Colonial Armies

[Vaya con Queso]

I think that brigades available to be recruited from colonial provinces should be restricted to irregulars, because otherwise the UK and France are just too (ahistorically) powerful.

It makes sense, in my opinion, because colonies would not be able to provide the same level of military training as a proper military academy. Also, colonial populations were largely illiterate and didn't speak the same language as their European overlords, and so they wouldn't be as disciplined/organized as professional soldiers. And creating hordes of armor, airplanes, and other advanced units from colonial populations just doesn't make sense.

I'd really just like to see an end to the whole "create colonial empire=>build massive army=>world domination" thing, is what I'm saying.

Thoughts?

[grommile]

The problem is that the Indian Army of the British Raj did, in fact, recruit cavalry and regular infantry from the population of India.

[Breyer]

The problem is that the Indian Army of the British Raj did, in fact, recruit cavalry and regular infantry from the population of India.

Excellent point. And those troops weren't as awful as some of the colonials raised by other powers at this time. In fact they weren't awful at all. could there be a literacy limit under which you can't raise anything other than irregulars in that province? I'm not sure if literacy was why Indian troops were capable of being of such unusually high quality, though. But I do agree with the OP, the old formula gets tiring.

But how would we do CTW with wurtemburg then??? =(

[Breyer]

Here's an idea: Make the construction of a fort in a colonial province a prerequisite for drafting anything other than irregulars in that province. Then make forts prohibitively costly.

Works?

[Vaya con Queso]

Here's an idea: Make the construction of a fort in a colonial province a prerequisite for drafting anything other than irregulars in that province. Then make forts prohibitively costly.

Works?

Hmm... I actually like this. Maybe a level one fort would allow infantry, level two cavalry, and level three artillery. And then then province would have to be made a state to allow guards, airplanes, armor, etc.

Of course, the AI will just fort-spam anyway, regardless of the cost.

[FrozenWall]

But the Indian troops were never used outside of India in any real numbers, even in WWI the Indian army lost a mere 48,000 total all theatres. The Indian army was chiefly used for controlling India itself, something that is not adequately modelled. In fact I don't know of any real pre-WWI engagements outside of India during the time period, not even during the opium wars. In addition it numbered some 60-100.000 pre WWI, while in the game you can spew out vastly larger armies.

I think what is needed is for the colonial soldier pops to simply be shrunk. Make the % of income they get from the slider contingent on their literacy, that way they can't grow to these ridiculous sizes. No more autowin for taking Java & Sumatra.

[Krautkopf]

In fact I don't know of any real pre-WWI engagements outside of India during the time period, not even during the opium wars.

At least during the so-called Boxer Rebellion of 1900, Indian units accounted for a nice chunk of the British forces employed in that campaign.
But back to topic: "irregulars" imo depicts tribal warriors or an armed mob of untrained ad hoc fighters... virtually all the colonial forces, never mind whether raised by Britain, France, Germany, whoever, were of far higher training and disclipline, better armed and organized. I would not like to see them depicted as irregulars...

[the_Hussar]

No more autowin for taking Java & Sumatra.

This is a problem ...

I like the idea of irregulars for colonials.

[Grubnessul]

I like the idea of necessity of a fortress, would also make those worth a bit more.

Another possible idea would be to increase the number of soldier pops needed for colonial armies. So instead of 3000, 9000 or something.

[Breyer]

At least during the so-called Boxer Rebellion of 1900, Indian units accounted for a nice chunk of the British forces employed in that campaign.
But back to topic: "irregulars" imo depicts tribal warriors or an armed mob of untrained ad hoc fighters... virtually all the colonial forces, never mind whether raised by Britain, France, Germany, whoever, were of far higher training and disclipline, better armed and organized. I would not like to see them depicted as irregulars...

What if there was a new type of garrison unit implemented? Something that stayed within a province to defend it in case of attack. It would be physically besieged when the province were attacked. If you make it so that colonial provinces can only make garrison troops?

[KPJ]

I think the v1/R solution is the best, in fact I've been playing revolutions lately and it still holds as a great game.
In that game Colonial troops have a significant penalty to reliability, which means they suffer higher attrition, and they only counted 1/10 of military score. So if you mix them with regular troops they can definitely provide the firepower and flesh needed to win battles, but overall they are less effective and someone can't drive up their military score on account of them.

[No idea]

Any army needs officers and NCOs (the more the better), and you can´t have decent officers, or even NCOs, without being literate. How many people in India were literate IN ENGLISH during the era 1836 to 1936?. I am sure not many. What I am trying to say is that even if real life or in game India can give the UK countless hordes of infantrymen, the real life or in game UK can´t provide enough officers. So, which should be the solution?

I think the one proponed by FrozenWall should be taken. Shrink how many POPs you get out of non accepted cultures (or it was out of non civilized states?) even further.

KPJ one also seems good to me.

[vaalen]

I think the v1/R solution is the best, in fact I've been playing revolutions lately and it still holds as a great game.
In that game Colonial troops have a significant penalty to reliability, which means they suffer higher attrition, and they only counted 1/10 of military score. So if you mix them with regular troops they can definitely provide the firepower and flesh needed to win battles, but overall they are less effective and someone can't drive up their military score on account of them.

I agree completely. That solution worked. I will have to try reinstalling Victoria revolutions. In many ways, I enjoyed the game more.

[HMS Enterprize]

But the Indian troops were never used outside of India in any real numbers, even in WWI the Indian army lost a mere 48,000 total all theatres. The Indian army was chiefly used for controlling India itself, something that is not adequately modelled. In fact I don't know of any real pre-WWI engagements outside of India during the time period, not even during the opium wars.

I believe Indian troops were used in an expedition to Ethiopia, the various wars in Afgahnistan and were used for at least garrison duty in the far east IIRC.

The fort idea proposed was a good idea, as would be keeping the old Vic1 rules for colonial troops.

[grommile]

Any army needs officers and NCOs (the more the better), and you can´t have decent officers, or even NCOs, without being literate. How many people in India were literate IN ENGLISH during the era 1836 to 1936?. I am sure not many.

Until the 1920s, the officers of the British Indian Army were mostly British - and required to learn Hindi.

[DoomBunny]

I think that brigades available to be recruited from colonial provinces should be restricted to irregulars, because otherwise the UK and France are just too (ahistorically) powerful.

It makes sense, in my opinion, because colonies would not be able to provide the same level of military training as a proper military academy. Also, colonial populations were largely illiterate and didn't speak the same language as their European overlords, and so they wouldn't be as disciplined/organized as professional soldiers. And creating hordes of armor, airplanes, and other advanced units from colonial populations just doesn't make sense.

I'd really just like to see an end to the whole "create colonial empire=>build massive army=>world domination" thing, is what I'm saying.

Thoughts?

But Canuck, ANZAC and Indian/Ghurka troops were some of the finest quality troops to ever serve the British Empire.

[FrozenWall]

But Canuck, ANZAC and Indian/Ghurka troops were some of the finest quality troops to ever serve the British Empire.

They were, but until WWI they were not employed outside of their immediate area. Nowhere in the historybooks have I read about the German high command quivering in their boots at the thought of the Netherlands intervening in the Franco-German conflicts with their massive Javan armies of DOOM. Never mind the Russians, it's not like they could field anything close to the Epic Colonial Legions of Holland!

[Ugly Guy]

I agree with raising the pop requirement for colonial soldiers. It doesn't penalize quality, but reflects the fact that the mother country could only pull so many troops from their overseas empires, and at a vastly discounted rate compared to the homelands. I also support tying quality of overseas troops or reliability to literacy, although that may make it more complex. I also think that high literacy in colonies should affect militancy and bureaucrat promotion be inversly proportional to the distance from the colony to the capital.

Of course I have other wishes as well...

[markslawson]

I agree mostly that colonial soldies can be used too freely in the game, although you can always come up with historical examples to back the game's treatment. France used African soldiers in the Franco-Prussian war (where they did well), and on the western front in WWI (where they did less well, due to the cold of the trenches). England was always using Indian troops outside of India, notably Gurkhas who could moved around with relative ease, and Sikhs, unlike Hindu soldiers who have cultural restrictions (although they can still be used overseas) - however, their main use was to keep order in India.

As for useful restrictions in the game. I would suggest considerable reduction in the number of soldiers that can be recruited from colonial provinces, even after they become states, and prohibit the recruitment of guards. As it is, the game just treats any province in the colonies as the same any in europe and clearly they were not.

[No idea]

Until the 1920s, the officers of the British Indian Army were mostly British - and required to learn Hindi.

What I meant was that India miht provide the UK with almost unlimited number of soldiers, but the UK, due to the fact that officers were brithish only, could not provide enough officers for the huge number number of soldiers they could have conscripted in India. So, with thios on mind, I think the brigades the UK can recruit out of India should be severily restricted. Not because of manpower shortages, but because of officers shortage. Officers are not taken into account when you build a military unit as they are in HoI 3, but no officiers means no unit should be built, so, some limit should be put so that the UK can´t build endless brigades out of indian soldier POPs