Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Moderator: Panzer Corps 2 Moderators
Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Putting this here to discuss
Tournament threats are busy with more important issues.
Still, there are two things still in effect that feel wrong to some
---
1) CONQUERING CITIES & BUILDING UNITS /wo DOWNTIME
You can still build units directly when taking a city. So you storm in and buy an arty to back up the unit that just took the city this turn.
You can even kick a unit out, drive a recon in, move it out again and put pioneers in to seal the deal.
How does this make any sense in context of all other possible actions.
Also there is no buying/placing restriction even if an enemy unit is directly adjacent to the city.
This feels and plays wrong in sense of reality and gameflow:
You drive up to a city that has only a small garrison, put 2 units next to it - siege next turn.
Next turn starts: Oh... now that city spawned pioneers, arty, aa and a nice tank to boot and the garrison is sitting in the forrest to outflank my troops.
This is simply impossible and is double problematic with paras.
---
2) PARAS
Arguably paras are still a pita on bigger maps. They still can do more than they should be able to. Dropping, running, taking airfield, taking off again
They demand way more attention from the defender then they cost in the first place and are almost impossible to contain if weather is in favor of para player.
In reality it was the opposite - they were a waste of precious men and ressources for the attacker.
Paras without support were doomed behind enemy lines - they got reported by civilians, couldn't find their equip or it fell in the hands of the enemy and were easily picked off by regular security forces. Also they simply wouldn't get supplied over great distances. In the game they operate and run around as if there is no difference between home and enemy territory.
This is ok in sense of singleplayer. Let the player have some fun - often the maps anticipate an action like this.
MP is a little bit different in that regard.
A simple fix would be to increase the cost in MP dramatically - so the risk/use ratio is more in line with reality
---
What's your impression?
Feel free to bring up other points that could affect competitive MP
Tournament threats are busy with more important issues.
Still, there are two things still in effect that feel wrong to some
---
1) CONQUERING CITIES & BUILDING UNITS /wo DOWNTIME
You can still build units directly when taking a city. So you storm in and buy an arty to back up the unit that just took the city this turn.
You can even kick a unit out, drive a recon in, move it out again and put pioneers in to seal the deal.
How does this make any sense in context of all other possible actions.
Also there is no buying/placing restriction even if an enemy unit is directly adjacent to the city.
This feels and plays wrong in sense of reality and gameflow:
You drive up to a city that has only a small garrison, put 2 units next to it - siege next turn.
Next turn starts: Oh... now that city spawned pioneers, arty, aa and a nice tank to boot and the garrison is sitting in the forrest to outflank my troops.
This is simply impossible and is double problematic with paras.
---
2) PARAS
Arguably paras are still a pita on bigger maps. They still can do more than they should be able to. Dropping, running, taking airfield, taking off again
They demand way more attention from the defender then they cost in the first place and are almost impossible to contain if weather is in favor of para player.
In reality it was the opposite - they were a waste of precious men and ressources for the attacker.
Paras without support were doomed behind enemy lines - they got reported by civilians, couldn't find their equip or it fell in the hands of the enemy and were easily picked off by regular security forces. Also they simply wouldn't get supplied over great distances. In the game they operate and run around as if there is no difference between home and enemy territory.
This is ok in sense of singleplayer. Let the player have some fun - often the maps anticipate an action like this.
MP is a little bit different in that regard.
A simple fix would be to increase the cost in MP dramatically - so the risk/use ratio is more in line with reality
---
What's your impression?
Feel free to bring up other points that could affect competitive MP
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
I 100% agree with both things.
1) CONQUERING CITIES & BUILDING UNITS /wo DOWNTIME
This is so silly. It is so unrealistic and gamey. You guys remember the battle of Stalingrad? Why didn't the Germans just instantly deploy fresh troops there the moment they took it ? DUH! Silly Germans
Simple solution: Force a 1 turn down time between capture and the ability to purchase
2) PARAS
Still broken, still cost too many resources for the defender to prevent. Para are still unrealistic and gamey. Every airfield you have needs to have a cheap bridge engineer to stop the same turn drop for these paras.
If paras are so good, why did Operation Market Garden fail so horribly?
Simple solution: Make paras cost more
1) CONQUERING CITIES & BUILDING UNITS /wo DOWNTIME
This is so silly. It is so unrealistic and gamey. You guys remember the battle of Stalingrad? Why didn't the Germans just instantly deploy fresh troops there the moment they took it ? DUH! Silly Germans
Simple solution: Force a 1 turn down time between capture and the ability to purchase
2) PARAS
Still broken, still cost too many resources for the defender to prevent. Para are still unrealistic and gamey. Every airfield you have needs to have a cheap bridge engineer to stop the same turn drop for these paras.
If paras are so good, why did Operation Market Garden fail so horribly?
Simple solution: Make paras cost more
-
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:55 am
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Bumping this thread.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Aiming for realism is a sure way to remove the fun out of the game. All the para problems you mentioned can be solved with proper scouting and foreseeing. Paratroopers make the game more dynamic and add a good layer of strategy.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
You have completely misunderstood the reason of failure of Market Garden..If paras are so good, why did Operation Market Garden fail so horribly?
It wasnt the Paras fault, it was the slow progress of the ground forces that caused the failure
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
SirAllan,
You have completely misunderstood the reason for this post.
The reason was to shine the light on game imbalance and to promote realism over gaming tactics.
However I still stand by my statement. Para are not good enough by themselves and is a major reason why Operation Market Garden fail so horribly. If Para were good enough by themselves the "slow progress" of the ground forces would not be a determining factor, simple as that. This is a problem of this game, paras are good enough by themselves.
and to Folklore, really man?
"All the para problems you mentioned can be solved with proper scouting and foreseeing"
You are actually on my side but you don't see you are making my point for me
why do I have to spend and dedicate so many resources to "proper scouting and foreseeing" just to prevent a gamey paradrop? You do realize air transports have 13 hex movement? You expect me to dedicated enough resources to scout 13 hexes in every direction? Jesus man does money grow on trees where you are from?
You have completely misunderstood the reason for this post.
The reason was to shine the light on game imbalance and to promote realism over gaming tactics.
However I still stand by my statement. Para are not good enough by themselves and is a major reason why Operation Market Garden fail so horribly. If Para were good enough by themselves the "slow progress" of the ground forces would not be a determining factor, simple as that. This is a problem of this game, paras are good enough by themselves.
and to Folklore, really man?
"All the para problems you mentioned can be solved with proper scouting and foreseeing"
You are actually on my side but you don't see you are making my point for me
why do I have to spend and dedicate so many resources to "proper scouting and foreseeing" just to prevent a gamey paradrop? You do realize air transports have 13 hex movement? You expect me to dedicated enough resources to scout 13 hexes in every direction? Jesus man does money grow on trees where you are from?
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
One single recon plane costs 50 prestige. Split it in 2 and you pretty much see half a map.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Caveat: I don't have Pz2 yet (hopefully next week) - so take the following with a grain of salt:
Maybe the answer is to only let them do one jump per scenario?
Maybe have two types of transports: cargo & combat
Transport: move a unit from friendly airport to friendly airport - can be used and reused
Combat: parachute jump - one and done for the scenario.
If you want a historical content - my dad's outfit (507 PIR) did both. Combat jump for Normandy and a air transport from England to France to join Battle of the Bulge.
As for recently captured cities generating replacements: yeah, I don't like that either
Maybe the answer is to only let them do one jump per scenario?
Maybe have two types of transports: cargo & combat
Transport: move a unit from friendly airport to friendly airport - can be used and reused
Combat: parachute jump - one and done for the scenario.
If you want a historical content - my dad's outfit (507 PIR) did both. Combat jump for Normandy and a air transport from England to France to join Battle of the Bulge.
As for recently captured cities generating replacements: yeah, I don't like that either
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
no I havnt misunderstood it at all - it was a comment to you using market garden as an argument for changing the game mechanics.
You are still wrong though about market garden, but thats another story
You are still wrong though about market garden, but thats another story
-
- Corporal - Strongpoint
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2019 11:18 am
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
I agree to both points.
1. We need 1 turn cool down for conquered hexes before buying. And also adjacent enemy to a city hex should prevent buying. Same as in PC1, right?
2. Dropping para should consume the action point. I think this should fix everything. No more capture airfield and fly again crap. But the threat of capturing hexes behind the lines will still be there.
1. We need 1 turn cool down for conquered hexes before buying. And also adjacent enemy to a city hex should prevent buying. Same as in PC1, right?
2. Dropping para should consume the action point. I think this should fix everything. No more capture airfield and fly again crap. But the threat of capturing hexes behind the lines will still be there.
-
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:55 am
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Also regular infantry in air transports have the same turn move/drop ability over an opponent's airfield. A player can fly troops over AA guns in range of the particular airfield and they're powerless to fight back. You can safely fly troops onto an opponent's airfield even with their fighters stationed there. The rule should be: move, NEXT TURN, then drop.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
. . .
A player can fly troops over AA guns in range of the particular airfield and they're powerless to fight back.
. . .
[/quote]
An AA on the airfield solves this issue.
A player can fly troops over AA guns in range of the particular airfield and they're powerless to fight back.
. . .
[/quote]
An AA on the airfield solves this issue.
There comes a time on every project when it is time to shoot the engineer and ship the damn thing.
-
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:55 am
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
This system turns the number of airfields you have into a liability as you're forced to account for them with core slots and prestige to prevent what should be an unrealistic move. Realistically, fighters would have a chance to intercept spotted enemy transports, especially without escorts, and AA within range would be able to fire on them. The rules in the first game (move, wait a turn, then land) were ideal in this aspect.
Are there instances during the war in which troops were flown behind enemy lines without escorts, landed directly onto enemy airstrips, and disembarked without a consequence? This is not likely or practical given the risks.
Last edited by ChristianC on Tue Nov 09, 2021 12:50 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
With the new game update those are the rules, except for AO DLCs.ChristianC wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 11:15 pm . . . The rules in the first game (move, wait a turn, then land) were ideal in this aspect.
Unless one edits the main rules file.
I have heard that during the early Cold War US [spy] aircraft would circle rural emergency airfields in China and if not shot at, would land, refuel, and the peasants would give them food. Not that the CCP knew that it was happening.ChristianC wrote: Are there instances during the war in which troops were flown behind enemy lines without escorts, landed directly onto enemy airstrips, and disembarked without a consequence? This is not likely or practical given the risks.
Whether the story is true I don't know.
Note: This is not to imply the peasants supported the US over the CCP, but were just being friendly to strangers.
There comes a time on every project when it is time to shoot the engineer and ship the damn thing.
-
- Captain - Heavy Cruiser
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 4:26 pm
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
I think that story is from the Doolittle Raid during WWII. They did planned to land and refuel at Chinese airbases after the raid, and many crews were rescued by local resistance and civilians, later made it back to the US.dalfrede wrote: ↑Tue Nov 09, 2021 12:08 am
I have heard that during the early Cold War US [spy] aircraft would circle rural emergency airfields in China and if not shot at, would land, refuel, and the peasants would give them food. Not that the CCP knew that it was happening.
Whether the story is true I don't know.
Note: This is not to imply the peasants supported the US over the CCP, but were just being friendly to strangers.
In the Cold War era, even peasants knows that Americans are enemies, due to the Korean War and their air raid on Chinese territory.
-
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2019 11:55 am
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
I have the latest version (v1.02.01) and air transports with regular infantry as well as paratroopers are able to move and land onto an opponent's airfield in one move.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Thank you CrisitianC. You have put well into words the problems Para cause. You have clearly brought to light how unpractical and unrealistic para troopers are currently. How the para troopers in previous game (Panzer corps 1) was ideal.ChristianC wrote: ↑Mon Nov 08, 2021 11:15 pmThis system turns the number of airfields you have into a liability as you're forced to account for them with core slots and prestige to prevent what should be an unrealistic move. Realistically, fighters would have a chance to intercept spotted enemy transports, especially without escorts, and AA within range would be able to fire on them. The rules in the first game (move, wait a turn, then land) were ideal in this aspect.
Are there instances during the war in which troops were flown behind enemy lines without escorts, landed directly onto enemy airstrips, and disembarked without a consequence? This is not likely or practical given the risks.
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
Well, for the first time (relating to the previous tournament and actual one WCT) I found the situation where player (if you want to defend yourself, you are welcome @royalcid) is playing only one game from the mirrors. The input is easy- on map Moscow41 right now playing as Soviets you gathering the points from the beginning, as Germans do not. I stopped right now on turn 3 as Germans.The mirrored game, where i should play as Soviets even didn;t start, so evetually i do not gather points.
The player is active, I tried to communicate with him, but it looks like intentional actions, where in one game we have already 3 turns played and in second game none. IMO very assholic playstyle
The player is active, I tried to communicate with him, but it looks like intentional actions, where in one game we have already 3 turns played and in second game none. IMO very assholic playstyle
- Attachments
-
- asshole.JPG (15.45 KiB) Viewed 1874 times
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
I agree totally, these things should be changed, when they ever find the time for!!!Lifever wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 1:16 pm Putting this here to discuss
Tournament threats are busy with more important issues.
Still, there are two things still in effect that feel wrong to some
---
1) CONQUERING CITIES & BUILDING UNITS /wo DOWNTIME
You can still build units directly when taking a city. So you storm in and buy an arty to back up the unit that just took the city this turn.
You can even kick a unit out, drive a recon in, move it out again and put pioneers in to seal the deal.
How does this make any sense in context of all other possible actions.
Also there is no buying/placing restriction even if an enemy unit is directly adjacent to the city.
This feels and plays wrong in sense of reality and gameflow:
You drive up to a city that has only a small garrison, put 2 units next to it - siege next turn.
Next turn starts: Oh... now that city spawned pioneers, arty, aa and a nice tank to boot and the garrison is sitting in the forrest to outflank my troops.
This is simply impossible and is double problematic with paras.
---
2) PARAS
Arguably paras are still a pita on bigger maps. They still can do more than they should be able to. Dropping, running, taking airfield, taking off again
They demand way more attention from the defender then they cost in the first place and are almost impossible to contain if weather is in favor of para player.
In reality it was the opposite - they were a waste of precious men and ressources for the attacker.
Paras without support were doomed behind enemy lines - they got reported by civilians, couldn't find their equip or it fell in the hands of the enemy and were easily picked off by regular security forces. Also they simply wouldn't get supplied over great distances. In the game they operate and run around as if there is no difference between home and enemy territory.
This is ok in sense of singleplayer. Let the player have some fun - often the maps anticipate an action like this.
MP is a little bit different in that regard.
A simple fix would be to increase the cost in MP dramatically - so the risk/use ratio is more in line with reality
---
What's your impression?
Feel free to bring up other points that could affect competitive MP
Re: Game Mechanics MP- PzC 2021 WCT related
We prepare something in the sense of a tournament, so I came across some new perspectives. We also took note of ideas here & stumbled across some new (minor!) problems
For now let's stick to a positive - the para problem, which is most efficient solved by the map designer.
Just place "security" (loser units) around the airfield like 5 str. P1s, low tier recons, 8 str inf. Also an occassional bunker does the trick
So we could implement it in some maps that we test for MP use. No upgrading of aux units, so their role is limited
That is an easy fix for our basic needs in MP, so core units of the player can still concentrate on the fighting, not guarding your basic infrastructure.
This is not Age of Panzers, this is Panzer Corps. The action is on the field, not in guarding "facilities to produce units". That is RTS territory
Get an adjutant to take care of homeland security. Frontline Generals have better things to do than "defending airfields far off the battlefield", divide their troops to provide homeland security, etc
That's a different brass entirely
Still para drops without suppression or any penalty + moving feels out of place and out of balance.
Two types of solution with similar result:
Solution A - either get half suppressed, but can run
OR
Solution B - they don't get suppressed but can't run in the turn of the drop.
Solution A would make them less fight ready and easily picked off, but at least they can seek shelter where they see fit.
Solution B would make them land fight ready, but potentially in a bad hex with no chance of moving away.
Both solutions meet the reality of para drops. It has an element of chaos and disarray.
Para drops don't go smooth - not in war
For now let's stick to a positive - the para problem, which is most efficient solved by the map designer.
Just place "security" (loser units) around the airfield like 5 str. P1s, low tier recons, 8 str inf. Also an occassional bunker does the trick
So we could implement it in some maps that we test for MP use. No upgrading of aux units, so their role is limited
That is an easy fix for our basic needs in MP, so core units of the player can still concentrate on the fighting, not guarding your basic infrastructure.
This is not Age of Panzers, this is Panzer Corps. The action is on the field, not in guarding "facilities to produce units". That is RTS territory
Get an adjutant to take care of homeland security. Frontline Generals have better things to do than "defending airfields far off the battlefield", divide their troops to provide homeland security, etc
That's a different brass entirely
Still para drops without suppression or any penalty + moving feels out of place and out of balance.
Two types of solution with similar result:
Solution A - either get half suppressed, but can run
OR
Solution B - they don't get suppressed but can't run in the turn of the drop.
Solution A would make them less fight ready and easily picked off, but at least they can seek shelter where they see fit.
Solution B would make them land fight ready, but potentially in a bad hex with no chance of moving away.
Both solutions meet the reality of para drops. It has an element of chaos and disarray.
Para drops don't go smooth - not in war