Sounds delicious. Perhaps with some Fava beans, and a nice Chianti?
-
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.
Sounds delicious. Perhaps with some Fava beans, and a nice Chianti?
I won going the nice Stalin route, but it was much harder. The lack of NU made the pre-war buildup much more painful. However, the last time I did it, the game's rules were different (pre-FtM I think).
The thing about the Purge is that it is also really easy to game. If you raise threat on the right target(s) from day 1, you can DOW Finland (or another minor target) in 38. Conquering/puppeting Finland isn't too exciting on its own, but the war removes the Purge penalty. So, you can take the benefits of the Purge with only a year or less of Purge penalties to leadership. That's much less of a leadership loss than keeping Purge penalties until Germany annexed Poland.
As far as I'm concerned, the better leaders and extra leadership just doesn't hold a candle to the IC malus. There's not a lot that German superiority in techs and doctrines can do in the face of twice as many mediocre divisions. If the leadership penalty was more severe, I'd have to rethink it. But I can easily optimize research a little better to compensate for the Purge's effects, while the IC loss is impossible to fix via better budgeting.
The thing about the Purge is that it is also really easy to game. If you raise threat on the right target(s) from day 1, you can DOW Finland (or another minor target) in 38. Conquering/puppeting Finland isn't too exciting on its own, but the war removes the Purge penalty. So, you can take the benefits of the Purge with only a year or less of Purge penalties to leadership. That's much less of a leadership loss than keeping Purge penalties until Germany annexed Poland.
As far as I'm concerned, the better leaders and extra leadership just doesn't hold a candle to the IC malus. There's not a lot that German superiority in techs and doctrines can do in the face of twice as many mediocre divisions. If the leadership penalty was more severe, I'd have to rethink it. But I can easily optimize research a little better to compensate for the Purge's effects, while the IC loss is impossible to fix via better budgeting.
wow some of those posts need spoilers to summarize results of the paragraphs of evidence, major TLDR hahaha.
I think I missed this post earlier. Let me respond. 
An SA of 2 is just under half that of INF. It's not as much as ARM by any stretch of imagination, but the brigade has no width and it does provide some SA on top of the CA bonus. I agree, ARM has better stats, but concentration of force is so damn important in HOI3. Cutting the width of a division in half means I can stack more SA and HA in combat even if my individual divisions are worse. That's one of the reasons ARM/SPARTY is so damn potent. 2 width just like INF/ARTY, but with all that juicy SA and HA from the ARM and SPARTY beefed up with the CA bonus.
If I am building ARM, I want it doing ARM kinds of things. And if we're talking defense in bad terrain, I'd still rather have a division of ARM/SPARTY on defense rather than putting ARM in the same division as other stuff. The game is more generous with armored units on defense than perhaps it should be, but since it is, give me that standard division on defense in the Alps if the mountain passes really, really have to be defended (I'd still rather have the ARM on the plains, but sometimes you gotta put your units where the enemy is operating).
I tend to favor firepower in bad terrain over speed, anyway. But you might have a point here against weaker enemies. Since you can't really run mobile or armored units quickly through some of the bad terrain in the Balkans and elsewhere, plain INF might increase the operational tempo of the whole campaign.
I'm surprised a human player let a human Germany get away with that.
I've always felt that the bonus Germany gets is not as fancy of a bonus as it appears because there's not a lot it can do to neutralize the effects of defending on the proper terrain. If the Soviet player tries to beat the Germans using a Kursk style engagement strategy in 1941, the German advantages in ORG from the special decision are potent. If you just adopt a "let the Germans eat most of Poland without a fight and force them to try armored breakthroughs along the river/marsh line" strategy, German advantages from that decision are less helpful. The front is much wider, the terrain is worse, and they are much further from good airfields, hurting Luftwaffe performance (and further from any RADAR a good human would have built after annexing Poland...). Certainly, the bonuses are still handy, but every day Germany has those bonuses, and does not encircle and destroy Soviet divisions, is a day that the bonus isn't being that helpful.
An SA of 2 is just under half that of INF. It's not as much as ARM by any stretch of imagination, but the brigade has no width and it does provide some SA on top of the CA bonus. I agree, ARM has better stats, but concentration of force is so damn important in HOI3. Cutting the width of a division in half means I can stack more SA and HA in combat even if my individual divisions are worse. That's one of the reasons ARM/SPARTY is so damn potent. 2 width just like INF/ARTY, but with all that juicy SA and HA from the ARM and SPARTY beefed up with the CA bonus.
If I am building ARM, I want it doing ARM kinds of things. And if we're talking defense in bad terrain, I'd still rather have a division of ARM/SPARTY on defense rather than putting ARM in the same division as other stuff. The game is more generous with armored units on defense than perhaps it should be, but since it is, give me that standard division on defense in the Alps if the mountain passes really, really have to be defended (I'd still rather have the ARM on the plains, but sometimes you gotta put your units where the enemy is operating).
I tend to favor firepower in bad terrain over speed, anyway. But you might have a point here against weaker enemies. Since you can't really run mobile or armored units quickly through some of the bad terrain in the Balkans and elsewhere, plain INF might increase the operational tempo of the whole campaign.
For the first 5 months to be precise. It is enough to conquer all the SU in SP or MP game
I'm surprised a human player let a human Germany get away with that.
I've always felt that the bonus Germany gets is not as fancy of a bonus as it appears because there's not a lot it can do to neutralize the effects of defending on the proper terrain. If the Soviet player tries to beat the Germans using a Kursk style engagement strategy in 1941, the German advantages in ORG from the special decision are potent. If you just adopt a "let the Germans eat most of Poland without a fight and force them to try armored breakthroughs along the river/marsh line" strategy, German advantages from that decision are less helpful. The front is much wider, the terrain is worse, and they are much further from good airfields, hurting Luftwaffe performance (and further from any RADAR a good human would have built after annexing Poland...). Certainly, the bonuses are still handy, but every day Germany has those bonuses, and does not encircle and destroy Soviet divisions, is a day that the bonus isn't being that helpful.
I find that using a Stalin Line type defense works quite well. In case you're not familiar with it, the Stalin Line was a series of forts going from the Gulf of Finland to the Romania border. The forts existed in 1936 and were moved west in 1940. As usual, none of that is represented in an unmodded game. One of the many reasons Hitler attacked the USSR was because the Stalin Line was being moved to the new German/Soviet border to become the Molotov Line.
The main feature of the forts (both sets) was that there were gaps deliberately left in them, as opposed to the Maginot Line or Sudeten Line forts which were contiguous. The forts themselves were placed in favorable defensive terrain, with the gaps appearing in flat areas. The idea was that Poles and Romanians (the USSR's main opponents in the '20s and '30s), then later the Germans, would attack the forts, find them too well defended to go through, and then proceed into the gaps between the forts. Large mobile reserves (the bulk of the defenders) were set up behind the forts, and it was the job of these troops to ambush the attackers pouring through the gaps. Basically, the idea was to lure the enemy into making a spearhead through the gaps deliberately created then cut off the spearhead using mobile troops.
None of that worked historically though, because the original forts were gutted and left to rot while the new ones were being built, and Germany attacked before the new forts were completed.
The main feature of the forts (both sets) was that there were gaps deliberately left in them, as opposed to the Maginot Line or Sudeten Line forts which were contiguous. The forts themselves were placed in favorable defensive terrain, with the gaps appearing in flat areas. The idea was that Poles and Romanians (the USSR's main opponents in the '20s and '30s), then later the Germans, would attack the forts, find them too well defended to go through, and then proceed into the gaps between the forts. Large mobile reserves (the bulk of the defenders) were set up behind the forts, and it was the job of these troops to ambush the attackers pouring through the gaps. Basically, the idea was to lure the enemy into making a spearhead through the gaps deliberately created then cut off the spearhead using mobile troops.
None of that worked historically though, because the original forts were gutted and left to rot while the new ones were being built, and Germany attacked before the new forts were completed.
never underestimate the wilyness of a human opponent. The best counter to the perfect strategy is to use the 2nd best strategy, if you have the foreknowledge to do that.
I.E. a good SU human could easily stop a "conventional" GER aggression through good units, fort lines, rivers, etc. But unconventional GER aggression... say, only "defending" the ex-polish border, and doing a massive triple invasion of one landing at Leningrad, one at Svastopol, and an overland push from Invited-into-the-Axis-1-day-prior-but-gave-military-access-a-month-ago-and-was-stationing-GER-troops Afghanistan and starting the "armor wars" from there, can seriously hose a guy who had a full ART-overload-with-plenty-of-mobile-backup defense ready at the MR line.
I've done some seriously crazy things before...
Even human opponents tend not to defend the Afghanistan/Persia line too heavily ;p.
I am talking about attack and more specifically an attack on hills and mountains especially when enemy armoured divisions are presented like for example in my AAR.
I prefer specialised infantry, that includes engineers in bad terrain, when I am attacking. BTW there are no strong AI enemies
The biggest stacking is in Lowlands and just because you have to cross 4-5 river before you reach Paris in narrow area. Artillery is not the best choice for that.The benefit of concentrated firepower is also useful only if can put 4+ divisions per province. If you look at any German-Soviet campaigns in AARs, that happens seldom.
I am too. I never played MP myself but in all MP games I saw the USSR gets nailed.
You see, a river line is only good until one breach is made and a bridgehead is created. After that all line collapses unless a counter attack is successful.
That's true. Those areas do represent the soft underbelly. Although I confess that I am surprised that the Soviet player did not immediately SR enough forces to that area to bog it down. I mean, the German army can't be everywhere at once.
As for letting Leningrad fall to an amphibious invasion, that is just inexcusable. Leningrad is worth way to0 many VPs to let it fall via naval invasion (or any other invasion). It's way to close to enemy airfields as well, so I always assume PARA will drop on the city or around it if I don't stock the area with enough divisions. And since it is a port, letting the Germans get a foothold there is very dangerous, since they can supply it by sea without fearing the RN. It's not like dropping PARA on Stalingrad and then watching them get surrounded and killed.
Fascinating debate. The HCE has only played once as Russia (very hard difficulty) and succeeded only in achieving a very boring stalemate, which became so excruitatingly boring that the paint fell off the ceiling in utter despair. Dont ask what happened to the wallpaper, it wasn't pretty...
The commentary in this thread has inspired the GREATEST MILTARY EMPIRE EVAR to try again. Perhaps with a little more planning...
...
...meanwhile in bunker, located in a dense and unfashionable part of the forest, buried deep underground and well out of reach to any spotty teenaged delivers of junk mail, a crack team of Corugian staff officiers studied this interesting debate with vested interest...
..and slowly and surely they drew up master plans for GLORIOUS VICTORY for the Union of the Soviet Socialist Corugii
!!!6!!!
...and this time THE CAT will be charge of all IC investment, (I really can't lose.)
The commentary in this thread has inspired the GREATEST MILTARY EMPIRE EVAR to try again. Perhaps with a little more planning...
...
...meanwhile in bunker, located in a dense and unfashionable part of the forest, buried deep underground and well out of reach to any spotty teenaged delivers of junk mail, a crack team of Corugian staff officiers studied this interesting debate with vested interest...
..and slowly and surely they drew up master plans for GLORIOUS VICTORY for the Union of the Soviet Socialist Corugii
!!!6!!!
...and this time THE CAT will be charge of all IC investment, (I really can't lose.)
Last edited:
I'm looking forward to the AAR
Another option that hasn't been mentioned is to attack Poland before Germany does. Poland isn't a member of any faction at the start and only joins the Allies through the UK's guarantee, which is placed in 1939. You lose out on cores from the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact decisions, but you'll be a lot closer to Berlin. If you take out Finland first then you'll lose the effects of the Purge, making Poland an easier target. At this point, since you broke the decisions that start WW2, wait until 1940 comes around and the UK makes its inevitable attack on Germany. Once you see Germany making progress in France, start the backstabbing
Another option that hasn't been mentioned is to attack Poland before Germany does. Poland isn't a member of any faction at the start and only joins the Allies through the UK's guarantee, which is placed in 1939. You lose out on cores from the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact decisions, but you'll be a lot closer to Berlin. If you take out Finland first then you'll lose the effects of the Purge, making Poland an easier target. At this point, since you broke the decisions that start WW2, wait until 1940 comes around and the UK makes its inevitable attack on Germany. Once you see Germany making progress in France, start the backstabbing
The HCE might also be interested in my other alternative strategies to dominating Europe.
1) Annex/Puppet Romania early. This cuts off the most accessible supply of crude and refining the Germans will have.
2) Annex/Puppet Sweden. Sweden provides tungsten and ball bearings. It also forces Germany to garrison Copenhagen substantially (although you have to garrison across the strait as well).
3) Annex/Puppet the Balkans. They aren't too valuable, but it moves the front west and gives you a direct border with Italy at the start of the war.
1) Annex/Puppet Romania early. This cuts off the most accessible supply of crude and refining the Germans will have.
2) Annex/Puppet Sweden. Sweden provides tungsten and ball bearings. It also forces Germany to garrison Copenhagen substantially (although you have to garrison across the strait as well).
3) Annex/Puppet the Balkans. They aren't too valuable, but it moves the front west and gives you a direct border with Italy at the start of the war.
Hm ok in my game, it´s january 1941 and Germany has bogged down in France for some reason... and I´m starting to have ideas... EVIL ideas. Stalin ideas :glare:
However, if I DOW Germany, since Japan is in the Axis, will they join? That´s my biggest fear, because Japan beat the chinese and then just as Germany would have a 2 front war, so would I... Damn, how that lack of IC hurts!
However, if I DOW Germany, since Japan is in the Axis, will they join? That´s my biggest fear, because Japan beat the chinese and then just as Germany would have a 2 front war, so would I... Damn, how that lack of IC hurts!
Yeah, if you attack Germany then you'll be fighting the entire Axis. Japan is pretty easy to beat though. Do a sneaky landing in the Hokkaido and Honsu's northern port with about 15 divisions and you can make Japan surrender, since surrender progress in FtM is based on VPs in cores rather than total VPs, so taking the home islands is enough to make Japan surrender. Given how poorly the AI defends islands, it should be really easy to knock Japan out right away (the same is true of the UK). If you want to be really mean, move you transports outside the Japanese ports first and use destroyers or subs to scout the surrounding sea zones. When everything is empty and your transports safe, declare war on Germany and land in Japan at the same time.
But that´s VERY gamey lol... rather do it an a reasonable way. Besides, by going the no purge route my IC is barely enough to make an army, let alone transports. Maybe by 1943.
If Japan is THAT dumb at defending the home islands, specially if they beaten Nationalist China, then the AI could be improved for 3.06. Really dunno the japanese would be less inclined to attack the SU in that case.
If Japan is THAT dumb at defending the home islands, specially if they beaten Nationalist China, then the AI could be improved for 3.06. Really dunno the japanese would be less inclined to attack the SU in that case.
Last edited:
I see that you have asked in here http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum...he-Soviets&p=12622879&highlight=#post12622879 basicly same things a long long time ago...13-07-2011 thats well almost a year now, and you still can't beat Germany? :rofl:
The AI doesn't defend as well as a human does. That said, given what I *actually* did to Leningrad, a human SU would have had to know ahead of time to defend from it. it was a spectacle, trust me
(tip: I used a Mulberry)The AI-SU did end up SRing forces over, but by not having my own troops right *on* the border when I day-1-invited, SU didn't know they were there. The SR-forces ended up getting hung up the Svastopol portion of the invasion, as I used the airbases there and from ROM to stage a massive LOGbomb campaign on the most likely route from PolishBorder to "Soft UnderBelly". And yes, after a while, it looked like SU was being destroyed by the middle east rather than GER. This was more of a "lets see" game than one I was trying to win at ;p.
Even a human wouldn't have known those were there, unless they had a level 4 or higher radar on that border. (i know the rules on radio-intercept, and am always careful to avoid it
Anyway, that's enough pseudobragging. Long story short, and what I was trying to get at, is that the bonus in question is useful against human opponents when applied in ways OTHER than what it is expected to be used for and already defended against. In the above case, I didn't "activate" the decision until the SR-ed forces came into contact with the Svastopol force, which were arriving very slowly, and piecemeal.
Yeah, I've done that, too. Holding the decision back until it would really be helpful is wise. And your post illustrates why RADAR is important. Until level 10 RADAR stations are nerfed, I will continue building them in places that give me several provinces of visual depth into enemy territory. I think even Germany can "see" to the pre-war Soviet Polish border by building RADAR stations at the Konigsberg/Polish/Lithuania border (pre-war border, I might add, making it possible to get the ball rolling early). And then you start adding in RADAR bonuses to aircraft in addition to the intelligence. Using level 10 RADAR stations, I've been able to gain air dominance over enemies with superior aircraft techs inside my own RADAR coverage.
Yeah, I've done that, too. Holding the decision back until it would really be helpful is wise. And your post illustrates why RADAR is important. Until level 10 RADAR stations are nerfed, I will continue building them in places that give me several provinces of visual depth into enemy territory. I think even Germany can "see" to the pre-war Soviet Polish border by building RADAR stations at the Konigsberg/Polish/Lithuania border (pre-war border, I might add, making it possible to get the ball rolling early). And then you start adding in RADAR bonuses to aircraft in addition to the intelligence. Using level 10 RADAR stations, I've been able to gain air dominance over enemies with superior aircraft techs inside my own RADAR coverage.
Indeed. but have you ever, as SU, L-10 radar'ed the border of the SU with that of the Persian/Afghanistan area? ;p
Nope. But I might now.
RADAR isn't that expensive, anyway. It just takes forever to build all the way to level 10.
To be honest, depending on the house rules in a particular MP, I'd probably puppet Persia early to keep the Allies and Axis from using that crude. I'd do the same thing to Romania if the house rules allowed it.