I love how fast you update Mosby! I get excited after coming back from work knowing that there's probably an update waiting!
-
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.
Are those statistics from your enemies correct (alla nofog in HoI2), or based on your intelligence?
Point is, they didn't have 4-5 brigades, they had 3 regiments (brigades) + internal artillery regiment that is NOT counted, but neither are counted Soviet artillery regiments (BTW, if you look at the summary in AAR you will notice Soviets have not a single artillery brigade, which is... well, not precise, to say at least).
German division on 22 june 1941 was slightly bigger, but mainly in support services - infantry regiments were similar, soviets had bigger artillery regiments and additionally, tank/armoured car battalion (or maybe company - anyway, more then Germans). Germans had more specialists and support, like AT, communications, logistics and such (Soviets relied more on corps/army level services in those aspects).
Soviet divisions GOT smaller, but that was after disaster at the start of Barbarossa.
It actually seems that the '41 Soviet organization called for divisions which were about the same size as German ones, around 14-15000 men. However, in reality most seem to have been under 10000 and many with as little as 6000 men.
I gets down to representation. Do we give the soviets historical amount of regiments that are just understrength? This risk severely overpowering USSR, especially if reinforcing is still cheaper than building new units. For example, if Germany has about 20 tank brigades in barbarossa scenario, Soviets should have about 150 of them. Which they then could reinforce with relative ease, before or after shattering. I'd just crop down the Soviet historical OOB and keep most stuff at full strength.
IMO, adhering to a strict "a triangular division must always have 3 brigades" policy is not a good way to go, as I already argued in another thread. To give a bit of an extreme example: The infantry regiments of a triangular (2 regular + 1 blackshirt) Italian infantry division amounted to about 4500 men total (ie. all 3 combined). At the same time, a single infantry regiment of triangular Japanese type A division had nearly 5000 men (for total of about 14500 for 3 regiments). In game these formations would (and propably will) be of same size. Historically accurate?
Last edited:
Wouldn't the easiest solution be to give them the historical number of divisions but with fewer brigades to the division (i.e. close to the number of troops they actually had). That way you avoid the re-inforcement bonus (assuming it exists).
Yes, because reorganization was unfinished (plus Soviets were often splitting already formed units in two to fill them up later) and units were short, especially on support services. Hence my suggestion to represent first echelon (border units) by 30-50% STR and low ORG on the day 1 of invasion. If you combine it with low officer number, it will lead to shatters and problems in initial defense, but hopefully over time Soviets will be able to rebuild army big enough to stop Germans (which might be impossible if the initial number of units gets lower).
It's better representation then artificial reduction of the regiments/brigades number - because all structures were there and understrength should be represented by, well, lower STR.
To put it blunt - when you start dropping historical data for "balance changes" game goes wrong way. Not because it leaves historical path and goes ahistorical - no, not because of that at all. Problem is that it replaces historical logic that caused this and that with external, game logic and it leads to game gradually losing contact with the topic it tries to recreate.
Anyway, back to point 1 - it's 1941 scenario. It says absolutely nothing how balance looks like in the most important scenario of the game, which is 1936 game. In 1936 IC, doctrine and technological advantage will be much more important as OOB will be most likely completly different then in dedicated 1941 scenario (for starters, Soviet player will never be able to build such a huge armoured and air force).
Last edited:
Oh, just a snide comment on the hoi2 model of magical fairies airwar modeling!
Is it me, or 436 infantry divisions is a little over the top...
10 000 is a division (let's have it rough), then 4 360 000 troops, just in infantry???
And that's counting Germany as a 80 million population (today, not in 1940s)
Correct me if i am wrong )
EDIT:
Sorry, had to add, that 21 Armoured divisions as opposed to 436 infantry divisions significantly lowers my faith in the German war machine lol )
10 000 is a division (let's have it rough), then 4 360 000 troops, just in infantry???
And that's counting Germany as a 80 million population (today, not in 1940s)
Correct me if i am wrong )
EDIT:
Sorry, had to add, that 21 Armoured divisions as opposed to 436 infantry divisions significantly lowers my faith in the German war machine lol )
436 brigades not divisions. Germany had around 166 divisions with around 3 Brigades in each division. The numbers are pretty accurate.
They are counting brigades not divisions. A brigade are probably between 1000-5000 fighting and support personnel.
At the begin of operation Barbarossa there where 3.000.000 troops, supported by 1.300.000 from the Luftwaffe.
And together with the other axis countrys: 4.700.000 soldiers, 3.600 tanks, 3000 planes.
I posted the link earlier but here it is again for the German Army on 22 June 1941. http://niehorster.orbat.com/011_germany/41-oob/41_frame_nos.html The games starting OOB is quite close.
Not times 3, more like X 4 or 5. German brigade/regimental strength far outweighed the USSR ones, a USSR corps was often equal to a full German division.
Lots of good and useful points, but isn't the basic challenge with the USSR that it was almost willfully unprepared, coupled with very poor strategic decisions in the first six months?
HoI3 can certainly capture being unprepared in the 1941 scenario, but it is perfectly reasonable to *expect* that the Soviet player can hold than the Dnepr line. I can't remember if there will be a 1942 scenario, but this would really be the only way to represent an accurate and highly compromised Soviet position that requires some skill to get out from.
I'll keep you to that. 35,000 to go
Just don't give Emu any ideas about "worthless" units... otherwise he'll have this thread beat in no time!
I agree with that too, hands offs will adjust the final needed, which should be the original OOB, but the strengths/org/bonusses/speed etc should be adjusted.
Well, my experience with Soviets in more specialized games (like WiR, which is kinda ultimate eastern front strategic game) is that if player controlling USSR knows what to do, he will always stop Germans on Pskov/Vitebsk/Kiev line, then start moving forward in 1942 at the latest, after wiping most of the German armies in cauldrons.
To properly simulate what was happening in 1941, player controlling Soviets would have to do the following:
1) Roll a dice.
2) If it's 1-3, player does nothing for 2 days ("orders have not reached units"). After 2 days of watching units sitting on their 4letters, he can roll again.
3) If it's 4-5, player turns AI on over all units and turns them into attack mode with destinations - Danzig, Warsaw, Krakow, Bucarest ("counterattack!!!"). After 2 days of watching AI controlled units, he can roll again.
4) If he rolls 6, he can control his units ("Zhukov's plane reached Front command, he will execute us all if we won't listen!"). After 2 days of this lucky time, he can roll again.
5) After 7th July, only 1 means units do nothing, 2-4 means they counterattack, 5-6 - player have control.
6) After 25th August, player gets full control over units.
Voila, you have working Eastern Front.
PS. Actually it's a stolen idea from fantastic "Flashpoint Germany" game, where your orders have delay times and might actually cause more trouble then help.
There is a December 1941 scenario. The only other new scenario is the February 1943 one.
Chapter four: Leningrad and Murmansk
For some reason several of my divisions were still inside Finish borders. Not that I mend as I will then have a bit more depth for my defence and a good advance warning system. Good, the Leningrad front is a strong front, several strong armies in a good defensive position and fortifications on the main approaches to Peter’s old capital.
Further down the line, to the north, however, my defences aren’t as strong.
Only a single weak corps protects the Murmansk line, which will be vital due to the Lend-Lease pact with the Allies.
At Murmansk itself a sizable force is stationed, which will be shortly reinforced by the two NKVD divisions I found in Archangelsk. The Finish are still neutral and only eyeing us from their trenches just across the border but the German forces in Finland attack straight away. The first move to the Murmansk rail line is thwarted quickly but if they build up some more forces for a second attempt I won’t come away as easy. I will need more troops here.
From Leningrad the Baltic fleet is sent out to patrol the Gulf of Finland. Even though it is of no use in the beta as there is no Naval AI yet.
From Moscow two armies and the Stavka reserves move west (strategic movenemt) to take up positions in the Dnjepr area. They will be my new reserves for the Stalin line, which isn’t finished yet. Although several divisions are send on to fill threatened gaps straight away. The worst of these is the gap in the front west of Odessa, Rumanian troops are pouring through.
At this moment idle divisions are called in from the Far East as well. Once they arrive they can create positions around Kiev and Minsk, moving the other reserves to the front. I will also need a reserve east of Riga as I will be in terrible peril if the Dvina river line breaks. But that’s all for the future.
Why is kKmito a land locket province? it is a part of a island!