come on its a game, i dont care if its 30 50 or 200 devision as long as it is fun to play
- 13
- 1
A question about "Divisions"
- Thread starter Scutatus
- Start date
-
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.
One thing I've always liked about the PDX games is that you actually learn so much from playing them, both directly from the game itself, and indirectly, from having your interest piqued enough to make you look up things on your own. This isn't Modern Warfare, it's a historical "simulator" where the devs and modders try to make things as accurate as possible.
In the latest releases, they're also cutting down the number of "grand campaigns", largelly to better research and balance each start they actually go with. Hence HOI4 has only a '36 and '39 start; the devs want to get things right as much as possible.
- 2
- 2
I think it's actually because an overwhelming majority of games are started in the earliest bookmarks. Little point in creating later ones.
- 2
- 1
That, too, absolutely, and I should've made that clear in my post, I guess. But I remember watching an interview where they said (very paraphrased) a large part of it was that they took a long time to make and that it was too much work getting them right.
- 1
Sure. I guess it feels pointless to work on those starts if very few people ever play them.
Personally I think it's a shame people go for the earliest bookmark all the time, and then complain that everything always goes the same way and that they lose interest after 150 years... They could instead pick a later start and experience something fresh, if they don't want a long campaign anyway.
I would think an army (or corps) commander might frequently consolidate or shift assets to a particular division for operational reasons when formations are understrength. Then there is also overstrengthening units (e.g., with an assault gun bn) for a schwerpunkt or to make a task-oriented battlegroup. But it sounds like that side of it is not feasible.
- 1
Although this is a game, and should of course be fun, it is also based in history, however loosely. Playing Britain and fielding 200 divisions may be "cool", but it's nothing like what Britain could actually do, not at all British in character, does not at all reflect the peril and challenge the country faced, so what would be the point of playing such a Britain at all?
To retain the feel and character of the war and the nations involved, a rough abidance to historical military strength and capabilities does need to be maintained. So the number of divisions a nation can field DOES matter.
- 4
- 1
where were you guys in Hoi 2 and 3
In the end its a game, we dont need everything from real live in a game. When it would be real a german player could never win the war
India. India is the contributor to the immense manpower. So essentially Johan's entire army were British Indians. Also if I am missing something England itself has quite a large pool of manpower and by the sizes of Johan's divisions I can see one hundred divisions.
where were you guys in Hoi 2 and 3
In the end its a game, we dont need everything from real live in a game. When it would be real a german player could never win the war
He could, If he didn't play like Hitler, and if he didn't (have to) go to war with the USSR, there is a good chance a player could pull off a German win. I think so anyway.
The ahistorical 100 divisions have been explained in several ways by some very intelligent suggestions. This is another one. While historicall there is no way the British could have pulled out more than a handful of divisions from India (they were needed too badly to police India and keep down growing unrest) - it is possible that in-game, Johann redeployed the vast Indian army to Europe (!) for his European campaigns. It would certainly explain the ease with which Adrian took the Raj.
- 1
India will be a puppet country of GB. So you Johan can not pull any manpower from there.
That's a new dynamic for HOI4 is it? Because in all previous HOI the Indian armies were completely under British control, British in all but name, in game terms. I can remember pulling out the Indian divisisions to form a massive BEF for the 1939/40 French front. Oh, the look on the German faces.
- 1
To create alot of divisions you need alot of manpower and equipment. To get manpower you need harsh conscription laws which in turn hurt your ability to produce equipment.
Yes you can get alot of divisions but they will be low quality one, like masses of infantry with very little support. Or you can go for high quality divisions with alot of artillery and other stuff.
Yes you can get alot of divisions but they will be low quality one, like masses of infantry with very little support. Or you can go for high quality divisions with alot of artillery and other stuff.
Well it`s beta so game balance is up in the air.
Not only the British Empire but USA`s ability to field many divisions must be nerfed.
They also need to nerf the ability of those two to cope with losses, in history both, combined, lost around 850.000 and in game those two have lost millions each !
Ah, and Germany could also use a special condition to go from Partial Mobilisation to War economy and I think having them reach 1.000.000 losses is a good condition that keeps Germany from having War Economy at the start of the war but also gives the player the ability to activate it earlier that 1943.
USA and UK wen't with quality in real life not quantity. They could very well had more divisions on the field but they would not be as well supported.
And your sources are ?????
Common knowledge is that both suffered from manpower shortages.
They suffered manpower shortages because for each soldier on the field there was several people behind that did all support stuff.
And what makes you think that UK or USA could transfer some of those to frontline duty ?
I`m not apposed to USA and UK fielding and losing more than they did in history but pretending that both of them could dream of fielding an army as big as the Heer is fantasy.
I'm sure the USA could have fielded more divisions than the Heer... as long as those divisions had roughly the same level of motorization as German divisions, and they were only fighting a war in North America. Of course, since the game doesn't model the full logistics cost of supporting armies across oceans* (or deep in Siberia...), then you get the oversized armies you see in WWW.
So I agree that the allies should have a lot more difficulty fielding the size of forces they do, I think that's mostly the case because of logistics, not because of anything particular about the countries themselves.
Edit: * = or the manpower cost of the strategic air arm and a huge navy.
Last edited: