Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Armies, Divisions, Brigades...

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.
unmerged(18885)

unmerged(18885)

Captain
Aug 15, 2003
358
0
Visit site
I think I would like HoI2 to have a military unit system more like Vickys than HoI1. I didnt like just seeing 100 go down to 96. I like 10 000 so if I loose 1265 troops, Ill know it.

I also think a system where you can pick to have differnt size units be created would be cool. So I could have a tank brigade be created, or an infantry division, or an entire multi division, multi unittype army be created. So if I just want a little extra backup i can build that, but if I plan on invading the USSR, I dont need to spend forever building a ton of divisions.
 
swampthing said:
I think I would like HoI2 to have a military unit system more like Vickys than HoI1. I didnt like just seeing 100 go down to 96. I like 10 000 so if I loose 1265 troops, Ill know it.

I also think a system where you can pick to have differnt size units be created would be cool. So I could have a tank brigade be created, or an infantry division, or an entire multi division, multi unittype army be created. So if I just want a little extra backup i can build that, but if I plan on invading the USSR, I dont need to spend forever building a ton of divisions.
Click to expand...

I like the "having the actual numbers instead of 100" idea, but the "Army, Brigade, Division" idea, not so much. I do like the idea that you could make actual armies, put them under Generals, then Generals under them, etc... Instead of just a stacking limit.

There had better be a way to know the casualties of your war in HOI 2, so that you can compare your carnage with real life.
 
It shouldn't be any lower than divisional level at this scale.I would like to see the components tracked at the divisional level,to the individual tanks,etc, like the 1st PanzerDiv would have 100PzIV's,30 PzV,10 StugIII's,15,000 men, etc.
 
ashbery76 said:
It shouldn't be any lower than divisional level at this scale.I would like to see the components tracked at the divisional level,to the individual tanks,etc, like the 1st PanzerDiv would have 100PzIV's,30 PzV,10 StugIII's,15,000 men, etc.
Click to expand...

No, that is micromanagement gone wild.
 
ashbery76 said:
It shouldn't be any lower than divisional level at this scale.I would like to see the components tracked at the divisional level,to the individual tanks,etc, like the 1st PanzerDiv would have 100PzIV's,30 PzV,10 StugIII's,15,000 men, etc.
Click to expand...

Yes. Agreed.
 
ashbery76 said:
It shouldn't be any lower than divisional level at this scale.I would like to see the components tracked at the divisional level,to the individual tanks,etc, like the 1st PanzerDiv would have 100PzIV's,30 PzV,10 StugIII's,15,000 men, etc.
Click to expand...

I like that idea. I dont know if it would be a good idea to make the player be able to do anything with it, but just to see what kind of makeup your army has would be great. Combine this with the terrain modifiers of Vicky and make some weather and a sweet tactical arm is added to HoI2
 
Having independent brigades might be unworkable - but what would be excellent would be the ability to 'custom build' divisions out of lesser components. You could start with an infantry brigade, motorise it, add an Elite brigade, medical / logistical enhancements etc.
 
snuggs said:
Having independent brigades might be unworkable - but what would be excellent would be the ability to 'custom build' divisions out of lesser components. You could start with an infantry brigade, motorise it, add an Elite brigade, medical / logistical enhancements etc.
Click to expand...

Yes, but only if you wanted to. It would be nice to have one or two special groups, ala "The Rainbow Division" or "GrossDeutchland" but you shouldn't have to do it all the time. That would be maddening.
 
snuggs said:
Having independent brigades might be unworkable - but what would be excellent would be the ability to 'custom build' divisions out of lesser components. You could start with an infantry brigade, motorise it, add an Elite brigade, medical / logistical enhancements etc.
Click to expand...

Yes.

One could have the various doctrines open different OOB forms to follow.
 
I agree with aprof.

Also, showing individual unit losses would require a very different combat system, which I expect, and would doubtful add in as much micro as one might expect. It could give players the view of how effective their individual units are, and whether or not they should or shouldn't keep them.

Oh, and it may be workable that smaller units be attached to a general, and be considered extra divisional assets.
 
What I would like to see in this subject (and in general, in all game aspects) is a flexible system, which permits you to micromanage or not.

Basic models for each division type, based on original national doctrines, and subjected to tech research or experience/army doctrine advances should be available. But you should be able to configure your division toe/oob to an extend and the produce that type of division all the times you want.

Basic unit should be division (with the ability to configure vrious types, or modify some of them individually, like elite units). The point of having elite units in real-life was giving them better training, best equipment and higher number, so they would be able to overcome special difficult tasks, but they consumed more suplies and their fielding was higher in time & cost terms and training. So the avility to make an army full of eleite divisions should be available to the player, but wouldn't be practical in relity.

As I said basic unit should be division, with corps being the following one (from 1 to 6 divisions), armies & army groups would be represented by HQ units. Option to allot divisions & corps to armies, and armies to army groups should be available. Corps & armies should be able to be equiped with extra regiments/bdes. Armies & AG should be an specific range, modified by tech, doctrines & maybe leader skills/experience. Units experience must be introduced and have an important factor in combat outcoming.

To tke full advantage of this model, province divided map model must eb abandoned, to return to an other type of equally distributed space model (be it hexes or whatever). This space units must have a range of staking limitationsfrom 0 to X, no penalties, from X to Y penalties cused by logitical issues and cogestion, being Y the maxim number of units per spce unit. This will give us a realistic fighting feeling and outcome; making strategical maneouver and encirclement, breakthrought and other modern war doctrines more important than ever. But that's n other question.

I'm in favour of dropping MP points for realistic numebr management and making countries differences in OOBs possible. i would say even more, I think it would be neccessry for what i exposed above.
 
We went over this some time ago and a few of us agreed on a division template idea, where you could customize your divisions at the battalion level or just use default division templates (the AI would of course use standard templates). Thus, you could choose this as your "43 Light Armored Div" which you would design once and add to your list of divisions:

1 armored car bn
3 M4A1 75mm bn
2 mot inf bn
2 mech inf bn
2 sp 105mm bn
1 M18 Wolverine TD bn

Once you researched M4A3 76mm you could change the tank battalions to them for your "44 Light Armored Div". Once again, for those not interested in in this level of management, you'd have default divisions available to choose from.

This also ties in with my idea of factories for specific types of vehicles a la Grigsby's War in Russia and War in Europe (nothing like Victoria's factories). You'd have downtime and an IC cost to retool factories to newer types (low cost for incremental upgrades like M4A1 to M4A3, bigger cost and more downtime to go from M4A3 to M26).

CC
 
swampthing said:
And I think the most important part would be the option of using a defaut version.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agreed. I love the idea of custom designing divisions, and breaking up shattered divisions to rebuild others, and pulling France's tanks out of her infantry divisions to build armored divisions, and, and, and......

But some days I just want to focus on the big picture. And a lot of people are going to be a lot less interested in this than us ;) . So a default template is an absolute must.
 
Wow, that level of micromanagement would be insane, yet so fun.

I think that if you would use WiR's system of factories that, the whole economic system needs to be retooled. At the point where you are telling the computer to bulid T-34s in the Urals and KV-85s in Stalingrad, then you would need a sytem, in which gives out reasources to individual factories. So, if you are running low on Steel, you can choose which factories keep producing tanks at what level. Thius would be most realistic, yet the most insane system ever.

Also, instead of individual men, it would have to be squads. Squads would be alot easier to create a system in which works off of squads then individual men.

Also, when creating a Mech division or birgade, you would have to put the right number of APCs with the number squads. If you put to many squads then they become foot infantry and then hurt the overall speed of that unit. In battle the same thing applies. If you lose, 75% of your APCs compared to 15% of your men, then the speed of the unit goes down, making for more realistic battles.

I think this is a bit going overboard, but if Paradox does any of this, where it allows you to create such detailed armies in a a semi ok way, then it becomes an instant classic.

The Khaos Project
 
Khaos - We have some agreement here. The factories could be given a priority or a slider for % of production (picture this - your KV-85 factory is at 80% and T-34 at 20%, thus your KV-85 factory gets four times the resources).

WiR also has the sliders for replacements and firepower decreases when you have fewer men/less equipment. Anyway, WiR has a lot of excellent concepts which really don't add too much complexity (or are actually simpler than HOI, such as the replacement sliders for each army).

Also, forget what I said above about making a new division template when you research a new tank - you could simply press a button as in WiR to upgrade existing units at battalion level (in each division), drawing new tanks from your pool.

CC
 
CORE already incorporates some of these concepts under 1.05c. I mostly play the Germans, so that's the only example I can give, but the German paras in CORE go from an airborne brigade (simulated by having far less org than usual), to a division, to the final 1943 Fsgr incarnation.

Shouldn't be too hard to have something similar in HOI2.
 
TheKhaosProject, CommanderCody I am with you guys on this one. I loved those aspects from WiR. I hope to see them again in some game somewhere. I remember that my divisions felt like real divisions because of the details in the game. I could peek in on the 4th Panzer Div for example and find out that it had a plot of experience and good equipment and it was different form the 3rd Panzer Div next door. I could also if I wanted to upgrade the best divisions with the best equipment if I liked. I often did this. It was never too much to micromanage.

In HOI a division is a division and everything is the same. I have no attachment to them.
 
I think the WiR does a nice job, but to make WiR and real time game, then it becomes anoth set of problems.

I think that with WiR type factories, aren't very good for prducing things other then tanks. Think if every AFV in the Russian, American, or German army was on a set of sliders for each factory you controlled, the madness. But, if it were only to be tanks then it loses the fun of the WiR concept.

The Khaos Project
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back