Great discussion, keep it going.
Some very quick comments.
terminator wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:35 pm
What is the maximal map size ?
hugh2711 wrote: ↑Sat Nov 17, 2018 11:38 am
I also would like to know; 'what is the maximum map size'
We have not set a limit yet. It will depend on how successful our optimizations are. Random map generator can generate maps of almost any size, because it does not deal with 3D at all, rather it creates a map similar to how you see it in PzC editor (minus the tiles). It's 3D engine which will be the bottleneck (obviously!). While we are on this topic, how large do you guys want maps in PzC2?
stephenkman wrote: ↑Fri Nov 16, 2018 11:23 pm
2. The ability to mark the map where you suspect enemy units are, with a "?" perhaps (the old Panzer Blitz board game had these). For instance, you attack a unit in foggy conditions and artillery briefly reveals itself when it fires, you can mark that spot so you remember it next turn. Or, a remote unit is about to be destroyed in an ambush and you want to remember that there were three units in that location.
We have it on wish list. This has been requested also by MP crowd, who like to leave some notes tied to hexes till later.
huckc wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:50 pm
Random enemy unit turn and location spawn triggers would be very nice for single-player, especially aircraft. To give an example, a group of enemy aircraft has a random chance of spawning between turns 3 and 5 and from airfield x or y. They will always spawn and as the same exact units but you don't know exactly when and where so you need to keep on your toes.
PzC should allow to do a very similar thing using position randomization and random condition, although this system will not guarantee that a given unit will appear. I'm looking into making this system automated (so it is activated by an option and randomizes any scenario, not only one specifically designed for this).
ptje63 wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:05 pm
I like the addition of random generated maps. It will guarantee a longer usage of the game. A good example of this is the fact that I still play The Grandest Fleet - thanks to its random generated maps option. Will you use similar parameters like TGF to create the map?
I enjoyed playing The Grandest Fleet long ago, but I don't remember any more what parameters it offered for random map generation. Can you remind me?
Rood wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 8:47 am
However I have a small request.
Could it be implemented that if there's only naval units that they cannot use their normal LoS range on grond hexes. As an example if there's a cruiser with 4 LoS adjecent to a coastal hex it can only see the adjecent coastal hexes but not further inland. Unless there's a friendly ground unit near by that does the actually spotting.
It annoyed me like hell that ships could bombard 3-5 hexes inland without there being any friendly ground untis. And yes the navy do have aerial recon planes but then those should be actual units that could be shot down.
I think it is a very reasonable request.
Molve wrote: ↑Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:13 am
I am sure you do see the concern here: assuming capital ships are given relative costs that are even close to reality, purchasing a battleship on any map where naval combat isn't absolutely necessary is not going to happen. Take the multiplayer scnario between french partisans and italian garrison forces (named partisan uprising maybe?). The presence of naval units on this map is entirely dependant on them being "randomly" assigned (in this case by the scenario creator)*.
The option to purchase ships is controlled on a scenario level, so many historical scenarios will not allow this. In a hypothetical Pacific campaign we will allow this, but will make sure this does not blow into unrealistic dimensions. As for generated content which is not based on history, we will use more freedom. Since we don't specify how long our turns are, how large are our units (and so how many Tigers in a single unit compete with a battleship), and also how you obtain your units (do you build them, or for example they arrive from main land on your request), we will balance things so that they make sense for gameplay. Of course, on all these maps it is totally possible to go without fleet (although naval landings can still be a very useful option).
proline wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 4:00 am
Let's try this a different way- have you taken any action to make recon less of a total waste of slots and money?
Now, about recon, several points:
- I consider recons separately from general LOS rules. Even though recon units must be useful, the rest of the army should not be totally crippled in its spotting ability without them.
- Usefullness of any unit is naturally limited by its role. If its role is not in demand, then the unit will see less use. If you play PzC with fog of war turned off, recons naturally become less important. Along the same lines, if you have already played PzC's nearly 500 official scenarios (plus mods), and on the next play through you still remember perfectly where each attack triggers - then congratulations, you have much better memory than most people out there. And yes, this means you need less recon than the rest of us. I don't see a good solution to this. Using scripting is a personal choice of a campaign designer. No matter how smart and unpredictable new AI will be, and no matter what randomization options I implement, the designer can conclude that a more scripted scenario will be more fun and go down this route. As for random scenarios and campaigns, they will certainly make recon more important (and we'll also have "shroud" option, to hide not just enemy units, but also terrain), but this kind of content is not for everyone. Still, I feel that between multiplayer, random content, and playing DLCs for the first time (or after a long break), it's enough room for recon to be considered useful in this game system.
- Within the new framework of rules, recons will be less vulnerable and more useful even without changing anything specifically about them. Thus, they will take less damage than in PzC, so their survivability will improve. They will also take much less slots than the mainstream combat units, so they will no longer compete with a Tiger II for the same slot (but rather with bridge engineers and other specialist units). New mechanics like split might make them more attractive, and more survivable. And if they die too fast, you can also give them overstrength from day 0 to improve their chances. By combining recon's great spotting with bonus from high ground allows to reveal even bigger area on the map (each additional step in spotting reveals more hexes than previous one). There are many little factors which help recon class in the new game.
- Having said all that, we are also making additional steps to make recon even more useful. One line of action is related to making them better in their primary (recon) role. For example, we are experimenting with their movement ranges, because even a slightly bigger range makes them more useful and flexible. The other line of action is about giving them new, unique roles. For example, recon next to enemy unit makes attacks on it more accurate, and also reduces chances of ambush (rugged defense).
proline wrote: ↑Sun Nov 18, 2018 4:00 am
I could see there being fun in making things a little more complicated in this one area. How about this: you can only see one hex into a forest or higher terrain than you. So if you're next to forest or hill, you only see one hex. Now add in a higher ground hierarchy, so that if you are on a hill, your vision is no longer blocked by hills, nor by forests, but it is still blocked by mountains. Plus you get double vision over terrain that is below you, So if you are on a hill hex and your base vision is 2 you can see 2 over other hills, but 4 over the plains, or 3 hexes if you are looking over a hill followed by two plains. Now exempt recon from all of the above except the high ground advantage.
While I admit my proposal would be a bit harder to learn, it would allow the possibility of effective ambushes or just plain hiding in close terrain, it would make recon essential, and it would give controlling high ground some meaningful value.
It's not a bad suggestion per se, but it relies too much on high ground, while many maps don't have enough of it, but still have lots of forests and bocage. So we will often degrade to situation where your army becomes blind. If we only played on random maps, we could balance terrain to our needs, but on historical maps it is not possible. And like I said, I don't want to make recons mandatory by making them exempt from general LOS rules, because it can quickly become frustrating. Panzer Corps style of gameplay is very fluid, I can advance with one large group, and then split it into several smaller ones if I see need, then combine them back. If each group must have a recon - then I lose a lot of this flexibility.