-
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.
Maybe this is a bit out of place, but speaking about "unternehmen barbarossa" I was always amazed about the success of the german army during the first two years of the campaign, considering the huge amount of divisions and armys the Soviets had.
A couple of weeks ago i started reading von Mansteins "Lost victories" and only than i realized that the typical russian Schützen-Division was in no way comparable to a german Infantrie-Division.
Manstein writes that 2 german Infantrie-Divisions (around 15.000 each) were - by sheer Manpower - the equivalent of 3 russian Schützen-Divisions (around 9.000 each).
I really don't know wether a beat a dead horse here, and this has been taken into account a long time ago.
But it seems to me like this has always been translated into the poor performance of russian divisions during the start of barbarossa, because up to now the different makeup of divisions could be modeled?
A couple of weeks ago i started reading von Mansteins "Lost victories" and only than i realized that the typical russian Schützen-Division was in no way comparable to a german Infantrie-Division.
Manstein writes that 2 german Infantrie-Divisions (around 15.000 each) were - by sheer Manpower - the equivalent of 3 russian Schützen-Divisions (around 9.000 each).
I really don't know wether a beat a dead horse here, and this has been taken into account a long time ago.
But it seems to me like this has always been translated into the poor performance of russian divisions during the start of barbarossa, because up to now the different makeup of divisions could be modeled?
Last edited:
its very true that what contituted a "division" was different by each countries standard...
italy fielded many divisions that germany considered to be only "half" strength...
italy fielded many divisions that germany considered to be only "half" strength...
Probably because the state of Croatia was technically a subject nation of Italy even though the Ustase basically listened to the Germans?
German division where larger, but still Soviets had a huge advantage in numbers through those two years.
It seams it had not been taken into account in HoI3 but not entirely. There are differences between size, and consistance of divisions of other countries, but still German divisions will not be as large as those that they had in reality.
Last edited:
The Soviets had less combat strength on 21st June than Axis. According to Wiki, anyway, you can check their sources.
@serial
No Question about that. But consider the consequences:
While the Soviets catch up in doctrines ... they will have a huge - and undue - advantage if their divisions are built like german Divisions.
Their divisons shouldn't be built like german ones at the start of barbarossa at least. And in the end it's a question about manpower. Sure they should have much more than Germany. But how much is the real question. And how much they can equip. Producing equipment for 9.000 is something different than for 15.000.
To make it simple 300 german divisions would be: 4.5 Mio Soldiers. 300 Soviet-Divisions just 2.7 Mio. Thats a hell of a difference.
Volkssturm restructuring etc. not taken into account. The point is more on the russian side. How good/big should those divisions be.
Especially with the new frontage-System the makeup of divisions (two, three or four brigades) makes major difference.
No Question about that. But consider the consequences:
While the Soviets catch up in doctrines ... they will have a huge - and undue - advantage if their divisions are built like german Divisions.
Their divisons shouldn't be built like german ones at the start of barbarossa at least. And in the end it's a question about manpower. Sure they should have much more than Germany. But how much is the real question. And how much they can equip. Producing equipment for 9.000 is something different than for 15.000.
To make it simple 300 german divisions would be: 4.5 Mio Soldiers. 300 Soviet-Divisions just 2.7 Mio. Thats a hell of a difference.
Volkssturm restructuring etc. not taken into account. The point is more on the russian side. How good/big should those divisions be.
Especially with the new frontage-System the makeup of divisions (two, three or four brigades) makes major difference.
Last edited:
The problem is that for many countries the difference in size was at the regimental level and below. HoI3 only has divisions of varying strength, the brigades/regiments are of uniform size.
Historically both, Soviet and German infantry divisions had 3 infantry regiments. This seems to have carried over to HoI3 directly, judging from screenies. So as a result, Soviet and German divisions are of the same size.
It's not really possible to have divisions of historical size without going deeper down the structure (the battallion mod some ppl talk about, though the differences could be even further down the chain) or by having brigades of varying size.
Unless we ignore the historical regiment allocation and give trinary infantry divisions anything up to 6-7 infantry brigades.
In a way it's kind sad that they gave us customizable divisions, yet it's not possible to fully represent the difference between armed forces. Though I guess the only effect of this is that the countries which had big divisions historically will end up building more in HoI3, and that's not a biggie.
I wonder though, how will the historical startups be handled? Will, for example, Germany and Japan get extra ahistorical divisions or will they be left understrenght?
Historically both, Soviet and German infantry divisions had 3 infantry regiments. This seems to have carried over to HoI3 directly, judging from screenies. So as a result, Soviet and German divisions are of the same size.
It's not really possible to have divisions of historical size without going deeper down the structure (the battallion mod some ppl talk about, though the differences could be even further down the chain) or by having brigades of varying size.
Unless we ignore the historical regiment allocation and give trinary infantry divisions anything up to 6-7 infantry brigades.
In a way it's kind sad that they gave us customizable divisions, yet it's not possible to fully represent the difference between armed forces. Though I guess the only effect of this is that the countries which had big divisions historically will end up building more in HoI3, and that's not a biggie.
I wonder though, how will the historical startups be handled? Will, for example, Germany and Japan get extra ahistorical divisions or will they be left understrenght?
Last edited:
I would think that with the ability to make new unit types you could make German infantry brigades only used by Germans and Soviet,etc. This way you could have the right number of units but change say the frontage where a Soviet division of 3 infantry brigades holds a frontage of say 6 (2 per brigade) as opposed to a German brigade that has a frontage of say 4 per brigade. If you take 1k man to mean 1 unit of frontage that means you would have 6k infantry in a Soviet division and 12k infantry in a German division. Since we track strength now at the brigade level and that affects stats than German divisions would be more powerful than Soviet ones but you could fit more Soviet divisions per province allowing you to have a hundred German divisions facing off against 300 Soviet divisions but the actual manpower differences much different.
Most likely they will be understrength at the start of "grand campaign". Otherwise its no biggie to mod it.
Only because in initial battles Soviet divisions were so decimated.
Early standard (1941) for Soviet division was not so much lower then for German one - curiously enough, it was similar in infantry part, HIGHER in artillery part and something that Germans never had (except from "prestige" units like Grossdeutchland), in armored part. Main difference on the German advantage was in support part - Soviet division were very light on backup services.
Of course, it have changed after 1941 disaster, when they have lost so much equipment that newly formed units were simply forced to use less equipment.
It's a side issue for game anyway - for all game purposes, at the start of the 1941 scenario Soviet units should either have very low ORG and/or STR, representing suprise effect and chance for shatter. They shouldn't have different structure then they have in reality though - and since logistical/support elements of the division/corps are not represented, it couldn't be properly show anyway.
Last edited:
What I'm talking about is the 2nd screenshot that is about Soviet Diplomacy. Romania, Croatia, Bulgaria and Hungary are not listed as part of the Axis even though they are together in a war WITH Germany against the Soviet Union.
It could be what Alexander Seil said, but there were screenshots posted which showed all the Axis nations in the Axis alliance.
This is looking awesome, one thing I want to remind everyone reading is that this is a Beta from over two months ago, so if there any typos or things out of place I'm sure they're fixed by now.
Little offense as possible meant towards Paradox however in this day and age continuously hearing press reviews and beta aars are based off outdated builds starts to ring alarm bells.
True we do a good job at annoying Paradox of every single thing wrong, but I guess I just hate to see hundreds of people saying "Why isn't this fixed yet?! Why does this look this way, but in this screen it's that way?!"
It is a good thing for sure but you have to keep in mind the absolute bliss a company like Paradox is for even listening. Just compare them with the producers of the Total War series. That's a completely different league. We are nitpicking over here on divisional sizes, that was an almost unplayable game at release.
I am glad you guys like the AAR so far. I have written two more chapters and will post one of them tomorrow.