• 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.
Gensui Yamamoto, you are thinking about it in a wrong way. If we get conditional peace, it will be achieved by save-game editting or a custom decision. Of course the Chinese may betray us, depending on the in-game situation, but you don't have to worry about game mechanics problems with "peacing out".


Oh...

I thought that the Chinese AI was doing that peace pop-up thing, and that's why it was in the report, rather than an RP thingy. Well that changes things...
 
But I've had FtM games where they come to a truce after a while. not many, just 1 or 2, but still...I figured it to be one of those.
 
Yamamoto,
I hope it didn't come out too harshly but supplies is the primary concern in China and I know its different from Barbarossa where the primary bottleneck is Poland (and the occupation policies).
Here we at least have lots of ports to help us (and we would be much worse off if Cybvep didn't hax the depot from time to time).
I've had the best experience with building the single strand rails as most provinces next to these never or only seldom carry any supplies. Partisans are of course a problem as they can cut the line but we simply can't afford to build a second line parallel to the main line just in case.
when playing Germany its more complicated, then there will be 3 lines from Berlin going east where the Ukraine one is the worst, the Smolensk/Moscow is bad, and the Leningrad/Archangel one is helped a lot from the ports. The ports in the south doesn't help much sadly.

Taken from paradoxian's logistic overview. (my comments in parentheses)
Green shows it is receiving all of its requested supplies and every unit is in supply. (for this purpose requested is reduced to max throughput else all hatched provinces would be brown or worse)
Blue shows a supply surplus. (our harbours near the front actually helps here as they hit the big hatched area relatively early, but observe how the Canton/Hongkong can't even turn the brown into green supply where they hit, suggesting either they don't receive much or that the demand is excessive, there are 15+ port levels there!!!)
Black shows zero supply, zero requests
Brown shows province has a supply deficit: demand is higher than throughput. Effected by infrastructure level, terrain, or tech level.
Red hatching shows limitation being imposed on the infrastructure. (this will spread out like a plague when the primary supply corridor is not build up)
Red shows demand draw is greater than required, province may or may not have supply, throughput is zero. (someone is stealing our supplies!!!)
 
LOGISTICS WILL ALWAYS BE AN ISSUE IN CHINA. Just consider this - we've been constantly transferring troops to China and our supply lines are long, while most of the provinces have 3-4 lvl infra. Sure, we can have 1-3 lines with relatively good infra (6-10), but we will never convert the whole of China to a logistical paradise unless we drop every other project. Some front-line provinces will always be hard to supply. Moreover, the frontline is dynamic and obviously the system tries to supply every division, so the supply routes change slightly all the time. Deal with this.

Also, infra impacts reinforcement/upgrade time and reorganisation. That means that it is hard to defend low-infra provinces from determined counter-attacks. Keep this in mind, too.

Shanghai depot IS NEVER AN ISSUE, because I keep checking it every 2 months or so. It rarely exceed 10k, sometimes it's as low as 6k. All other depots are much smaller. You don't have to worry about this bug or even mention it at all.

In regard to screenshots, remember that you can enlarge them by clicking on them *shocked*
 
Last edited:
In regard to screenshots, remember that you can enlarge them by clicking on them *shocked*

Hehe, yes I can, but if its not taken from the correct zoom we can only see that there are units there, at a certain distance we can see how large the stacks are, but its not a problem as long as you also write how many there are in each area, I was just surprised we had that many divisions in south China.
 
Hehe, yes I can, but if its not taken from the correct zoom we can only see that there are units there, at a certain distance we can see how large the stacks are, but its not a problem as long as you also write how many there are in each area, I was just surprised we had that many divisions in south China.
I usually paste a table with the number of brigades there. This should give you an idea :). Keep in mind that the AI keeps low-ORG troops in the rear.
 
Yamamoto,
I hope it didn't come out too harshly.....

Oh not at all :D.

I'm just puzzled by the supply screenie we got, because for all intensive purposes it looks like the front line is supplied, but the rear isn't. Normally In my experience if you've got supply trouble it tends to look the otherway round, and the fact that we can clearly see that the throughput is being limited by infra, which we also know is lv.10 is even more confusing.

To me, it looks like in terms of supply from depot to front, we can't improve it any more. Therefore frontline infra is only doing so much.

What's more puzzling to me than this though, is why the supply issue has hit us where it has hit us. In the vast majority of my Japanese games it normally tends to get me more just as I've got to Golmud and the Tibetian hinterlands. Perhaps its the fact we have a lot more troops there then my games and we don't overrun/encircle enough because we can't really play all that tactically, and don't have Caverly to exploit breakthroughs.

Eitherway, China was fought historically with Great War Era weapons for the most part, in this history the Chinese are putting up an equal fight, therefore WW1 era fighting is to be expected. Unfortunatly this is WW1 Austian-Italian front style in the Mountains.....one of the most pointless fronts of the war killing about 651 men in every 5,000 and wounding another 953, bringing casulities up to 32% in general. It looks like the army units are fighting on aggressive rather than defensive stance too given the high costly attacks. Therefore going defensive is always an option for us there.

The great thing is though, we are one of the 3 in game nations that doesn't really have a MP problem, although given this is HPP eventually that War Werieness will kick in later rather than sooner from costly battles. Hell, we haven't even 'Advertised the Solidering Profession' yet, hence we've got about 15,000% more manpower avalible to us should we 'ahem' call in the reservists. That shouldn't be done unless we can change the Chinese in the lands already taken by us to support that movement too however. Hence better to save until we are running low.

The only real concern here is the Soviets, and keeping the winning side of the naval battles.
 
MP in itself is not a problem, but war exhaustion, ICdays needed for reinforcements and decreasing officer ratio are. Everything will be taken into account in the epilogue (and my endings are not different only on paper - this is not ME3) and we have about 2,5 years of gameplay left (the rest of 1943, the whole 1944 and the whole 1945).
 
Regarding the calling in the reserve, I had 2 different Japanese games lately, one I stayed on standing army and one on drafted, there were wide differences in those two, in the standing army I don't call in reserves.

Regarding supplies, in HOI3 it works opposite of what I would assume, namely that the units closed to the depot and harbours would be supplied first and that supplies was flowing from those toward the units at the front.
But in HOI its demand that "flows" toward the depot and the supplies arriving at ports also flows toward the depot unless it happens to meet a province with demand, as seen in south China. As opposed the Fuzou(sp?) has its blue supply flowing nearly all the way up to Shanghai before being "demanded" just outside.
If the front now moves just one province further inland in south China we might get huge supply problems there as the supplies from the ports would first reach a demand later and therefore giving huge supply problems.
On the other hand the Central front is independent of this, except if the south demands too much and therefore steals more than its share like we are on the edge of doing now, hence my request to move forces to the central front.
The further the central front advances the more of its units will get priority over the southern forces and be well supplies. In the long run the low infra provinces will be a problem unless we upgrade right up to to the front.
 
I'm coming in late here, so I'm reluctant to bombard you with a ton of (likely already answered) questions, but I do want to let you guys know how interesting this concept is and will definitely be following. I'm curious...do the in game frictions between all these different parties/players trickle outside of the game itself? Everyone getting along ok? I'd be a terrible partner is such a setup....I'd be too demanding I think :)
 
If the front now moves just one province further inland in south China we might get huge supply problems there as the supplies from the ports would first reach a demand later and therefore giving huge supply problems.
On the other hand the Central front is independent of this, except if the south demands too much and therefore steals more than its share like we are on the edge of doing now, hence my request to move forces to the central front.
The further the central front advances the more of its units will get priority over the southern forces and be well supplies. In the long run the low infra provinces will be a problem unless we upgrade right up to to the front.
My fear is that weakening Army Group South will render it incapable of fighting and units will be pushed back South from where they came. I also don't trust our supply network enough to transfer units into a front that had huge supply problems not so long ago. Perhaps Cybvep could test it out? I really hate it when we have to deal with artificially produced nosenses... System works fair enough on lesser difficulty ratings as you need less men to do similar work. Here we are forced to use huge numbers of troops to counteract various disadvantages and because of too many units supply system cracks down.
 
I'm coming in late here, so I'm reluctant to bombard you with a ton of (likely already answered) questions, but I do want to let you guys know how interesting this concept is and will definitely be following. I'm curious...do the in game frictions between all these different parties/players trickle outside of the game itself? Everyone getting along ok? I'd be a terrible partner is such a setup....I'd be too demanding I think :)
I get along with all the players just fine. Don't know what do the players think about themselves, though :D. However, I guess that we all know that we are just RP here...

My fear is that weakening Army Group South will render it incapable of fighting and units will be pushed back South from where they came. I also don't trust our supply network enough to transfer units into a front that had huge supply problems not so long ago. Perhaps Cybvep could test it out? I really hate it when we have to deal with artificially produced nosenses... System works fair enough on lesser difficulty ratings as you need less men to do similar work. Here we are forced to use huge numbers of troops to counteract various disadvantages and because of too many units supply system cracks down.
China should be a logistical nightmare, as it was IRL. This was one of the main reasons why the Japanese didn't win. I agree that the system can be counter-intuitive at times, though, but I cannot change it - I can only provide info about the in-game situation or the game mechanics. I will certainly not send you letters from the future! ;)
 
ooh, mounting tension. always fun to watch!