Panzer Campaigns update

[BigDuke66]

As they want to add Volcano Man scenarios I doubt that we see a rework of the stock scenarios, maybe Ed's scenarios will even completely replace the stock scenarios.
Anyhow I'm rather "allergic" regarding balance, it alway sounds like the players want a fair game, but I expect that the reality is depicted and if that means unbalanced scenarios I don't mind at all. I expect as German to kick ass in 40-41 and get my ass kicked it 43-45.

[typhoon]

Yes agreed to a point but balance more reflects how badly an arse is kicked. In Desolate Dump on the Desna for example the German can still kick butt but if the Soviet is not too sore he should still be allowed the VP total to give him the win by losing less bad than historically was the case. Some extra VP locations some more supply anything that helps this a long. Your basic point though is valid the Germans should be winning the battles early war and that should change latter on but that should not necessarily give a player the victory because he is German in 41

[Landser34]

As far as balancing goes that is hard to do because most of the scenarios only get tested against the AI and then you have the players one guy might be a veteran player or another a newbie and even if the balance on a particular scenario favors lets say the new player the veteran can will still win most of the time.I remember when I 1st started playing and some of the veteran players would pick scenarios that would favor me but I would still lose a lot of  the scenarios.When I started here guys like Esher and Steel God when I played them and others i just couldn't beat them now I think I could hold my own.

[ComradeP]

Bigduke66: I agree that imbalance complaints need to be judged on what historically happened as well, but I'd say that a minor loss or victory situation should in most cases be able to result in at least a draw.

Furthermore, the vast majority of wargames simplify logistics and replacements, abstracting the two main German problems whilst at the same time making the Soviets rather weak.

The Germans were certainly efficient fighters, but the Soviets can't put up stiff resistance like their historical counterparts with regular units. Side-wide quality ratings als favour the Germans. The post-war memoirs by German commanders have helped with establishing an image of German superiority that does not always match historical performance. Panzer Battles: Normandy consistently shows that the Allies also had excellent units, which is uncommon in (PC) wargames.

[BO45]

Hi
I´m new to this site, but feel like sharing my opinion on the "upgrading" of PzC.

I´ve been playing PzC for about 10 years now, and before that I used to play the PC game World af War Stalingrad and Operation Crusader.

It sounds very interesting that you are going to make some updates, and I´m looking forward to see what you come up with. But until that happens, I´m having some suggestions that I feel will make PzC a true “Gold series”

To me the perfect PzC game would be, if you adopted some of the features from the World at War series into the PzC series

1) Lets face it – the AI divisional movement in PzC simply does not work. Make it work – or even better – just get rid of it.
Instead you should add a feature where you can give open orders to individual units – just like in WaW.
i.e. order a unit to go from A to B using a certain route, (use transportation mode here and tactical mode there). The unit will execute the orders over the next many turns, and report to you when they are done. The unit will only terminate its orders if contact with enemy units is established.
I´m currently playing the Moscow 42 campaign scenario, and its taking the fun out of the game, that I´m having to move every god damn German unit, each and every turn – especially when the weather is bad, and they can only move a couple of hexes per turn……

2) Like in WaW it should also be made possible to attach individual units to a divisional HQ.
i.e. I want to attach a corp Nebelwerfer directly to a Panzer Division, but I cannot do that without attaching a bunch of other corp units at the same time.

3) Bunkers, pillboxes, trenches, etc, should have a certain defensive value when attacked frontally, but a reduced defensive value when attacked in the flank or from the rear. Anyway – a bunker´s defensive value should be reduced when hit a certain number of time by artillery or FLAK. Today bunkers have a fixed defensive value.

4) I agree with Fhil that it should be possible to destroy bridges by aircraft of artillery attacks – it makes the game much more realistic

5) But most of all – you have to make the computer play a better game. “Cosmetic surgery” is fine, but doesn´t make it alone

a) Much to often the computer allows itself to be surrounded without trying too break out and return to its own lines. And units outside the encirclement ring don´t try to relieve their comrades.

b) The Soviet artillery (which is formidable) is too passive – it should pound every German unit in the open in sight, but usually does nothing. The artillery is also very easy to trick – a single shootout between two individual units will make the AI spend all the artillery firepower at once, after which I can start the main attack without being shelled.

c) Partisans are much to passive. Most of the time they are just remaining in their starting positions, doing nothing. They should dig in along the roads and wait in ambush for the Germans – making it difficult for them to bring their reinforcements forward in time.

d) In Moscow 42 some well entrenched soviet unit are leaving their bunkers for no reason at all – making them easy prey for my artillery.

It would be very interesting to hear if any of you have similar ideas, or any comments to my suggestions
Kind regards
Bo (from Denmark)

[jonnymacbrown]

[quote pid='420594' dateline='1494947504']
a) Much to often the computer allows itself to be surrounded without trying too break out and return to its own lines. And units outside the encirclement ring don´t try to relieve their comrades.

It would be very interesting to hear if any of you have similar ideas, or any comments to my suggestions
Kind regards
Bo (from Denmark)
[/quote]

I would suggest you stop quite literally wasting your time playing the A/I and get games going against humans. Maybe you might make a few moves against the A/I to figure out your organization but other than that why bother? There are so many players looking for games! jonny

[BO45]

jonnymacbrown
[quote pid='420594' dateline='1494947504']
a) Much to often the computer allows itself to be surrounded without trying too break out and return to its own lines. And units outside the encirclement ring don´t try to relieve their comrades.

It would be very interesting to hear if any of you have similar ideas, or any comments to my suggestions
Kind regards
Bo (from Denmark)
[/quote]

I would suggest you stop quite literally wasting your time playing the A/I and get games going against humans. Maybe you might make a few moves against the A/I to figure out your organization but other than that why bother? There are so many players looking for games! jonny

Hi Jonny :-)

I do understand your point of view, about the futility of playing the A/I, but.....

1) I have long working hours, and sometimes even schoolwork afterwards. In many cases it will therefore be impossible for me to complete a turn a day/every two days, when playing a human opponent - and it wouldn´t be fair to keep people waiting :-). Against the A/I I can play whenever I have the time.

2) It has been possible to create chess programs strong enough to beat the human world champion, so why shouldn´t it be possible to improve the A/I just enough to make the games more exiting.

3) If the A/I systematically gathered intelligence about its opponent, it should be possible for it to calculate moves and to make "qualified guesses" about the possible outcome of different moves (just like a chess computer) - instead of sticking to a predefined plan like it does now. But I guess it´s going to take too many man hours of programming to do that........




Bo

[BigDuke66]

Chess is a cakewalk against this game. So many units with so many abilities that have to work together against the same amount of different units with different abilities, to this add terrain, weather, supply situation, etc.. All these factors have to be considered and not only in general but based on the current tactical & strategic situation and the short and long term goals.
Programming such an AI is a lifetime job, it it only takes away resources for a rather futile endeavor.

I'm sure there are opponents out there that don't mind a slow paced turn exchange so set up a thread and ask for such a person.

[Kool Kat]

1) I have long working hours, and sometimes even schoolwork afterwards. In many cases it will therefore be impossible for me to complete a turn a day/every two days, when playing a human opponent - and it wouldn´t be fair to keep people waiting :-). Against the A/I I can play whenever I have the time.

Bo

Hey Bo:  

You play them when you get them?

Many players have multiple PBeM games underway, so a game turn exchange rate of 2+ days will not even register on folks' radars. 

As suggested, just state up front your looking for a "leisurely" game exchange rate of "X" number of turns per week and find like-minded opponents.

Seriously, stop wasting time playing the AI and get some human matches underway!    

Heck, if these games were ONLY player against AI, I would have quit a long time ago!  

[krmiller]

1) I have long working hours, and sometimes even schoolwork afterwards. In many cases it will therefore be impossible for me to complete a turn a day/every two days, when playing a human opponent - and it wouldn´t be fair to keep people waiting :-). Against the A/I I can play whenever I have the time.

Bo

Hey Bo: 

You play them when you get them?

Mike's right, if you try you'll find someone willing to play at your speed, not everyone is worried about how fast the game goes.  I have played against others who did a turn every two weeks and sometimes longer, not all of us spend all our time playing games.  Haven't played a game here at the Blitz for some time, come here mostly to keep up on things but would be willing to do something at a leisurely pace and I'm sure there are others like me.