 |
|
Normandy Patch Update - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Panzer Battles (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=280) +--- Thread: Normandy Patch Update (/showthread.php?tid=69123) |
RE: Normandy Patch Update - Xaver - 02-06-2016 Is possible have a list of fixes-improvements??? at least the critical fixes, thanks and good luck with it. RE: Normandy Patch Update - Strela - 02-06-2016 I want to add that it's a 4 day long weekend here (gotta love Chinese New Year in Singapore!) so I have some time to go back and review everyone's posts. I'm currently working through the Getting Started scenarios and trying to make them more newbie friendly. I'll take full responsibility for the issues seen to date. I did these myself in the last two weeks before release and they obviously needed more polish. Probably, the biggest blunder was not realising Kraut Corner was impervious to direct fire - that sort of caused all sorts of issues and is one of the reasons it wasn't in the actual write-up. What I wanted people's thoughts on, is should there be a 'dumbing' down of the Getting Started scenario vs its parent? For example, if Kraut Corner was a bunker vs a BUNKER, then direct fire could come in from all sides. I'd be loath to change the original full scenario though. What are people's thoughts? There are a lot of other problems solved and we're particularly focused on the fatigue accumulation issue. We can see where there could be challenges with the current code and one of the outcomes is as you're all calling out, fewer disruptions and broken units. This is in John's hands and he is considering all the impacts. As far as a change log, I may post something soon, but it will only include completed work not work being contemplated. I wouldn't want to build up hopes that someone's pet feature was being completed when it may not have been committed to. I would only post the change log to ensure I hadn't missed any requests/bugs called out here on the board. David RE: Normandy Patch Update - ComradeP - 02-07-2016 What is the "fatigue accumulation issue" in this case David? Unless something is really broken, I'd be in favour of not adjusting fatigue gain too much aside from defending units in assaults (but that's not so much a fatigue accumulation issue as an issue of the system not spreading out assault losses over all units in a stack). With medium fatigue starting at 50, things get rough quickly for the side relying on quality if fatigue accumulation increases. RE: Normandy Patch Update - wiggum - 02-07-2016 I think it has something to do with the currently too rare disruption and very rare broken Results. RE: Normandy Patch Update - ComradeP - 02-07-2016 There's no documented direct influence of fatigue as such on Disruption or Broken states, as they depend on a die roll check based on unit quality. Yes, fatigue influences quality at various points, but that has nothing to do with fatigue accumulation or fatigue at any other numbers aside from the numbers that result in a higher fatigue level (and thus a lower quality level). For me, one of the more problematic parts of the disruption mechanic is that it doesn't take the actual losses into account, at least not according to the manual. There's no documented difference on the check between losing 20 men or just 1 man, unless you happen to end up at a lower quality level through fatigue and I'm not sure if the effect of that is immediate (that is: if fatigue gained through launching - or being hit by fire/an assault is applied before the quality disruption roll from that combat or afterwards). This is why Soviet lines in PzC collapse so rapidly through 1 man/D results. Statistically speaking, the Soviet battalions have a significant chance to disrupt each turn. With mostly C or higher quality units in PB, this is less of a problem. I'd be very much in favour of casualties having an effect on the disruption roll, and was actually surprised that effect wasn't in PzC when I bought Moscow '42 (and thus not in PB at the moment as the disruption mechanic was ported from PzC), but that doesn't have much to do with fatigue accumulation. RE: Normandy Patch Update - ComradeP - 02-07-2016 This may be as intended because it might make passengers too easy to kill otherwise, but passengers on vehicle units don't become Vulnerable when moving through hedgerow hexsides, unlike motorized/armoured infantry units in T-mode. RE: Normandy Patch Update - wiggum - 02-14-2016 (02-06-2016, 11:25 AM)Strela Wrote: What I wanted people's thoughts on, is should there be a 'dumbing' down of the Getting Started scenario vs its parent? For example, if Kraut Corner was a bunker vs a BUNKER, then direct fire could come in from all sides. I'd be loath to change the original full scenario though. What are people's thoughts? Tutorials should not be hard to win anyway. So i think its a good idea. Any news on the DISRUPTION/BROKEN front ? RE: Normandy Patch Update - Strela - 02-14-2016 (02-14-2016, 08:13 AM)wiggum Wrote:(02-06-2016, 11:25 AM)Strela Wrote: What I wanted people's thoughts on, is should there be a 'dumbing' down of the Getting Started scenario vs its parent? For example, if Kraut Corner was a bunker vs a BUNKER, then direct fire could come in from all sides. I'd be loath to change the original full scenario though. What are people's thoughts? I'll be adjusting the tutorials at least for length and probably Kraut Corner. I did play the tutorial myself last night and noted that artillery is particularly effective against that hex so I'm still wondering whether I should just change the write up to explain the deficiencies of direct fire. I'll make the call on that soon. As far as disruption/broken its in John's hands. We have what I think is an elegant solution but I need to see how John codes it. I don't want to say anymore until I know we are changing something here. One good thing for you Wiggum is that John has turned the visual disrupt graphic on and we will be able to show broken/disrupt on the actual counters. I've tried a few different configurations and it works well... David RE: Normandy Patch Update - GerryM - 02-14-2016 A comment on Kraut Corner and artillery. I probably player the scenario 4 times. The artillery could kill from 1 - 10 soldiers every salvo but in only one playing for me, and that in the penultimate turn, did the unit disrupt. All the deaths did not seem to bother them RE: Normandy Patch Update - Strela - 02-14-2016 (02-14-2016, 09:45 AM)GerryM Wrote: A comment on Kraut Corner and artillery. I probably player the scenario 4 times. The artillery could kill from 1 - 10 soldiers every salvo but in only one playing for me, and that in the penultimate turn, did the unit disrupt. All the deaths did not seem to bother them Hi Gerry, Yeah, I understand. I'll probably look at dropping it to a 'lower-case' bunker which halves the defense value. More on that to follow. David |
){kind=link}