Panzer Battles 2 - The Official Teaser Thread

[Xaver]

First of all thanks for the pics.

Well, 7th armored division had a very disappointing performance in the Normandy campaign... like other veteran UK formations, maybe for me they need be more D than C quality because with no separation between training and morale reflect better how they have the combat experience BUT in a total diferent terrain and of course they dont had the morale level of previous campaigns... in desert fight to win in Normandy fight to dont die.

Ummm still testing totally new scens and we talk about one covering Cherbourg assault... i have divided feelings... i want it and want it yesterday but add scens covering actions like this made waiting and patience valuable.

Again thanks for the leak, good luck with the job.

PD: ummm looks like now company HQs in armored units are present... is only for 7th or in general you remove the company HQ vehicles??? i am curious about the new feature, maybe affect single vehicle units???

PD2: JT needs explore the option of use "Early access" model on his games hehehe.

[jimcrowley]

Hi everyone,

Well there have been some issues with the forum software - particularly troublesome for me with images, but I think we have a workaround now   



Firstly, all images are now rescaling automatically to fit the forum width. Unfortunately the old plug-in where you can click on a bar to see full size no longer works (at this time). If you right click on any image and open in a new tab you will see it full sized.

 
I had to travel again last week for work (Singapore to Texas and back this time!!!) so there were only brief periods where I had time to work on the game. Fortunately, other team members were beavering away!
 
We have a finalised map thanks to DaveMic and I’ve sent an updated build out to the testers last weekend. Quite a bit has changed since the last build a couple of months ago, including both new and updated scenarios (thanks Jeff and Rick!), exe changes and other enhancements.
 

Talking of new scenarios, here is a section of the latest scenario I’m personally working on - this will be a new one for the play test team to look over. (remember to right click and 'open image in new tab' if you want to see full size)






As a further teaser, here is a first shot from the brilliant Visual OB created by Mike Avanzini. The particular formation shown here had a particularly rough time – anyone know why? (again, right click for full size)



 
 
 
David


Didn't they run into some German tankie blighter - Manntwit, Wattmin or some such - in Villers and have a spot of bother. Bloody shambles, actually. Damned poor show!

[Strela]

First of all thanks for the pics.

Well, 7th armored division had a very disappointing performance in the Normandy campaign... like other veteran UK formations, maybe for me they need be more D than C quality because with no separation between training and morale reflect better how they have the combat experience BUT in a total diferent terrain and of course they dont had the morale level of previous campaigns... in desert fight to win in Normandy fight to dont die.

Ummm still testing totally new scens and we talk about one covering Cherbourg assault... i have divided feelings... i want it and want it yesterday but add scens covering actions like this made waiting and patience valuable.

Again thanks for the leak, good luck with the job.

PD: ummm looks like now company HQs in armored units are present... is only for 7th or in general you remove the company HQ vehicles??? i am curious about the new feature, maybe affect single vehicle units???

PD2: JT needs explore the option of use "Early access" model on his games hehehe.

Firstly, I think 7th Armoured Division and the British Armour in Normandy is unfairly maligned.

John Buckley published the below book which builds a solid argument that the British performance was quite credible and substantially improved over time. It's well worth picking up from Amazon and having a read. The British were facing far and away the bulk of the German armour and it is arguable they were some of the best quality German formations as well.




That said we had a think how to reflect the up and down performance of 7th Armoured and though the quality of the fighting units is actually very good we have marked down the leaders substantially. General Erskine & 'Loony' Hinde did not cover themselves in glory. Jim Crowley might recognise the last gentleman here?






200%







Talking about tank HQ units. We changed the OB around from Kursk and included them but allowed them to combine together. See below, these are the London Yeomanry Squadron HQ troops combined. Essentially we allow you now to create an additional platoon(s) in a battalion/regiment if you like.






200%






David

[Xaver]

Ok, i understand it bad... armored companies have HQ... even more, the support tanks (derp guns) are attached with HQ and not squadrons.

But i have here a question... in troops are fireflyes (4 Croms but inside is 3+1) but they are integrated in the troop using a buffed value in hard/soft attack??? this is not problematic but with the range value how you solve it??? 3 Croms+ 1 Fire is take the Crom firepower x3 and +1 Fire hard/soft attack and divide all by 4 but range... Firefly has more hard attack than Crom but Crom has more soft range attack than fire... you are going to "nerf" hard attack range maybe??? or mantein Firefly hard attack range with a nerf in hard attack value???

PD: Jim, where is your post??? only appear Strela post.

EDIT: lol, i post when you post... hehehe

Ummm well, for me the point is that first fights in 7th were bad, even to be a experienced unit the terrain and kind of fight was totally new for them and even new formations worked better because didnt had "bad habits" or see them as "lets defeat them again", maybe here the impact of a germans with a mass of very poor and low quality units and average units affects balance .... and well, the best german armored divisions are going to meet UK troops and this made C a better thing than D.

Interesting point with the ability to create HQs companies using the HQs units inside a regiment this sure help a lot in title because you can prevent have a lot of uni-units in map and sure add a lot value to derp tanks as support in assault, i think i am going to use HQ all the time in a single platoon ummm here i have now a little thing in my mind... regimental HQ... why not add the ability to them??? i refer join the regimental HQ with the troop HQs and have a "half" squadron??? i find ok you say but join all HQ in a single counter help a lot made harder to kill regimental HQ.

Thanks for the pics and keep it working.

[Strela]

Ok, i understand it bad... armored companies have HQ... even more, the support tanks (derp guns) are attached with HQ and not squadrons.

But i have here a question... in troops are fireflyes (4 Croms but inside is 3+1) but they are integrated in the troop using a buffed value in hard/soft attack??? this is not problematic  but with the range value how you solve it??? 3 Croms+ 1 Fire is take the Crom firepower x3 and +1 Fire hard/soft attack and divide all by 4 but range... Firefly has more hard attack than Crom but Crom has more soft range attack than fire... you are going to "nerf" hard attack range maybe??? or mantein Firefly hard attack range with a nerf in hard attack value???

PD: Jim, where is your post??? only appear Strela post.

Squadrons are companies in British Army 'speak'. Regiments are Battalions just to confuse it more. There are HQ tanks at both the squadron and regiment level. In the example I posted the squadron HQ's can combine.


We have specific values for the combined units. For the actual fire values it is a weighted average. For the range we use the longest. So for example a Sherman Firefly can fire out 12 hexes and a Cromwell 8 hexes. We give the combined unit a 12 hex range to represent the longest possible range, but with a fire value that is heavily weighted to the Cromwell. Range attenuation also helps here to average things out.

Jims post was at the bottom and I copy it verbatim...


Didn't they run into some German tankie blighter - Manntwit, Wattmin or some such - in Villers and have a spot of bother. Bloody shambles, actually. Damned poor show!

David

[Strela]

Interesting point with the ability to create HQs companies using the HQs units inside a regiment this sure help a lot in title because you can prevent have a lot of uni-units in map and sure add a lot value to derp tanks as support in assault, i think i am going to use HQ all the time in a single platoon ummm here i have now a little thing in my mind...  regimental HQ... why not add the ability to them??? i refer join the regimental HQ with the troop HQs and have a "half" squadron??? i find ok you say but join all HQ in a single counter help a lot made harder to kill regimental HQ.

Thanks for the pics and keep it working.

You can only combine identical 'components'. We decided the regimental tanks at 4 vehicles didn't need to combine with any other unit as they were a platoon  in their own right.

David

[jimcrowley]

David, yes, the man himself.
Wittmann's run, whilst undoubtedly courageous, was also extremely lucky. At those ranges he could easily have been stopped even by Cromwells. And tanks attacking in built-up areas were an operational no-no.
But the British seem to have been unprepared for combat and just asking for a smack on the nose!

Xaver, yes not sure what happened there. Another forum glitch?
Good point about the included Fireflies and interesting to see how it has been resolved.

[Xaver]

Thanks for the aclaration.

Well, i know that UK use diferent names and call usually battalions regiments but i use the names i see in OOB, i asume that in german army you can join company HQs in a single platoon, in general the idea is very good for me, give combat value to company command vehicles.

The solution in mix formations is good for me, max range in hard/soft but with attack value adjust to the unit composition (i think you do like i say, individual vehicle attack value X number of tanks in unit divided by number of vehicles AND a penalty to show how practically all vehicles in unit have the lower effective attack range).

Here i find something that maybe is necesary to help players notice who is who... i refer show in the unit portrait something to know what is a mixed platoon and what is not a mixed platoon... something like add a white M in the NATO symbol showed in the unit portrait, with this you can know what is an unit with Firefly or other vehicles.

Yes, the combat ranges in game are going to increase tanks and vehicles casualties but with terrain... maybe use tanks to block in open roads is not going to be a good idea if you dont have a Tiger II (if they appear) but combats in field is other history.

Can wait to see the PDF OOB and the scenarios covered in game are certain interesting actions in Normandy and with not the tipical german units.

PD: i try the quote mode and is hard notice when you are writing out of the quote area, is easy mix them.

[ComradeP]

Mixed units using the range of the best vehicle worries me, and so do the still generous engagement ranges.

The current vehicle vs. vehicle loss calculation system doesn't include penetration data/an actual representation of effectiveness at range. The range modifier is the same for all units, guns are not rated for how long their projectiles preserve penetrating power.

Vehicle losses are also decided by a die roll in many cases (statistically speaking, the result is rarely precisely 10 men abstracted into 1 vehicle).

1 vehicle loss is also the average loss result in the case of a result.

All of that combines into the current situation where weak guns can knock out vehicles at ahistorical ranges, whilst units with good guns are at a significant disadvantage due to also usually knocking out only 1 vehicle. The quality modifier doesn't tip the scales in favour of the better unit all that much.

For example: I've spent an hour or two running calculations as to how it's possible, but I can't figure out why a T-34 unit has a better unmodified Fire effect than a Panzer IV F2/G, whilst its gun is significantly worse and even though the armored effectiveness ratio is better, the square root formula means that the relative decrease in effectiveness for targeting a vehicle with a lower defense value than the hard attack value also reduces its effectiveness more.

This means that German tank units have issues with dealing with C quality and above units with decent to good guns. The vast majority of the Allied tank units are likely to fall in that category.

The quality of an HQ has no direct effect on fire results, and in a system without a quality penalty for detached units combined with short command radii like what EP '14 has, it normally shouldn't have too much effect on combat performance.

The opportunity fire isn't modified by things like quality, proximity or being fired upon and depends on two rolls with highly variable results: the roll for whether it happens or not and the casualty roll. This makes it impossible to setup a reliable overwatch position, which in turn makes it impossible for the Germans to defend against large numbers of relatively fast tanks with good to decent guns in a situation where the Germans are outnumbered.

Yes, the Germans hit hard on their turn, but it's usually not too difficult to create a situation where either the defender becomes the attacker with tanks or where German armour can be more or less forced to attack.

A significantly superior vehicle exchange ratio is difficult to achieve currently due to superior firepower usually only weighing in on the German turn, and due to the low vehicle losses per shot resulting in relatively few enemy losses.


The problems also apply to AT guns as they use the same formula's.

Aside from Fixing units, there are currently no limitations preventing ahistorical unit concentrations either in terms of unit frontage or in situations where in the real war C&C difficulties prevented close cooperation. The player has perfect information on his forces, and can move them anywhere on the map when they're not Fixed.

Taking the Ozerovskii scenario as an example: the Soviets historically counter-attacked in a piecemeal fashion without coordination between brigades. This allowed the Germans to deal with the attacks one at a time and made each attack likely to stall. Aside from being Fixed for a few turns, there are no limitations keeping the Soviets from concentrating.

With the Soviets having superior numbers, the terrain and smoke making it possible to get to range 1 or 2 with relative ease and limited opportunity fire, the Germans are likely to lose the scenario if the Soviets concentrate in the hands of a capable player. Example: Gregor's two results in the tournament.

To move the example to Normandy: the fighting west and east of Caen featured large but either poorly coordinated attacks or attacks that were impeded by the terrain forcing attacks to be made in a fashion that made it possible for the Germans to counter them.

From a purely hypothetical perspective, I am worried that through using smoke, the lack of areas of operation/strict unit frontage and superiority in numbers, the British will be able to cycle their tank units around to attack German tank units in the same manner that Soviets can do. The British also have a large number of divisional and corps artillery pieces to help them.

In this case, there will be numerous Panther units as well, but at least half the tanks will still be Panzer IV's, although the slightly better H variant in many cases.

If the game uses the most recent alt quality values, most German units will be C and B quality as well, a further handicap relative a scenario like Ozerovskii where the Panzer IV's are A quality.

I am wondering how the new game will deal with these issues, and am looking forward to see what changes to the system will be included.

Edit: the Germans also have 5 vehicle tank platoons at full strength, which means combining them into a 3 unit company puts them above the 1/2 stacking limit threshold. Using 10 vehicle merged units is an effective way to avoid taking more damage from enemy fire whilst still having an effective unit.

However, as it is a merged unit composed of 2 sub-units, it gains more fatigue from incoming fire than merged units composed of 3 unit, which puts them at a disadvantage compared to Soviet, and judging by the visual OOB screenshot, British tank units, which can create merged units composed of 3 sub-units that stay below the 1/2 stacking limit threshold.

In practice, even with the quality modifier reducing incoming fatigue, German fatigue can increase quickly due to the above. When facing T-34's, it's not unusual to gain 10-20 fatigue from a "Fatigue" result. With fatigue penalties starting at 50 fatigue, this is another factor complicating the use of the edge in quality to your advantage.

[DaveMic]

 
 
 
Thank you Strela ! It's beautiful !!