Division Maker

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 2, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #1

i was wondering what everyone else thinks about the current division maker. it's definately a great improvement over HOI2, but for HOI4 would you like to see it expand or stay the same?
i would like an expansion to battalion level units:
cant be built on their own, but when building a division you have the option to add specific battalions to each regiment (brigade). so you could build a true to form panzer division with armoured cars and mortercycles, tanks, mortorized infantry, artillery, tank destroyers, and engineers, or a light motorized divsion with only one Battalion of tanks (could be useful considering how much tanks cost in 3.06)
id also like it if auxilary battalions were included (just for realism, maybe with bonuses) such as medical battalions, signal battalions, and supply/administration battalions (a bonus for example would be that medical battalions increase casualty trickle back)
this would also increase division size to historical levels with the addition of non-frontline troops
thats just what i want, what do you guys think?

 

unmerged(364820)

First Lieutenant

8 Badges

Aug 15, 2011

251

1

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 2, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #2

Wow, I like micromanaging but that would be too much even for me. Wow . . . basically mixed regiments? That's a lot of detail for a game of this scope.

 

basun

First Lieutenant

37 Badges

Nov 16, 2007

296

3

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 2, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #3

I believe it would do more harm than good, since it would be incredibly difficult to make good use of it all and it would take forever to make your units decent enough.

I would however like many more upgrades in form of tech advances, such as artic warfare equipment etc. But for more units. If you need the stuff, you research it basically. Maybe one tech for medic to be included in your infantry units etc

 

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 2, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #4

well you probably would end up making use of more templates, but it allows for much more variation, just like there really was in the war. ie no one had the same divisions
also you could do it like:
regiment types: armoured, motorized, recon, infantry, artillery...and only certain battalions could be in certain regiments...although your problably right, it would turn into a micromanaging nightmare
template and actaully useful pre set divisions could help though

 

Pro_Consul

Convicted Drive-by Poster

85 Badges

Aug 4, 2003

5.598

382

Visit site

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #5

LoftenHenderson said:

i would like an expansion to battalion level units

Click to expand...

When you model units down to the battalion level you are no longer talking about a grand strategy game; you are then dealing with an operational level game. That is not to say I wouldn't be interested in playing such a game, because I definitely would if Paradox made one. But the whole game would need to be modeled to that scale. Regional scenarios make the best settings for such operational level games, e.g. Market-Garden, the North African campaign, etc.

 

C

comsubpac

Banned

76 Badges

Jul 23, 2009

12.176

3

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #6

the problem is: who would actually use it? isn't it already the case that most people either use the default templates or only use the "best" configuration? in the end we theoretically have more choices but we end up with using the same divisions anyway. most likely it will only do two things: increase the amount of micromanagement and give the player another advantage.
sure, it would be nice for some situations and maybe it would add a lot of flavour but from a gameplay perspective its complicated.

 

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #7

im not talking independent battalions here, they just makeup divisions, and cannot operate by themselves; although i do get what you're saying
maybe paradox should make an all encompasing strategy game with tactical and grand strat sections that'd be epic
(i could see HOI4 like that though)

 

Thanik

Lt. General

5 Badges

Mar 26, 2012

1.576

113

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #8

Using battalion model is excellent to scenarios like Desert Fox, not when you directly control all armies,navies and airforce. Maybe dual units/map system ->scenarios/campaign? Or make two new games

When you raise number of units x2 ,or give x2more techs -> you raise also usage of memory/CPU, and you gain even more AI confuse (becouse he can't counter your strategy).

You can try AHOI3 MOD and you will see what I am talking about. You can tell us how fast is progress of time when barbarossa starts...

 

Shady Ed

First Lieutenant

75 Badges

Sep 19, 2009

273

31

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #9

I've wanted that for a while. You would do it while building the Division though, you would design your brigades and save them as templates then move on to constructing your division with brigades.

 

plasticpanzers

Field Marshal

25 Badges

Oct 6, 2007

4.405

258

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #10

The model they use in the HPP mod is a brilliant idea. Art/AT/AA/AC are part of the "support"
brigade and they are all included once you start researching the tech they 'fill in' the support
unit giving it more and more flexibility and power. You can have horse/motor/mech support
units and they become more and more mobile. Very nifty idea and takes the sting out of trying
to build historical units with the current system.

 

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #11

that seems like a great compromise between the two ideas

 

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #12

(although id still love battalions btw ;D)

 

Dieselboater

Colonel

66 Badges

Jun 21, 2009

815

10

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #13

Shady Ed said:

I've wanted that for a while. You would do it while building the Division though, you would design your brigades and save them as templates then move on to constructing your division with brigades.

Click to expand...

The problem is, the AI's tiny little brain would explode... it would never use & choose optimally.

As PlasticPanzers said, the HPP mod has simulated this, while simplifying the complexity and micromanagement, by having techs cumulatively affect these "Combined Combat Support Brigades", which then benefit and reflect the specializations and improvements made....

HPP is also my favorite mod!

 

JASGripen

Field Marshal

10 Badges

Jun 14, 2004

4.574

14

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #14

The OP suggestion is a tad bit to much. But letting divisions have a given number of Battalion slots and regiment slots should be a good option for HoI4. Say 6 regiment slots (of which two only can be supportive-types, the rest of the slots will be units with "frontage" to use HoI3 terms) and a handful of Battalion slots (say 5 to allow a division to have all types of support inherent). A given HQ slot should be a must (no slots for C3 and Logistic, they are given).

Then one can model a rather true division model rather than the HoI3 model which abstract some elements in a division but not others. For example division artillery must be placed in a slot (often regiment, but it could be on bat. level too in a weaker division. ART. could then be bought a both reg. and bat.).

With this one could for example get rid of the "milita" unit. Instead an INF unit lagging in tech and having no other elements in the division than INF-type regiments will be its very nature be milita; milita would be a state not a designation.

With this it would be nice to also allocate units in Higher HQ, giving subordinate units a bonus accordingly to the type of unit in the HQ if within command range (e.g. Corps Art. give a bonus to the Corps division's if within command range).

 

Hoffdogg

Major

5 Badges

Aug 12, 2011

677

0

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #15

Does anyone use motorised divisions? I seem to only use Infantry and Tank divisions.

 

C

Charles Reeps

General

9 Badges

Mar 4, 2010

2.311

16

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #16

Hoffdogg said:

Does anyone use motorised divisions? I seem to only use Infantry and Tank divisions.

Click to expand...

All the time...even the "gamey" 2XMOT/2XTD that nets you the combined arms bonus. I also use 3XMOT/1ENG for countries lacking in the leadership/IC to make armor. This is a fast, powerful division, and it is very fast. It is perfect for Italy and Japan.

 

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #17

JASGripen said:

The OP suggestion is a tad bit to much. But letting divisions have a given number of Battalion slots and regiment slots should be a good option for HoI4. Say 6 regiment slots (of which two only can be supportive-types, the rest of the slots will be units with "frontage" to use HoI3 terms) and a handful of Battalion slots (say 5 to allow a division to have all types of support inherent). A given HQ slot should be a must (no slots for C3 and Logistic, they are given).

Then one can model a rather true division model rather than the HoI3 model which abstract some elements in a division but not others. For example division artillery must be placed in a slot (often regiment, but it could be on bat. level too in a weaker division. ART. could then be bought a both reg. and bat.).

With this one could for example get rid of the "milita" unit. Instead an INF unit lagging in tech and having no other elements in the division than INF-type regiments will be its very nature be milita; milita would be a state not a designation.

With this it would be nice to also allocate units in Higher HQ, giving subordinate units a bonus accordingly to the type of unit in the HQ if within command range (e.g. Corps Art. give a bonus to the Corps division's if within command range).

Click to expand...

if i understand what you're saying (and i think i do) i like this idea very much

 

JASGripen

Field Marshal

10 Badges

Jun 14, 2004

4.574

14

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 3, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #18

LoftenHenderson said:

if i understand what you're saying (and i think i do) i like this idea very much

Click to expand...

Yeah, I wrote in a hurry so some grammar went south. But basically I think that taking the full step to a modular division model would be to prefer. Period. Rather that than as now: abstract some parts and not some parts; which makes one start to wonder what the ART. reg really symbolise in the division when it is ART in the INF techs already and the ART "brigade" (i.e. reg.) you can equip the div. with is on division level and not on corps level (same with ENG.brigades. They are on top of the ENG. which almost all div. have or are they that ENG. regiment after all? Then most nations should have one in the OOB and they don't have it).

A straighter model, slightly more complex but not very much more than what we got now, that is what I want. The gain would be much increased clarity and there are always templates for those who do not want to meddle with this stuff.

 

Twotribes

Colonel

13 Badges

Nov 30, 2002

998

7

Visit site

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 4, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #19

comsubpac said:

the problem is: who would actually use it? isn't it already the case that most people either use the default templates or only use the "best" configuration? in the end we theoretically have more choices but we end up with using the same divisions anyway. most likely it will only do two things: increase the amount of micromanagement and give the player another advantage.
sure, it would be nice for some situations and maybe it would add a lot of flavour but from a gameplay perspective its complicated.

Click to expand...

I change the basic divisions right off the bat. And wish I had more generic templates that I could name. But I doubt battalions would be appropriate at this type of game.

 

LoftenHenderson

CinC Mediterranean Fleet

87 Badges

Feb 14, 2012

911

102

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jun 4, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #20

me too, i never use the starting divisions