Aside from house rules, how can dog-piling be prevented?

[billcorr]

Aside from house rules, what can be done to prevent players from placing a very large number of units in a nation ("dogpiling") before hostilities break out or event during a war? Players can gain an advantage by allowing military access to allied and future allied nations.

• Commonwealth nations place units in France before "Danzig or War"
• USA moves 30 divisions to the Soviet Far East (using the Military Access rule) before Japan and USA are at war.
• Germany moves armor units to Italian North Africa before the war.

The HoI4 game mechanics do prevent dogpiling to an extent:

• Opportunity costs. By strengthening one area, other areas have diminished combat forces, limiting actions in other parts of the globe
• Risk. "All-in" is an extreme example of England (and others) placing all available units into France, thus opening up England to a successful naval invasion.
• Non-aggression pacts (e.g. USA cannot attack Japanese forces from the USSR if the USSR and Japan have a NAP).
• During war, nations can sink troop convoys.
• Note: this post might have overlooked an obvious antidote and render the entire discussion moot.
• Feel free to describe other game mechanics that limit or discourage dogpiling ____________

Besides using house rules, what are your thoughts about ways to ensure that players don't gain an unfair advantage by placing an inordinate number of units (typically during peacetime) in a location that unbalances the game?

There might be a role to change the game mechanics.

 

[epicmemory]

Disallow military access unless you're at war? E.g., both the USA and X country would need to be at war and in the same faction (maybe) to allow you to ask for military access. The only exception would be puppet states.

 

[Baron_von_Beer]

One problem with any game of this type, at least in a "historical" run, where there is great freedom by which our own hindsight can have massive consequences leading up to the war. About the only thing that could be done is, as said, restrict access in some manner, be it outright, a hard cap, or at least some form of consequence (PP or whatever per division deployed). This could be adjusted as the war begins, either removed or growing to prevent 50 UK Divisions showing up the day after Poland is invaded. As a reference point, he first British troops began moving to France at the start of the war, and by May when Germany finally attacked, they had 10 divisions on the mainland. They had plans for moving onto the continent, but execution didn't begin until the war truly began.

Of course this must also be balanced by having a plausible level freedom on the aggressors' side. Germany had a better idea it was going to war and had made more thorough preparations (relatively speaking), but even they were not running at total mobilization, throwing a uniform on every able bodied male they could grab, and running the factories 24/7, even by 1940. Not right if one side can ignore all historic limitations while the other is totally restrained.

 

[Mr_Dimento]

I see nothing wrong with British troops digging into Northern France before the war starts.

 

[billcorr]

I see nothing wrong with British troops digging into Northern France before the war starts.

British troops in France. Yes, I think 99.999% of players would agree with that.

It gets a bit more exciting when

• There are South African Heavy Tank divisions in Paris.
• A line of sun-burnt Raj troops dug in behind the Somme.
• Australian sappers pushing over the Rhine.
• And just as in World War 1, 140000 Chinese. (Labour Corps) in the rear.

(well. After all, it is a World War. )

 

[Mr_Dimento]

I think when the Allies really work together like that, it is when it is the most fun.

 

[orochi2k]

I think when the Allies really work together like that, it is when it is the most fun.

Sure all troops/air force from Commonwealth/USA/Soviet just station in France/Czech/Poland before 1938, when war starts, they will kill Hitler in a few months, every one will be happy.
Or...even faster! Soviet justify German on Day 1, France/Poland give military access to everyone -> France join Soviet. everyone else join Britain -> Everybody send everything to France/Poland -> When war broke out, Soviet kick out France -> France join Britain, drag everybody into war -> World war 2 shall end in 1937.

Of course nobody cares why those nations historically didn't use such effective "strategy"

 

[Alex_brunius]

Disallow military access unless you're at war? E.g., both the USA and X country would need to be at war and in the same faction (maybe) to allow you to ask for military access. The only exception would be puppet states.

If your in the same war and faction or to/from puppet states you have military access automatically....

So in practice your saying don't allow Military access at all.

 

[BlitzMartinDK]

I think that military access (historically) wasn't really practiced between equal partners. Say, traditional enemies like France and England. Allowing French armed troops onto English soil? In peacetime, In unlimitied numbers? Not going to happen! So mostly military access was for major powers who wanted to be able to get somewhere, without having to fight through an insignifacant minor. Mostly to fight another insignificant minor

 

[RikiBreeiki]

New Game Features

Features ;
1-demand supply base/ depot construction rights
2-You now have your own real equipment storage!. watch your equipment get captured as you get pushed and your supply bases are captured, stockpile broken tanks and ship them back home for repair!
3-Supply Formula; supply used = , sum of squares of ranges between supply zones divided by supply zone count ( 4 zones between home capital 4^2/4 = 4times suply used, 2 zones= 2^2/2 = 2 times supply used if you got a supply base basically it is still sum of squares, but between zones = (1^2+1^2)/2= 1 ( you got supply 2 provinces away as if ur next to capital with supply base)
4- Each railroad province counts as +1 supply base level ,

Pre Order for 19.99Euros today !


Jokes aside, i think best action here is to look at every dogpiling situation individually

A-) south africa placing units in france, if this was prevented mechanically by logistical mechanics, i think south africa would also be unable to defend suez , which would make it an unfun nation to play with ,
Rules solve this problem by saying; No using commonwealth resources and units for defence of france,

A Solution -)We have division attack- defence againist China and similiar modifiers in game, we could have new things like Division Defence-Attack in France-belgium and similiar modifiers named Why die for Alsace for commonwealth troops, So that These troops are worse only in targeted provinces, instead of being worse againist germany everywhere, would be a nice to have thing

I quickly thought about other solutions but all have horrible side effects ( Multiple nation penalty in same tile,-- Losing stability-war support for allowing acess,--Actual logistics .

B-)

• USA moves 30 divisions to the Soviet Far East (using the Military Access rule) before Japan and USA are at war.

Custom game rules already solve this issue in my opinion , by banning military access between diffrent ideologies But problem is USA placing troops in land like Dutch east indies, i will respond to this with point C

C-)

• Germany moves armor units to Italian North Africa before the war.

Another example like japan moving troops to europe would be better, since French Navy will attrition the german tanks to death but this is overall related to Pre/ Placement of troops, Like usa placing troops In indonesia, Japan moving troops throguh suez assuming it has fallen, UK already placing troops in France etc

C solution-)This can be solved by simply making it so that you cant move your troops to anywhere except your and your puppet's land outside of war ( no sort of any military access outside of war ) basically. this would also make it so that people are not entrenched in places they should not have been in in first place

So summary;
New modifier Division Attack/defence IN x territory ( so that japan is worse againist china in china, not in japan ) and NZL just fights worse in france does not matter againist who
Military access limitations
there are probably million other solutions that are yet to be suggested

 

[orochi2k]

Features ;
1-demand supply base/ depot construction rights
2-You now have your own real equipment storage!. watch your equipment get captured as you get pushed and your supply bases are captured, stockpile broken tanks and ship them back home for repair!
3-Supply Formula; supply used = , sum of squares of ranges between supply zones divided by supply zone count ( 4 zones between home capital 4^2/4 = 4times suply used, 2 zones= 2^2/2 = 2 times supply used if you got a supply base basically it is still sum of squares, but between zones = (1^2+1^2)/2= 1 ( you got supply 2 provinces away as if ur next to capital with supply base)
4- Each railroad province counts as +1 supply base level ,

Pre Order for 19.99Euros today !

No focus tree?

 

[RikiBreeiki]

No focus tree?

During the recent PDX meeting, and talking with the EU4 dev team, it has been decided that HOI4 dev team is breaking the golden Rule of PDX development studios, not releasing enough dlcs per year for the player base, hoi4 is now the most played PDX game yet dev team only making one DLC per year , so country Focus Trees will be released as seperate DLCs,

Spain, Italy , Bulgaria and Turkey Greece will be released as seperate other 2 DLCs, PDX is done with listening to MP communities bitching about how they dont care about Netherlands and Mexico Focus Trees , so it has been decided that MP nations Spain-Italy-Bulgaria, and always banned SP nations like Turkey-Greece will be released as seperate DLCs,

This is by no means an increase in prices per content, what has been done is reducing unwanted features , PDX think of it as reducing-removing unwanted flavours from your favourite sauce

 

[epicmemory]

If your in the same war and faction or to/from puppet states you have military access automatically....

So in practice your saying don't allow Military access at all.

Why not make military access unavailable as a rule of thumb for everyone, including people in factions, unless specifically asked for? In order to ask for military access, you and the host nation would need to be at war (even if you're in the same faction).

It's just locking the "request military access" button behind a check that verifies both parties are at war.

 

[Alex_brunius]

Why not make military access unavailable as a rule of thumb for everyone, including people in factions, unless specifically asked for? In order to ask for military access, you and the host nation would need to be at war (even if you're in the same faction).

It's just locking the "request military access" button behind a check that verifies both parties are at war.

I'm not sure it would be a fun experience playing as UK and having all 20 or so nations in the allies asking for Military access each time they join or war breaks out instead of it being automatic like now. There is already too much popups and join war requests and LL offers and all popping up IMO.

 

[GundamMerc]

During the recent PDX meeting, and talking with the EU4 dev team, it has been decided that HOI4 dev team is breaking the golden Rule of PDX development studios, not releasing enough dlcs per year for the player base, hoi4 is now the most played PDX game yet dev team only making one DLC per year , so country Focus Trees will be released as seperate DLCs,

Spain, Italy , Bulgaria and Turkey Greece will be released as seperate other 2 DLCs, PDX is done with listening to MP communities bitching about how they dont care about Netherlands and Mexico Focus Trees , so it has been decided that MP nations Spain-Italy-Bulgaria, and always banned SP nations like Turkey-Greece will be released as seperate DLCs,

This is by no means an increase in prices per content, what has been done is reducing unwanted features , PDX think of it as reducing-removing unwanted flavours from your favourite sauce

Sounds like hearsay to me.

 

[GundamMerc]

I'm not sure it would be a fun experience playing as UK and having all 20 or so nations in the allies asking for Military access each time they join or war breaks out instead of it being automatic like now. There is already too much popups and join war requests and LL offers and all popping up IMO.

Basically. It would be trade offers in HoI III without the automation.

 

[epicmemory]

I'm not sure it would be a fun experience playing as UK and having all 20 or so nations in the allies asking for Military access each time they join or war breaks out instead of it being automatic like now. There is already too much popups and join war requests and LL offers and all popping up IMO.

Basically. It would be trade offers in HoI III without the automation.

There are so many ways around this, though. Have the system automatically implement military access once both parties are at war, for example. Once someone "joins the war" via that annoying popup, military access is automatic.

Say the UK, France, and all the Allied minors are in the Allied faction in 1939. Germany DOWs Poland, war breaks out. Military access is then automatically granted the moment countries join the war. Once the UK and France are at war, military access would be automatic between the two of them (and their puppets). BENELUX joins the Allies after Around Maginot pops, the UK and France are able to cross the border (but not until the host country and country looking to put troops in are involved in a war).

The problem described by the OP is summed up in that people can place troops in allied nations before the war starts. There are many ways to forbid countries from using military access as a function until hostilities commence.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

There are so many ways around this, though. Have the system automatically implement military access once both parties are at war, for example. Once someone "joins the war" via that annoying popup, military access is automatic.

This already has some ruinous consequences in SP with AI faction trolling.

Stacking troops up in France does imply troops won't be elsewhere. Is holding France worth losing Raj + Australia to Japan early? If the allies are coordinating in this way in MP the opposition must also coordinate. Japan getting Indonesia and denying the allies all that rubber would be a non-trivial price to pay to hold France, and completely devastating if France still falls. No way they could send their navy to help on that front either because that would expose UK to naval invasion, with their troops in France.

 

[RikiBreeiki]

This already has some ruinous consequences in SP with AI faction trolling.

Stacking troops up in France does imply troops won't be elsewhere. Is holding France worth losing Raj + Australia to Japan early? If the allies are coordinating in this way in MP the opposition must also coordinate. Japan getting Indonesia and denying the allies all that rubber would be a non-trivial price to pay to hold France, and completely devastating if France still falls. No way they could send their navy to help on that front either because that would expose UK to naval invasion, with their troops in France.

Usually Germany dying is worth Abandoning Raj, Japan also should never be able to kill Australia considering the starting allied French us UK navies and their superior naval industry and focus trees and fact that Japan can run out of fuel and needs time to build silos airfields and even then who cares about Raj and Singapore when game is over in 39

Obviously in any serious- game, such things are banned

 

[davidc929]

British troops in France. Yes, I think 99.999% of players would agree with that.

It gets a bit more exciting when

• There are South African Heavy Tank divisions in Paris.
• A line of sun-burnt Raj troops dug in behind the Somme.
• Australian sappers pushing over the Rhine.
• And just as in World War 1, 140000 Chinese. (Labour Corps) in the rear.

(well. After all, it is a World War. )

I can see your point. I'd say the bigger issue is that your example includes South African heavy armour divisions in 1939.