Artillery problems in Bulge '44

[dto]

As I posted on the WDS forum, the problem with fudging Parameter values for play balance is that it's a clumsy tool. For example, if you boost German artillery values in Bulge '44 so the Germans can achieve a breakthrough in the early turns, that bonus lasts through the entire 162-turn campaign.

Unless I looked at the counterbattery values in the Parameter file, I have no reason to believe that German artillery has an advantage when the real history was otherwise. Maybe we should include more information in the scenario description, such as the campaign boosting German artillery values.

Michael

But you just asked to have the values in the PDT adjusted in a direction you think is “right” and not what the scenario designer did after a lengthy process of play testing.  So is it only clumsy when we disagree with the values? Or is the PDT in fact a tool for the designers to make subtle adjustments?

You've got this backwards. The default values are 100 percent, which for reasons unknown, the designer modified to strongly favor the Germans in an ahistorical manner.

Maybe the designer did this for play balance. Maybe for some other reason, or perhaps the designer simply made a mistake. As a player, it's not my job to guess.

I'm more inclined to believe that Panzer Campaigns has seen a lot of changes over the years. So a play balance mechanism, such as modifying default artillery values, may have been necessary at one time but not now. At the least, it's worth reexamining the question.

Michael

[2-81 Armor]

Maybe I'm looking at this the wrong way, and trying for a too simplistic answer, but wouldn't be easier to adjust the stockpiled factors in the pdt if we're trying to depict the opening German barrage?

When it comes to counter battery values I agree that the US should definitely be superior, and we could avoid using this value to depict the opening barrages if the stockpiled setting is right.

Some mention has also been made of unit ratings, and I do agree that some like the US 106th Div are rated too high. Nothing against the 106th, but really, they were in the Ardennes in order to get a low intensity introduction to combat.

By the same token, some German units like 1 SS Panzer are probably rated too high given how many replacements they needed and the limited training time available after Normandy.

Just my 2 cents for whatever it's worth

[wildb]

This discussion highlights the balanced versus historical scenario.

I have modified the Market Garden main scenario (original not Scheldt version) to see what it would take for the Allies to reach Arnhem as planned. Basically: no blown bridges, vast reduction in the German forces in the way, and allowing night movement. Even then, you barely make it to Arnhem according to planned schedule.

I think what is needed are the following versions of the campaign:

Strict Historical scenario - the players must replicate the initial historical actions
Modified Historical scenario - the players are allowed to deviate from the initial historical actions
Balanced scenario - give each side has a chance to win the campaign

[Steel God]

FWIW: Per Strela's request, Volcano Man responded to this question on the WDS Forum.  Ed's response is a very long explanation on game design philosophy.  I won't try to paraphrase it, those who are interested should pop over and read it. 

But I do think it's important to dis-spell the notion that setting PDT values is straight forward, and that adjusting them is considered a clumsy way of achieving a desired outcome.  While we can all have our opinions on that score, it's not at all how the folks that make the games see things.