Again trying with SU-force composition

[21oliver]

What part is gamey to you?

BTW.. The Soviets to the best of my knowledge (just tried again) cannot maintain a 400 base IC without trades or conquests. Most recent game it was 1940 (my resource techs were up to date, and i had a resource minister). Energy is the main culprit, i was down to about 35k from 99k and dropping. This is after getting the strategic event for Finland. It was close though, one good major conquest and id probably be ok. I made a few trades but its hard to maintain them when other major nations begin firing up for war.

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

What part is gamey to you?

BTW.. The Soviets to the best of my knowledge (just tried again) cannot maintain a 400 base IC without trades or conquests. Most recent game it was 1940 (my resource techs were up to date, and i had a resource minister). Energy is the main culprit, i was down to about 35k from 99k and dropping. This is after getting the strategic event for Finland. It was close though, one good major conquest and id probably be ok. I made a few trades but its hard to maintain them when other major nations begin firing up for war.

Timing a change from CGO to HI to match finishing a major production run. Ie. all the benefits of HI without the cost.

 

[Opanashc]

SU have a base of ~580 energy, 194 metal, and 146 rares. Metal is the big shortage.

Timing a change from CGO to HI to match finishing a major production run. Ie. all the benefits of HI without the cost.

How about money to change the laws?:ninja:

 

[Loke]

Gaming the system, can be done in many ways. IDKFA is one...

 

[21oliver]

Timing a change from CGO to HI to match finishing a major production run. Ie. all the benefits of HI without the cost.

I myself dont consider it gamey. IMO its like running a factory and today you work 8 hours tommorrow you have overtime. You are paying for the switch afterall. Building items you have no intention of using is rather gamey as well, just to gain practicals....

SU have a base of ~580 energy, 194 metal, and 146 rares. Metal is the big shortage.

Because you need twice the energy i find energy harder to maintain, a few good trades for metals and im usually good. But i would have to make alot of early trades for energy and maintain them while im capped until such time as they are needed. The thing is all the resources cap at the same level, even though their usage isnt the same. For example 99k of metal will last longer then 99k of energy, because i need twice as much energy per IC. I always scramble more for energy then metal if i make a huge IC build.

 

[21oliver]

Current game ... as of Jul 1 1939 Im at 400/530 IC, ive traded for 100 Energy and am still in a negative daily of 84.37. This includes being up to date with my techs and using a resource minister. Im -96.1 in Metal (ive traded for 100) and im -26.43 in rares (ive traded for 50). Just to give some numbers...

 

[Sweynforkbeard]

SU have a base of ~580 energy, 194 metal, and 146 rares. Metal is the big shortage.


How about money to change the laws?:ninja:

Lord C was generous enough to allow for personal standards.

 

[Lord Curlyton]

Lord C was generous enough to allow for personal standards.

Danke. Everyone plays the game in their own way; if the devs considered it a giant problem they would just change it so said tactic couldn't be done anymore (as simple as adding a cooldown on switching laws). I mean, I have no problem building uber-rockets and log bombing the piss out of some poor sod who comes my way, and I know there are others who'd say that crosses the line (and I wouldn't deny that they have a point). Since I play SP, it doesn't really matter what my opinion is; I'm just putting it out there, heh. And its also why MP games tend to have HRs and not unusually some modding to meet the taste of the group.

 

[21oliver]

I think we all tend to have our own HRs suited to our playstyles...

 

[cl1xor]

Current game ... as of Jul 1 1939 Im at 400/530 IC, ive traded for 100 Energy and am still in a negative daily of 84.37. This includes being up to date with my techs and using a resource minister. Im -96.1 in Metal (ive traded for 100) and im -26.43 in rares (ive traded for 50). Just to give some numbers...

In TRP mod i believe there are a little more resources, for instance US has more rares (iirc). But i can't seem to trade so much with the majors in TRP. However, perhaps the general more availablity of resources makes trading later in the game (now at '40) more easy.

If you really want to IC whore, you should check TRP (or blackice) a try with the heavy industry. Especially as the USSR, when your construction practical make it so cheap to build IC, the exponational increase of Heavy Industry pays off.

 

[21oliver]

I wasnt a fan of Black Ice, only because i tend to like the generic maps and counters more then anything. I felt it was too "busy". TRP i liked but something irked me, i cant recall off hand, i think it was something having to do with Diplomacy. Ive tried them all at one point or another and often come back to vanilla. Anyway the above was mostly a test type game, i am comfortable with 300 base IC pre-war and i can generally keep that going with a little effort.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's actually easier to win with Soviet Union if you dont build any IC. Just build infantry and tanks.
Because there is a big risk you overbuild the IC and you wont have enough units to stop Germany.
But once you stop the germans, they will run out of manpower and you beat them in the end.
So I think building IC as soviet is a trap.
It might be the optimal strategy, but it's risky.
You turn a safe win to a maybe win if you build alot of IC.

 

[21oliver]

I do so for a variety of reasons, mostly interest in building quantity of various big ticket items. I understand your thought process but i dont worry too much about losing in HOI3 due to the AI. You have time on your hands, you begin with roughly 100 INF and 21 Larm divisions...

 

[marxianTJ]

I'd don't generally favor building troops to start the game (assuming 36) for a few reasons.

Firstly, the sooner you build troops of any sort, the sooner they are going to start sucking supplies out of the economy and raising your consumer goods requirements, thus reducing the number of troops you can build later. Also, when you have less IC as oliver mentioned above, it tends to limit how much you can build really expensive items like STR bombers, TAC bombers, carriers, or even high hardness tank divisions. I also don't personally prefer it because, although your practicals do get a lot of heat from building early, it also requires me to have a plan laid out from 36 and to play through those years with at least some attention to detail, building IC, you just build the IC and stare at the map to see if anything wacky happens while you grow your industrial base.

I would suggest going easy on the IC building if you were *completely* new to hoi3, so that you'd just have a few extra divs out to cushion the impending blow, but in general you're 100% safe as long as you don't go too crazy during or after 1938 and don't build relatively useless things (like 2 full blown carrier fleets or something lol).

 

[21oliver]

For me the safe route would be 200 base IC, the optimal is 300 base IC, the high intensive is 400 base IC. I generally prefer the 300 base IC as my norm.

 

[cl1xor]

I wasnt a fan of Black Ice, only because i tend to like the generic maps and counters more then anything. I felt it was too "busy". TRP i liked but something irked me, i cant recall off hand, i think it was something having to do with Diplomacy. Ive tried them all at one point or another and often come back to vanilla. Anyway the above was mostly a test type game, i am comfortable with 300 base IC pre-war and i can generally keep that going with a little effort.

I agree with you on Black Ice, after all those years playing HOI3 it's a too different from vanilla for me personally. But to be fair, if you want, blackice offers like a whole new game (so still props to the black ice mod team!). TRP feels like a good middle ground, AI just feels more smarter somehow. But also with threat levels etc can mean a more unhistorical game.

For instance in my current SU game, Molotov didnt trigger, and then the finnish winter war didn't (and also the annex of baltic states). So i tagged to finland and declared war on SU. The problem now is that since i'm at peace now my CG skyrocketed again (120 IC) which seriously hurts my essential pre-barbarossa buildup plans.

Also, with the increase research 'steps' in TRP it means you have to focus production more, which is more a challenge for me opposed to just pump out INF and ARM.

 

[21oliver]

Thats why i stopped playing TRP, the Political actions of the various nations didnt seem to function correctly. He did great work, but it was too much of an issue for me, so i simply stay with vanilla.

 

[Loke]

Thats why i stopped playing TRP, the Political actions of the various nations didnt seem to function correctly. He did great work, but it was too much of an issue for me, so i simply stay with vanilla.

Wasnt that gonna change back to a more modest political AI?

 

[21oliver]

I only played it for a bit when it launched. My issue was things werent happening between nations as they were supposed to. TBH I stopped following it after that. He did some nice work, but it was too much of an issue for me. Im concerned about the grander scheme then the minutia.

 

[Loke]

I only played it for a bit when it launched. My issue was things werent happening between nations as they were supposed to. TBH I stopped following it after that. He did some nice work, but it was too much of an issue for me. Im concerned about the grander scheme then the minutia.

Same here, I want it to follow history a bit better than it did.