 prestige to make the game more fun, then by all means. :)

Oh and by the way:
viewtopic.php?t=23695&highlight=experience

Kerensky
Content Designer
Content Designer
Posts: 5428
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:12 am

Post by Kerensky » Sun Nov 06, 2011 10:28 pm

deducter wrote:Part of the issue with having experience be very powerful is that to balance it properly, the AI units must be given high experience to counterbalance your units in late scenarios. That makes it so that you can't afford to lose any of your 4-5 star units, and force you to restart.

I personally think that the experience is a bit weak, but if you factor in the ability to overstrength (esp. artillery, bombers, air units) it makes a big difference.

You also do have the option to adjust the EXP bonus yourself, like you said, and play with those settings. But changing the balance in the base game should not be undertaken lightly.
This also is one of the important, long term problems we have to address.
If experience gain rate is drastically... it makes units irreplaceable. If you cannot afford to lose units, you will be almost forced to load/save cheat to prevent units from being lost. If it takes a full campaign (11 scenarios) to raise a unit from 0 to... 300 experience. And that unit can easily die multiple times during a single scenario if you're not careful, then we have a snowball problem. A player who is constantly losing units has a harder and harder time keeping up while a player who isn't losing units has a easier and easier time going into the future. Provided they also continue to not lose units.

With experience somewhat marginalized and quick to acquire, people are afforded the opportunity to 'catch up' very quickly. Not to mention all units newly purchased start at 0 exp, so every new purchase must also 'catch up' to the rest of the core. Which by 1941, is hovering between 150 and 300 experience on each unit.

And even if experience is marginalized, I still want experience. For the bonuses? Nah, we all know they're nice but not that great. It's all about the overstrength! :twisted:
A 14 strength unit is a LOT better at dealing damage and surviving damage than a 10 strength unit.
The chances for a 10 strength unit to cripple or 1 shot another 10 strength unit is very low. The amount of damage a 15 strength unit can potentially deal out...well that's 50% more dice being thrown, that's a big deal!

rezaf
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:27 pm

Post by rezaf » Mon Nov 07, 2011 7:05 am

Well, a couple of points.

The obvious solution to the problem with a need for experienced units would be to allow players to buy XP stars, or to make units you purchase in a given DLC a certain minimum experience. The individual scenarios even have a setting for that - except it isn't used when purchasing units for your core. It should be.

Losing a highly experienced unit SHOULD be painful - but also not too common, unless you take insane risks. You know that other game Panzer Corps was inspired by? Panzer General? It worked just like that.
This consideration should also play a role when designing scenarios - the '39 campaign has a few offenders, like the very first mission and especially the skirmish with the Soviets.
Anyway, giving newly purchased units during a campaign the minimum-XP defined in the scenario settings totally makes sense AND conventiently solves the issue of players losing their experienced troops falling behind in the power curve. These players will then be able to cope with the opposition in a given mission, but will not have the edge of the highly experienced units until they have nurtured them to more XP again - which will be challenging, but not THAT hard if starting from the scenario XP minimums.

The reflex to counter these units by especially highly experienced enemy units is TOTALLY missing the point, imo. The whole idea of making experience MATTER would be to allow a player willing to expend the prestige and keep units alive to possibly have troops that are ahead of the power curve - thus able to deal with the opposition better and make it easier to achieve a DV. The scenarios should NOT be designed with a certain amount of highly experienced player units in mind.
Enemy units DO have >0 experience in later maps, so they WILL be able to cope with a moderately experienced player force, only the ELITE of the player will (and should) outrank them. The AI already has time on it's side - missions have a time limit, sometimes a very strict one. Also, the AI has the numbers on it's side.
Elite units don't need to be countered, they're supposed to give players a possibility to counter those advantages, to a degree.

The marginalized effect of XP is a completely different design direction. I disagree with the idea behind it, BUT I could see the reasoning and get on board with it if it was at least implemented consequently. To embrace it, elite reinforcements should be a LOT cheaper. One of the very first suggestions I was given on this board was to not invest in Elite replacements, and I've since seen the advice being given to many other players. Well, guess what, I think it is given because they are NOT WORTH IT. Which means, they need to be balanced better. Either by increasing the effect of XP OR by making them considerably cheaper.

Also, about overstrength, I agree that it's very useful, but the problem with it is that when you usually face the greatest obstacles in any given mission - at it's end - you have already lost the majority of your overstrength and usually tight turn limits will NOT allow you to reinforce to overstrength before the final push.

I'll leave it at that for now.
_____
rezaf

impar
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 8:53 am
Location: Portugal

Post by impar » Mon Nov 07, 2011 12:23 pm

I havent finished the 39 GC yet, but in the [spoiler]soviet wargame[/spoiler] I have 6-7000 prestige to spend, FM difficulty level.
Of course, havent spent prestige in elites and disbanded units to get other units, even if in the same class:
viewtopic.php?t=28953
And I think I only got DVs.

Finishing this DLC am thinking on re-playing it spending prestige in elites only to see the difference.

impar
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 8:53 am
Location: Portugal

Post by impar » Mon Nov 07, 2011 12:27 pm

rezaf wrote:Also, about overstrength, I agree that it's very useful, but the problem with it is that when you usually face the greatest obstacles in any given mission - at it's end - you have already lost the majority of your overstrength and usually tight turn limits will NOT allow you to reinforce to overstrength before the final push.
The advantage of overstrengthening a unit is that it would need less reinforcements during the scenario and reach the final objectives faster.

rezaf
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1487
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 3:27 pm

Post by rezaf » Mon Nov 07, 2011 12:35 pm

impar wrote:I havent finished the 39 GC yet, but in the [spoiler]soviet wargame[/spoiler] I have 6-7000 prestige to spend, FM difficulty level.
Heck, how is that even possible? Have you EVER reinforced any unit?
_____
rezaf

impar
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Posts: 452
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2011 8:53 am
Location: Portugal

Post by impar » Mon Nov 07, 2011 12:40 pm

rezaf wrote:
impar wrote:I havent finished the 39 GC yet, but in the [spoiler]soviet wargame[/spoiler] I have 6-7000 prestige to spend, FM difficulty level.
Heck, how is that even possible? Have you EVER reinforced any unit?
Explained above.
Only have 3 pionieres, 2 SE Gebirgsjagers, 4 Pz38(t), 4 Sturmpanzers, 3 Stukas, 2 Bf109 and a 222 recon.

PS: Oh, and the captured polish artillery piece.

Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Corps”