An old idea whose time has come

[Chaplain]

I want to raise (again) the suggestion of incorporating dissent hits for lost battles. This would go a long ways towards toning down the gamey tactics of SP humans.

For example, a popular way to take Gibraltar is to 'trick' the AI by advancing in to the adjacent provinces, then retreating, then squashing the AI when he comes out to fight. We call the AI stupid for this, but it's actually a grotesquely unreal tactic - it would never have been allowed in real life (except perhaps by the USSR).

But what if 'losing' a province that has been captured cost a player X dissent hit, and retaking it only restordec .5 X dissent? Suddenly, every operation and battle matters a great deal to your nation's public opinion and will to fight, which is quite realistic. Moreover, everyone is motivated to try and maintain front lines.

This simple solution would keep the Germans from casually attempting beach landings all over the UK until they find a weak spot, and it would make everyone think twice before launching any attack. Not only will a lost battle cost manpower, mobility, time, etc., but it will cost public opinion. Historically Overlord was delayed repeatedly due to the spectre of a public opinion debacle, and nothing re-motivated the Soviets more than the success of Uranus. Same goes for Watchtower, Torch, etc.

Why not?

Johan?

 

[unmerged(46065)]

I want to raise (again) the suggestion of incorporating dissent hits for lost battles. This would go a long ways towards toning down the gamey tactics of SP humans.

For example, a popular way to take Gibraltar is to 'trick' the AI by advancing in to the adjacent provinces, then retreating, then squashing the AI when he comes out to fight. We call the AI stupid for this, but it's actually a grotesquely unreal tactic - it would never have been allowed in real life (except perhaps by the USSR).

But what if 'losing' a province that has been captured cost a player X dissent hit, and retaking it only restordec .5 X dissent? Suddenly, every operation and battle matters a great deal to your nation's public opinion and will to fight, which is quite realistic. Moreover, everyone is motivated to try and maintain front lines.

This simple solution would keep the Germans from casually attempting beach landings all over the UK until they find a weak spot, and it would make everyone think twice before launching any attack. Not only will a lost battle cost manpower, mobility, time, etc., but it will cost public opinion. Historically Overlord was delayed repeatedly due to the spectre of a public opinion debacle, and nothing re-motivated the Soviets more than the success of Uranus. Same goes for Watchtower, Torch, etc.

Why not?

Johan?

Well it sounds like a good idea, but there needs to be something that determines how much dissent is lost. Otherwise the Soviet Union would have a really hard time with their old strategy. Maybe how Authoritarian the government is? So then it has a choice whether or not to let the public know that it lost a battle, so no dissent hit. Then it puts a small cripple on democratic governments though....so it would need sumthin to balance it out.

 

[Willard]

The dissent hit should be tied to the VP worth of each province.
The more VPs, the more dissent.

 

[unmerged(13931)]

Sounds great mate.

The only problem is that it has to be human only. (I know easy to do).
On the other hand, this may take a bit more time and patience than Paradox is willing to give. (no offence intended Paradox, you mates are the best in my book).

 

[unmerged(26983)]

Uranus

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

[mic-dk]

I want to raise (again) the suggestion of incorporating dissent hits for lost battles. This would go a long ways towards toning down the gamey tactics of SP humans.

Who cares about SP - it would, at least in my book, completely ruin MP games. Particularly if you are the unlucky b*stard that draws USSR. One of the key tactics as USSR is to trade land for time to build more units. If this tactic costs X dissent hit for each province lost Stalin is out of office in 3 months

You may have a valid point conserning democracies, but a dictatorship would never allow lost battles to influence public opinion. Sorry, but I think it's kind of silly.

 

[Kedwinbi]

Well it doesn't sound like a bad idea even in MP, if you add some events to lower the dissent... Like GPW would give -10 dissent, or winter is coming etc... Would give some historical stuff implemented. But that's need to be tested a lot... As SU is already very powerful in MP.

But I like the idea. And more dissent hit if it"s a VP province is a cool idea too.

 

[unmerged(40886)]

I like this idea.

I also think that the player should be able to choose his puppets' ministers

 

[Darth Tracid]

suggestion subforum. moved, TRACID

 

[unmerged(47075)]

I think it should be only for Human Players and should be modelled through events, but some different events to cover different situations.

For example, against this trick:

For example, a popular way to take Gibraltar is to 'trick' the AI by advancing in to the adjacent provinces, then retreating, then squashing the AI when he comes out to fight. We call the AI stupid for this, but it's actually a grotesquely unreal tactic - it would never have been allowed in real life (except perhaps by the USSR).

You should suffer an event called "infamous tactics", who should cost you 1-2 of dissent. Same case every case you use nukes (but with disset hit of 3-5).

For operations you should have a - dissent if you accept the dare ("Prepare for Sealion" event), and if unable to have correct advances in enough time have a probability of suffering dissent hits montly. Obviously this should be very different depending on the operation, but could involve only 10-20 most important operations and different objetives (to advance some number of provinces before the first winter of Barbarossa).

Same could be applied if things were worsen that expected for SU, losing too much territiries too early or too much troops.

For small operations there should be only minor events, totally ramdom and the same for every country, who only occurs in very bad performing situations. For example the losing fifth assault over the enemy's capital with overwhelming forces.

I think this should be considered more for mods (ever wanting to add more actions), than for vanilla game, where all those events could be too much to implement.

I hope you like my proposal

 

[unmerged(11633)]

Sounds like a bad idea. Dissent affects everything- like TC. Not to mention that in many cases it simply isn't possible to defend everywhere, and being forced to robs players of strategic choices.

Not to mention that when the homeland was invaded by foreigners was precisely when everyone rallied round the flag.

 

[Myth]

maybe, but it should bepend on the type of government. Uranus had a sister operation in the north, at Rhzev, called Mars. It was a disastrous failure that cost the USSR some 336000 troops and around 1600 tanks. Yet it was forgotten by history, as if it never happened, only Uranus was remembered. My point with this is (if its not clear, which I'm sure it isn't), more authoritarian governments take a smaller and perhaps randomly no-dissent hit, as they could manipulate information sources in a way no democratic government could.
or, perhaps, rather than having dissent for any one defeat, dissent if a whole unit is destroyed in combat. just another idea.

 

[unmerged(15088)]

Who cares about SP ...

Granted most of the people who post here are interested in MP but I bet most people who have purchased HOI 2 use SP. Even if only 1 person prefers SP there is no reason to 'dis' them. All people who have purchased the game deserve equal respect.

 

[Chaplain]

I think it should be only for Human Players and should be modelled through events, but some different events to cover different situations.

For example, against this trick:



You should suffer an event called "infamous tactics", who should cost you 1-2 of dissent. Same case every case you use nukes (but with disset hit of 3-5).

For operations you should have a - dissent if you accept the dare ("Prepare for Sealion" event), and if unable to have correct advances in enough time have a probability of suffering dissent hits montly. Obviously this should be very different depending on the operation, but could involve only 10-20 most important operations and different objetives (to advance some number of provinces before the first winter of Barbarossa).

Same could be applied if things were worsen that expected for SU, losing too much territiries too early or too much troops.

For small operations there should be only minor events, totally ramdom and the same for every country, who only occurs in very bad performing situations. For example the losing fifth assault over the enemy's capital with overwhelming forces.

I think this should be considered more for mods (ever wanting to add more actions), than for vanilla game, where all those events could be too much to implement.

I hope you like my proposal

I could support this means of implementation. You got my vote.