Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

'AARchtung panzer!' II (WiF2)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Reader mode
Surt said:
Interceptors can be used many places, AA only in one place. The resources spent on the individual provinces is maybe better spent on interceptors that can defend many more provinces.
Click to expand...
My opinion is that players underrate the value of AA guns. For the reason exposed below by Beagá.

Beagá said:
DH isn´t HOI 3. The amount of provinces do make forcing bombers into one province much easier - and trust me, AA guns have a big punch, and if they attack a division with AA brigades, the allies will bleed a LOT for very little gain. INT is not cheap to reinforce.
Click to expand...
Actually, if you want to be gamey (and I tried it before), you leave a corps composed of 2 units (HQ+AA brigade, INF+AA brigade) alone and in a city province with AA guns. North and South of the city, you build airports with 2x4 FTR/INT in each. The HQ will attract the enemy bombers like a magnet. You let them bomb the HQ (+INF). Because it will be 1) In a city 2) well entrenched, the bombers will inflict very little damage but will suffer quite a lot in the same time. The AA (brigades + static guns) will inflict some losses and quite a lot of ORG loss. After 2 hours of bombing, you put the adjacent air units in scramble mission. They will intercept the enemy bombers and will inflict very heavy damages. If you have another wing which can intercept them once more during a second combat, the enemies may actually lose one unit for good.

Migthy said:
Wait, Romania refused to give Basserabia to Russia?
Are they at war now?
Click to expand...
Do not dream ;) Russia will repeat asking Bessarabia until she gets it. A refusal doesn't trigger a war. I guess that the chance of success for USSR will improve after the fall of France.


Hmm, the update doesn't want to upload to the forum. I have no idea what is happening. Size is not an issue, since a test (preview changes) with a bigger picture has worked. I will check tomorrow.

lecuFTj.jpg

 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Curious but why you focused on fighters and not interceptors first?

Naval bombers are hilariously powerful... That alone makes me think strategic bombers might be usfeul to pound Malta into dust and fill the Med with Navs. Also, UK fleets have more to do with scripting as IIRC, CORE for Arsenal of Democracy solved to an extent the idiotic fleets in the Baltic. HOI 3 wasn´t succesful and you could slaughter ships there just the same.
 
Beagá said:
Curious but why you focused on fighters and not interceptors first?

Naval bombers are hilariously powerful... That alone makes me think strategic bombers might be usfeul to pound Malta into dust and fill the Med with Navs. Also, UK fleets have more to do with scripting as IIRC, CORE for Arsenal of Democracy solved to an extent the idiotic fleets in the Baltic. HOI 3 wasn´t succesful and you could slaughter ships there just the same.
Click to expand...
For the extra-range, for Barbarossa.
STR are the only units that I will avoid for now, even for flavor. They are very expensive, require lots of doctrines, and are almost useless before 1941. Later, I may be tempted.
The problem with the idiotic fleets in the Baltic will solve itself if I succeed to capture Copenhagen. I should succeed :) I agree that NAVs are too powerful, the problem is that they become too weak if you remove an attack point. Anyway, Germany didn't have 4 units of them IRL, you had also to be very careful before sending a fleet along the shore and certainly not without an important air cover. If Naval attack is not powerful, you can' t reproduce Sealion for example; the German goal was to wipe out the RAF to be able to keep at bay the Royal Navy.
In 'The Lords are hunting', the NAVs did ORG damage essentially. Except for the last two weak units that they sunk at the end, the other units that they sunk were the units which had been already badly pounded by the SHBBs.

One thing that I didn't write in the AAR: the advantage of the Scramble mission is that the two wings stacked on the same province will hit the enemy together. Previously, with the Air superiority mission, my units were flying in different provinces, then intercepted an enemy unit at 4 vs 4, then the reinforcements arrived one or two hours later. This makes a big difference regarding the losses.
 
Is that the solution to the problem with disproportionally high losses in the air you mentioned?
 
Jolly good tip. BTW does radar give some impact on the time it takes for units to take off?

Think I will carry on my with my german game, as the UK one is FUBAR. Why? Because, for reasons unknown, when Germany DOWed lower Countries... SU DOWed them :eek: And I´m pretty sure MR was signed. Dafuq? (I do have auto-saves, but it makes me very pissed to lose progress).

Another thing I hate hate hate is when a partisan revolt pops up during the pre-war years, the AI does nothing and suddenly POOF war with Palestine/Chad/Morocco/idiotic nation that declared Independence, and the allies IC surge... And in my US game, the embargo started earlier (maybe because Japan more than half of China)... and POOF Pearl Harbour in july 1940 :confused:

Some random stuff is cool (I liked going to war earlier as US), others not as much. Did you ever play as US Lucifer? Looking at the files, there are some stuff I don´t understand. Events can be triggered by conditions, ok - but decisions can also make them fire earlier and not under the random event chance, right?
 
Last edited:
Beagá said:
Another thing I hate hate hate is when a partisan revolt pops up during the pre-war years, the AI does nothing and suddenly POOF war with Palestine/Chad/Morocco/idiotic nation that declared Independence, and the allies IC surge... And in my US game, the embargo started earlier (maybe because Japan more than half of China)... and POOF Pearl Harbour in july 1940 :confused:
Click to expand...

The first is "random", as in the AI can't properly garrison their colonies it seems, the second one is entirely the result of events and decisions. (Well the second one is also AI driven, but the event isn't tied down to historical dates.)
 
Nice, thanks.

I was actually more bothered by the fact that even playing as US, Japan builds a crapton of infantry, but no carriers... Do I have to choose the option that buffs Japan to face a decent IJN?
 
Beagá said:
Nice, thanks.

I was actually more bothered by the fact that even playing as US, Japan builds a crapton of infantry, but no carriers... Do I have to choose the option that buffs Japan to face a decent IJN?
Click to expand...

I haven't played the most recent version sorry. However that would explain why Japan steamrolled China so well.
 
I will try doing a hands-off game with another country and pure WiF 2, as I added the other suggested mods. Lucifer could you take a look on what Japan is building in your game?
 
Beagá said:
Jolly good tip. BTW does radar give some impact on the time it takes for units to take off?

Think I will carry on my with my german game, as the UK one is FUBAR. Why? Because, for reasons unknown, when Germany DOWed lower Countries... SU DOWed them :eek: And I´m pretty sure MR was signed. Dafuq? (I do have auto-saves, but it makes me very pissed to lose progress).

Another thing I hate hate hate is when a partisan revolt pops up during the pre-war years, the AI does nothing and suddenly POOF war with Palestine/Chad/Morocco/idiotic nation that declared Independence, and the allies IC surge... And in my US game, the embargo started earlier (maybe because Japan more than half of China)... and POOF Pearl Harbour in july 1940 :confused:

Some random stuff is cool (I liked going to war earlier as US), others not as much. Did you ever play as US Lucifer? Looking at the files, there are some stuff I don´t understand. Events can be triggered by conditions, ok - but decisions can also make them fire earlier and not under the random event chance, right?
Click to expand...
Radars give some bonus, but don't allow a faster take off AFAIK.
If you wait for the decision Fall Gelb, the declaration of war will happen through a decision, not a regular declaration. SU won't declare war if you have signed the Pact, and honored it.
Regarding the partisans, yes they are a pain, for the reason that you have provided. It is an issue from DH, not WiF2.
No, I have never played the USA or UK. But I don't recommend to go at war earlier than IRL with this mod. You will have to choose another mod for that.

Beagá said:
Nice, thanks.
I was actually more bothered by the fact that even playing as US, Japan builds a crapton of infantry, but no carriers... Do I have to choose the option that buffs Japan to face a decent IJN?
Click to expand...
I have opened the save of December 39. Japan builds only 2 lines of transports and 1 of DD. No carrier, and they are not even researched. The most modern is CV1930. Japan has 2 CV, 2 CVL, 6 BB, 4 BC, 21 HV, 20 CL, 24 DD // 5 INT, 13 TAC, 3 NAV // 107 INF (of a total of 176)
 
Well talking with people at the forums and indeed it looks Japan´s AI is messed up... bad. Guess I will have to do some editing.

My guess is that as usual they power-gamed China´s AI to beat the player, and had to power-game Japan as well on land... That is the problem with power-gaming approaches to make Normal too hard. Specially when you have a country with multiple threats, as is Japan´s case...
 
Last edited:
Beagá said:
Specially when you have a country with multiple threats, as is Japan´s case...
Click to expand...
That is THE issue with Japan AI. The other option would be to allow it to annex China quickly. Therefore, Japan would be able to concentrate on the Pacific theater.
Except when one plays Japan, let say that it made the choice to defeat China as is primary objective. That is what I will do for the AAR.
 
Well, there should really be two sets of Chinese AI - one to work against the AI Japan, one to work against the Human. One-size-fits-all is IMO a nonsensical approach, but I don't remember if this was the case.

If memory serves, there was always an issue with the Japanese AI, mostly because it is so effin' hard to make it wage the war in the Pacific properly. If you are even decently competent as a human Allied player, you can stop Japan from making any progress since blocking naval amphibious invasions is sooooooo easy. In real life, Japan was so successful only because a) it caught the Americans with their pants down (mostly because the Americans were too arrogant to realize how vulnerable their position in the Pacific really was); b) because the Brits were busy in Europe/Middle East and like the Americans, they tended to underrate the Japanese.

Now in game, against a human player who knows that Japan is going to attack, creating the same effect of shock, surprise, and panic is next to impossible without some very forced, very scripted events. (I don't remember which mod was it, but I remember that one prevented me, the US, from garrisoning the Pacific islands; every time I did it, I started getting events giving me dissent. While it achieved the goal of preventing me from turning every island into a fortress, it was pretty... weird and forced.)
 
Winner said:
Well, there should really be two sets of Chinese AI - one to work against the AI Japan, one to work against the Human. One-size-fits-all is IMO a nonsensical approach, but I don't remember if this was the case.
...
Now in game, against a human player who knows that Japan is going to attack, creating the same effect of shock, surprise, and panic is next to impossible without some very forced, very scripted events. (I don't remember which mod was it, but I remember that one prevented me, the US, from garrisoning the Pacific islands; every time I did it, I started getting events giving me dissent. While it achieved the goal of preventing me from turning every island into a fortress, it was pretty... weird and forced.)
Click to expand...
Hmm, never thought about 2 sets of AI for China. But I guess that you would need 2 sets of AI for Japan as a consequence, and the problem would be the same. Nevertheless, you have perhaps a valid point here. People better than me could perhaps look at it.
Garrisoning the Pacific Islands, building fortifications or airfields was prohibited by treaties. That mod was perhaps forced, but not invalid by far :)

53UuxmA.jpg
 
Last edited:
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back