Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Development Diary #8 - 3rd of December 2008

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Show only dev responses
Stacks = stairway to Heaven made of counters.
This does not mean anything in HoI3, because only a few units fight per province. In HoI2, stacks meant a dogpile of units without regard to physical space the divisions took up. There was no problem with literally 400 division battles taking place in Luxembourg. That is the true meaning of 'stacks' as I see it.
 
A bit OT but I found an old screenshot I wanted to share. Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you all:

The super stacks of doom!​
frontenspanien2of1.jpg


This is from an EU2-->Vicky-->HoI2 game me and a friend played, so don't bother asking how that's possible by 1944 :p
 
If every division has its own commander, that's effectively the "end of the stack." Sure, you'll be able to group divisions (like you can group Peons and Grunts in WarCraft!), but it means that the stack, the way it works in HoI2, will disappear. I doubt you'll be able to permanently assign divisions to stacks. In particular, that goes against the grain if you're including a command chain to begin with - it's much more reasonable to have the Corps as a primary, permanent grouping for divisions, not a stack. Also, the term "unit" has a very specific meaning in RTS games - it's the object you move on the map. You could group them, of course, but fundamentally they are still separate objects (like grouped stacks in HoI2). Each division being its own unit could only mean that "stacking" (permanent group assignment) is replaced by proper formations, which *may* or *may not* be in the same province. Also, given the granularity of the map, it's rather silly to have a lot of stacks running around - you'll run out of divisions and won't be able to cover the whole front, so even if stacks are possible, they won't be terribly useful.
 
Wiking said:
I was worried about the game being more streamlined, something which is not to my liking.
And now I see that it's becoming more complex than HoI2, which is something to be welcomed! :cool:
Click to expand...

Dumbing down is bad, but streamlining = good
A system with depth and options is good, but complex = bad
- incidentally my impressions are that the game is having a lot of depth added while being streamlined.


So you and me don't agree ;) (except for that we both, perversely, like the shape the game is taking...)
 
Veldmaarschalk said:
This could just as well mean that each division will keep its own commander, even when stacked together. Unlike HoI2where stacked divisions only have one commander in total
Click to expand...

Thats the impression I get when I re-read what Johan said.

Johan said:
Another important aspect of this is the fact that every division is its own unit on the map, and so is every HQ above it.
Click to expand...


Each divisions is its own unit, in regards to command. Just like it was in the real world. You can still have a corps consisting of two divisions, but that corps will actually have 3 leaders, one for the corps itself and two for the two divisions. Compared to HOI2 that would only have one leader for any given stack/corps/army.

He also says....

Johan said:
Now you may think that this will increase micromanagement? Well, we have some pretty interesting plans on how to handle unit orders.
Click to expand...

To me that means its not going to increase MM, so the assumption that you're going to have to control every single division seperately when it comes to orders is incorrect IMO.
 
Dakk said:
Dumbing down is bad, but streamlining = good
A system with depth and options is good, but complex = bad
- incidentally my impressions are that the game is having a lot of depth added while being streamlined.


So you and me don't agree ;) (except for that we both, perversely, like the shape the game is taking...)
Click to expand...

Well normally I'd say I was worried about the game being dumbed down, but then I always get a torrent of replies correcting me and saying I'm wrong, that Rome (for example) isn't dumbed down and why would I even think this for HoI3, etc. etc. I don't want to argue anymore. :p
 
He clearly indicates that the order system will be different...meaning, not like HoI2. Meaning, not just clicking a stack and clicking on a province. Otherwise those changes wouldn't be "pretty interesting," now would they?

EDIT: If you re-read my posts carefully, you'll also see that I never said that it gives me the impression that you have to control divisions individually. All I said is that the control will be mainly exercised at Corps level. Which may or may not involve some kind of delegation to AI. My guess is that it will.

Also, with 10,000 provinces, stacks become rather useless, since you won't have 20 divisions in the same province in most cases. And it is unclear how stacks would mesh, organizationally, with the Corps, especially if there are coordination penalties of any sort (this, however, IS pure speculation on my part).
 
Last edited:
Alexander Seil said:
He clearly indicates that the order system will be different...meaning, not like HoI2. Meaning, not just clicking a stack and clicking on a province. Otherwise those changes wouldn't be "pretty interesting," now would they?
Click to expand...

You're probably right that we wont see stacks as they existed in HOI2, but that doesnt mean they dont technically exist, just in a different form.

This doesnt necessarily mean you're going to have to click every single division that's attached to a corp or army to give it orders. My thinking is you could give the corp/HQ the order and the divisions that are attached to that corps/HQ attack automatically. Remember he specifically said that HQ's are their own as well.

Edit:

Alexander Seil said:
EDIT: If you re-read my posts carefully, you'll also see that I never said that it gives me the impression that you have to control divisions individually. All I said is that the control will be mainly exercised at Corps level. Which may or may not involve some kind of delegation to AI. My guess is that it will.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think we're both thinking along the same lines... it may involve some delegation to the AI, but this might just be an option if you dont feel like doing it yourself. I doubt we'll be forced to hand over control of everything attached to a corps/army/HQ.
 
Last edited:
Piggy said:
You're probably right that we wont see stacks as they existed in HOI2, but that doesnt mean they dont technically exist, just in a different form.

This doesnt necessarily mean you're going to have to click every single division that's attached to a corp or army to give it orders. My thinking is you could give the corp/HQ the order and the divisions that are attached to that corps/HQ attack automatically. Remember he specifically said that HQ's are their own as well.
Click to expand...

But that is exactly what I meant. You will mostly issue orders to Corps HQ's, except in rare cases where you want precise, total control over a handful of divisions. :cool:

But in many cases, say in 1944 on the Eastern Front, the only "reasonable" way to play would be to rely on your Corps HQ's almost exclusively, unless you'd want to go insane because you have 500 divisions to manage. In HoI2 you could put them in stacks because provinces were huge, but now there are 5 times as many provinces, so even if you were to group the divisions by province, you would still have an insane number of them to manage.
 
LOL... yeah I knew we were getting at the same conclusion, just different paths.

However, I just went back and re-read DD#5, I take back what I said about stacks.

Johan said: "The next thing we looked at was the legendary super stack, and we made sure that now it is no longer any guarantee to success, not to say it might not have its place."

??? I dont know...
 
Stack in that sense can also mean just a "group of units in the same province." You can drag-select multiple stacks in HoI2, for example, so in this case your stack would really be a group of 1-division stacks. The problem that I see with having permanently grouped stacks (even with different leaders for each div) is that -

1) There are A LOT of provinces. Meaning that you won't be able to concentrate more than 3-5 divisions in one province in most cases, and chances are that these divisions won't be attacking the same province, so stacking them would be useless.
2) There is already an equivalent of a HoI2 "stack" from an organization perspective - the Corps. I don't really see how to make permanently-grouped stacks play well with Corps HQs.
3) The Corps is an equivalent of my regular, 3-division stack I always relied on in HoI2. I don't really see that much of a difference between ordering this stack and simply accepting the results of a single combat calculation (like you did in HoI2), or having the AI move the individual divisions. The end result is the same.

As an example of point #2 - let's say you stack together divisions from 2 different Corps (or Armies, or whatever). That is, in a stack like you have in HoI2 - one cohesive, monolithic unit moving and attacking as a single entity. Now you issue an order for one of the Corps to attack, and an order to the other Corps to move back into strategic reserve. What happens with the stack? Does the AI break it up? Who controls the stack? The Corps AI? The Army AI?
 
Johan said:
Our goal is to leave you wanting good commanders at each level thus leaving you to think about should you promote that Major General to a Lieutenant General and give him command of a corps? At every position in the command structure, you can insert a leader of the designated rank.
Click to expand...

Will the auto promote function change? Will you address the differences between the way auto-promotion of Army Commanders works to that of Air and Naval Commanders?
 
Modestus said:
I must admit I have been wondering about this as well.

I am not sure that you can jump from the idea that every division on the map is its own unit to that there is no stacking of units but ........

The stacking of units does seem to cause problems when you look at the ideas about combat width and frontage.

I see the size of the front line as a real barrier in combat, if you cant fit your divisions in the front line they wont engage with the enemy.

It has been stated that a Corps commander increases the chance of a reserve joining combat that seems to suggest to me that if a single division is forced to retreat from the front line a Corps can somehow replace this division with one of its own.
That causes a problem for me when I try to visualize the front line as a fixed length, 2 divs cannot replace 1 div if theres only room for one

But this may be the case, once a Corps is formed it will act as one unit with a total combat width equal to the amount of divisions\brigades that it has, it will need a commander and at least two divisional commanders it will have a better chance of operating as a reserve but only if there is room on the front line.

As you proceed up the command structure forming Corps and Armies each level adds value to your overall abilities but you also need commanders for each level.

It seems to me you could form an army out of one division something you would never do because you would be wasting 3 commanders but it could be possible.
Alternatively you could form an army out of 100 Corps but your first attack would fail because the combat width of that army would be too big for any front line.
Click to expand...

Firstly, my guess is that around 6 frontage slots will be available for fairly open ground. I make that assumption on the basis that if a province is around 30km then I would expect IRL for 1 to 3 INF Divs to defend it. A single INF Div would be very stretched across that area, but there were occasions where on quiet parts of a Eastern Front such an area might have been covered by only one Div. However, about 2 would be the norm, but occasionally on important fronts there would be about 3. If we assume Paradox will agree that 3 INF Divs on clear terrain is possible, and that an average INF Div will have two Inf.Bde (each with 1 frontage slot) then we get a total of 6 frontage slots.

But to help visualize how this should all work, let's instead look at much more difficult terrain - mountains. Here we can easily imagine that even if the province is 30km wide, that most of this area is virtually impassable, and there might only be 2 frontage slots. You can visualize this as a single INF Div with 2 Inf.Bde defending a single narrow pass through the mountains.

Put two independent INF Div in that mountainous province: call them 1st and 2nd Mountain Div. If combat takes place 1st MTN occupies the frontline, while 2nd MTN is in reserve several km behind them. There is just not enough space in the narrow mountain pass for both Divs to deploy alongside each other.

The attackers throw in several waves of well-equipped and well-led forces against 1st MTN and eventually after several days of combat it cracks, it's Org. drops to 0%, and it retreats from the province. At this stage, the attackers have breached the frontline, but they have not yet won the battle. There is a chance that the Maj.Gen. commanding 2nd MTN will organise his men to form a second defensive line. Let's just guess that this is 70%. Perhaps it will be dependent on his skill level/traits, and doctrines, which will affect how able the Maj.Gen of 2nd MTN is in recognising the danger of 1st MTN cracking and getting his men into a good defensive position.

If 2nd MTN take up position on the frontline, then they are able to hold-up the attackers for several more days. If they don't take up a good position quick enough, then the attackers make a complete breakthrough, and the 2nd MTN also has to retreat from the province, even though they are still at full Org.

Now let's play-out the same battle again, but organise the two Divs into a Corps formation. Whatever the mechanism for doing this we end-up with I Mountain Corps with a Lt.Gen commanding. I prefer the idea that there will be a Corps HQ unit formed with the Lt.Gen, and this will be positioned just to the rear of the two M.Divs in the adjoining province, but that is still not confirmed.

Anyway, 1st MTN is in the frontline and it has been attacked for several days. As it's Org. drops towards 0% the Lt.Gen Corps commander becomes concerned that it will soon crack. He orders the Maj.Gen commanding 2nd MTN to move forward and relieve 1st MTN in the frontline. Now the chances of this happening are much higher. Let's just guess at 90%. It is not entirely dependent on the initiative of the 2nd MTN's Maj.Gen. Instead, it is dependent on the skills/traits and doctrines of the Lt.Gen commander of I Mountain Corps. An average Corps commander would still give a higher chance of 2nd MTN getting into position, than not having a Corps formation. This is because that is his job, to ensure that the Divs are able to support each other.

In addition, there might be other benefits of having a Corps formation. This is entire speculation on my part, but it seems reasonable that if the Lt.Gen pulls 1st MTN out of the frontline before their Org. reaches 0% they may not have to retreat from the province. They go into reserve in the same province a few km behind 2nd MTN. They can regain some Org. and then be available to be put back into the frontline later, if 2nd MTN can hold-out for any length of time.

Since this takes place entirely with the combat system, within a single province, IMO this will all take place completely under the control of the AI. You will be able to see which Div is in the frontline, which is in reserve, whether an event takes place for the 2nd MTN to take over the frontline, etc. only within the combat screen. You will not be able to affect this directly.

Now, let's play-out again. Let's have the same 2 Divs in the province organised into I Mountain Corps with a Lt.Gen, but give the Corps a third Div: 3rd MTN. This is not in the province where the combat is taking place. Instead, it is in tactical reserve, in the adjoining province where the Corps HQ is located.

If you are micro-managing the units in this Corps, and you can see that 1st and 2nd MTN might struggle to defend the province, then you can give 3rd MTN an order to move into the frontline province and help the defense. Once it completes it's forward move, it will join the combat, but as a further reserve unit. Now, because there are two different Divs in reserve in the province, the chances that one of them will be able to take up a densive position as the new frontline, will be higher than if there was just one. Let's just guess that this might be 95%.

But if the Corps is under AI control, and you have given the Lt.Gen an order to defend this mountain province, then I would expect the Lt.Gen commanding I Mountain Corps to give the order to 3rd MTN to move forward and join the combat, without you having to micro-manage the situation.
 
potski said:
Firstly, my guess is that around 6 frontage slots will be available for fairly open ground. I make that assumption on the basis that if a province is around 30km then I would expect IRL for 1 to 3 INF Divs to defend it. A single INF Div would be very stretched across that area, but there were occasions where on quiet parts of a Eastern Front such an area might have been covered by only one Div. However, about 2 would be the norm, but occasionally on important fronts there would be about 3. If we assume Paradox will agree that 3 INF Divs on clear terrain is possible, and that an average INF Div will have two Inf.Bde (each with 1 frontage slot) then we get a total of 6 frontage slots.

But to help visualize how this should all work, let's instead look at much more difficult terrain - mountains. Here we can easily imagine that even if the province is 30km wide, that most of this area is virtually impassable, and there might only be 2 frontage slots. You can visualize this as a single INF Div with 2 Inf.Bde defending a single narrow pass through the mountains.

Put two independent INF Div in that mountainous province: call them 1st and 2nd Mountain Div. If combat takes place 1st MTN occupies the frontline, while 2nd MTN is in reserve several km behind them. There is just not enough space in the narrow mountain pass for both Divs to deploy alongside each other.

The attackers throw in several waves of well-equipped and well-led forces against 1st MTN and eventually after several days of combat it cracks, it's Org. drops to 0%, and it retreats from the province. At this stage, the attackers have breached the frontline, but they have not yet won the battle. There is a chance that the Maj.Gen. commanding 2nd MTN will organise his men to form a second defensive line. Let's just guess that this is 70%. Perhaps it will be dependent on his skill level/traits, and doctrines, which will affect how able the Maj.Gen of 2nd MTN is in recognising the danger of 1st MTN cracking and getting his men into a good defensive position.

If 2nd MTN take up position on the frontline, then they are able to hold-up the attackers for several more days. If they don't take up a good position quick enough, then the attackers make a complete breakthrough, and the 2nd MTN also has to retreat from the province, even though they are still at full Org.

Now let's play-out the same battle again, but organise the two Divs into a Corps formation. Whatever the mechanism for doing this we end-up with I Mountain Corps with a Lt.Gen commanding. I prefer the idea that there will be a Corps HQ unit formed with the Lt.Gen, and this will be positioned just to the rear of the two M.Divs in the adjoining province, but that is still not confirmed.

Anyway, 1st MTN is in the frontline and it has been attacked for several days. As it's Org. drops towards 0% the Lt.Gen Corps commander becomes concerned that it will soon crack. He orders the Maj.Gen commanding 2nd MTN to move forward and relieve 1st MTN in the frontline. Now the chances of this happening are much higher. Let's just guess at 90%. It is not entirely dependent on the initiative of the 2nd MTN's Maj.Gen. Instead, it is dependent on the skills/traits and doctrines of the Lt.Gen commander of I Mountain Corps. An average Corps commander would still give a higher chance of 2nd MTN getting into position, than not having a Corps formation. This is because that is his job, to ensure that the Divs are able to support each other.

In addition, there might be other benefits of having a Corps formation. This is entire speculation on my part, but it seems reasonable that if the Lt.Gen pulls 1st MTN out of the frontline before their Org. reaches 0% they may not have to retreat from the province. They go into reserve in the same province a few km behind 2nd MTN. They can regain some Org. and then be available to be put back into the frontline later, if 2nd MTN can hold-out for any length of time.

Since this takes place entirely with the combat system, within a single province, IMO this will all take place completely under the control of the AI. You will be able to see which Div is in the frontline, which is in reserve, whether an event takes place for the 2nd MTN to take over the frontline, etc. only within the combat screen. You will not be able to affect this directly.

Now, let's play-out again. Let's have the same 2 Divs in the province organised into I Mountain Corps with a Lt.Gen, but give the Corps a third Div: 3rd MTN. This is not in the province where the combat is taking place. Instead, it is in tactical reserve, in the adjoining province where the Corps HQ is located.

If you are micro-managing the units in this Corps, and you can see that 1st and 2nd MTN might struggle to defend the province, then you can give 3rd MTN an order to move into the frontline province and help the defense. Once it completes it's forward move, it will join the combat, but as a further reserve unit. Now, because there are two different Divs in reserve in the province, the chances that one of them will be able to take up a densive position as the new frontline, will be higher than if there was just one. Let's just guess that this might be 95%.

But if the Corps is under AI control, and you have given the Lt.Gen an order to defend this mountain province, then I would expect the Lt.Gen commanding I Mountain Corps to give the order to 3rd MTN to move forward and join the combat, without you having to micro-manage the situation.
Click to expand...
It would be really awesome if the game works like that... you should work for PI, that is an excellent idea :D.
 
:) ;)
 
Last edited:
dublish said:
Wrong.



That is what Johan is intending.
Click to expand...

There are three sizes of provinces on the map
- small
- medium
- large

About those three Johan said

Johan said:
We have assumed that all provinces are the same for attack frontage purposes. We justify this assumption on the grounds that these large provinces are usually in the places in the world that are remote and have hostile terrain so even though the borders are technically larger the terrain is such that you cannot use this extra space to bring more units into combat.
Click to expand...

After that Johan talked about terrain

Finally terrain also affects the frontage, when crossing a river or making a seaborne landing it is much harder to bring your massed troops to bear as compared to nice open terrain.
Click to expand...
 
i would do it in a little different way:
frontage of unit depends on baons available so 4 baon regiment is gonna have double frontage than 2 baon regt (it could be determined by doctrines)
only combat troops (baons) have frontage
so all would depend on battalions
imagine 2 div with 2 regts of 2 baons each - means 8 frontage baons and 1 div with 3 regts of 3 baons - 9 frontage space

IRL:
russian units were about 6 baons (due to lacks of manpower - it should be 9 but IRL it was only 6) and german 9 (later 7; 6 + 1; 2 regts with 3 baons + 1 'independent' fusilier baon) it means that 2 german divs cover the same frontage as 3 russian (+ off course additional units in div like combat/assault eng or recon could have additional impact on that)

Edit:
it would be nice if they dont hardcode frontage so modding that is possible
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back