Sorry to repeat my own post, but I think I asked this just as the weekend was beginning... and I'm hoping for some clarification for my own peace of mind:
AHD DD7 – This is my rifle, this is my gun!
- Thread starter podcat
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
was sure I had replied to that one. if you have no army you cant mobilize. you need trained soldiers to get your riff-raff up and running.
But... isn't that going to be a huge problem, especially with regards to new countries (such as CSA) that haven't had time to build armies? Or countries that have just suffered a rebellion and haven't had a chance to rebuild yet? It's already a disadvantage fighting with only reserves... but this seems like a huge disadvantage that could come up in a lot of different ways.
Is the ratio of standing army to mobilizable reserves going to be moddable so that it can be affected by things other than military policy? For example, will it be possible to have some National Values let you mobilize a greater number of reserves, or make an invention or decision "standing reserve formations" that would do the same thing?
The trouble is, the game turns trained soldiers into riff raff when a country is defeated and it takes forever to turn them back again.
All they have actually lost is their equipment but they have to be recruited again at a glacial pace.
Perhaps surrendered formations should reappear in the build queue of their province when peace is agreed with only 5% of the normal build time but normal equipment requirements?
yeh its a regular modifier so can be put in a lot of places.
@The Arch Mede if it turns out to be a problem during testing we can modify it. so far it hasnt been
That's great news. Means it can be easily turned into a political reform.
It´s an interesting change, I liked it. No decent professional army = no decent mobilization.
Was thinking a bit more about putting military tradition in the game, maybe we could have a Military academy that could receive both funding in the Budget and prestige input from existing generals to influence the new generals´ stats? Not only would it reduce the random factor but also would be another thing to spend money on (which is needed IMO as everyone is always floating in cash).
Was thinking a bit more about putting military tradition in the game, maybe we could have a Military academy that could receive both funding in the Budget and prestige input from existing generals to influence the new generals´ stats? Not only would it reduce the random factor but also would be another thing to spend money on (which is needed IMO as everyone is always floating in cash).
Eh, but some countries (like Switzerland and even the USA) relied almost entirely on Mobilized armies during the period. How are you going to simulate that?
This may or may not have been addressed, but will you improve MP? IE, will I actually get to play for once? I have never been able to play MP on any PI strategy game I own.
have you opened a bug report etc in the bug or tech support forums? some games have incompabilities between say gamergate and steam. if you have that issue, yes I plan to make sure that is fixed. If its something else, do open a bug report or tech support question
Maybe some national values could simulate these?
Hopefully they will get some love too. I like the idea, but they should be more flexible and more prone to change due to context.
Its not going to be allowed. You can't be a Swiss style pacifist country where every adult has a gun and is trained to use it. You can't do US or UK style WW1 mobilisations, only an ineffective variant of French or German style ones.
Mobilisation ought to require stockpiling of military goods, and allow more militarised societies to mobilise at higher ORG, but it shouldn't stop countries, with economic capacity to do so, generating vast armies over time just because they don't start off with one. Its like the game is enforcing the German view of the US (they haven't got an army so they can't raise one so it doesn't matter if we go to war with them, and forgetting the result 20 months later, oops there's 1.5 million of them here already and another 1.5 million on the way, time to surrender).
The UK and US, could, and did, conscript similar numbers to France and Germany. It just took a year or two to gear up rather than being ready within the week.
Sweet the developer is still (presumably) here! 
One question from a guy who loves playing Germany and land wars. Can you please fix the AI to consider their ability to recruit more troops? For example, when I play as Germany vs Russia, I occupy all of Poland + Ukraine and destroy most of their army but they STILL won't give me a single piece of land until I occupy all the way until Moscow even though 9/10ths of their recruitment ability is crippled.
It would make wars against large countries much less tedious really.
Oh, and another request: add a "vassalize" casus belli. Seriously, why isn't that in the game the first place? :/ It occurred lots of times during this historical time frame
One question from a guy who loves playing Germany and land wars. Can you please fix the AI to consider their ability to recruit more troops? For example, when I play as Germany vs Russia, I occupy all of Poland + Ukraine and destroy most of their army but they STILL won't give me a single piece of land until I occupy all the way until Moscow even though 9/10ths of their recruitment ability is crippled.
It would make wars against large countries much less tedious really.
Oh, and another request: add a "vassalize" casus belli. Seriously, why isn't that in the game the first place? :/ It occurred lots of times during this historical time frame
I think we need to see how it's actually implemented before we jump to conclusions. Myself, I'm a little worried at how exploitable this could be-- the AI countries handle their finances in a spotty manner, and thus sometimes have difficulty maintaining an army of any reasonable size (or, far more prevalent, favor building a navy over an army... and in fact will disband their army in favor of maintaining a stack of capital ships). So I worry that this mechanic of limiting mobilization will prove to be exploitable.
But that's just my worry, based on nothing more than a few lines on a forum. They're the ones testing the system, not me, and hopefully they've accounted for this.
I actually think they've already mentioned that they're adding this, no? Would be nice if the AI used it as well, though, and not just the player.
The problem is, in game terms, that would best be represented by raising troops normally, not mobilizing the reserves. Mobilization that creates troops instantly really does only fit the continental model. To represent the US properly, you need some sort of system whereby you could recruit infantry from non-soldier pops when at war.
How about this...allow a limited minimum mobilization regardless of your current army size. So you may mobilize, say, one brigade per state regardless of your current army size (like if your army is wholly destroyed). A sort of last ditch Volksturm mobilization of old men and young boys if you need it as a once per war (or time duration, i.e. once a decade say) way of getting an army if you need one. Also perhaps you need to have sufficient supplies in your stockpile or these "Volkstrum" brigades come out as irregular infantry instead. Also it should have penalties like a permanent minus on your population or all your RGOs/Factories are automatically closed down if you do this.
I second that idea. Just let nations recruit non-soldier pops when already mobilized. These could be trained faster but disappear when you demobilize.