-
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.
Can it be modded where attack delay is directly proportional to average organization of division (plus a big negative modifier if the HQ has any organization loss).
There are allot of things in this game that are illogical and counter-intuitive, I wish the developers would attack these problems. Make the game funner.
I think they're doing a pretty good job on an incredibly complex project with limited resources. My goal here is to give voice to my dislike of the attack delay implementation (and hopefully draw out other like-minded players). I'll leave it to the developers to prioritize how to spend their efforts, but I would very much appreciate it if they would replace the attack delay with something tied to ORG.
The bad thing about attack delay is if your micromanaging your army you have to micro-micro manage attack delay, watch it like a hawk, which i think is unnecessary.
It's quantized/digitized, it's unrealistic too.
You know that if attack delay were simply removed and units under say 33% organization were unable to attack then the computer AI would pretty much always be at low organization all the time. They would attack, drop below 33%, wait for 34% then attack, drop below 33%, wait for 34% then attack, drop below 33%.....
I disagree. In my games, my armies are more likely to be sitting in 'attack delay', not the AI's. I haven't seen the AI attacking just for the sake of attacking. They do it when they have a chance for success, when they're surrounded, or when they need to pin down my forces. They seem to have plenty of restraint.
As for the 34, 33, 34 cycle... I'd make it where the min ORG to initiate an attack was somewhat higher than the min ORG to maintain an attack. For example, you might need 33 ORG to launch an attack, but only 20 ORG to continue one.
As for the 34, 33, 34 cycle... I'd make it where the min ORG to initiate an attack was somewhat higher than the min ORG to maintain an attack. For example, you might need 33 ORG to launch an attack, but only 20 ORG to continue one.
. . . entering this thread late, and don't really see the connection between attack delay and organization. Some are suggesting this because of delays when panzer divisions encounter HQ units. But, putting that aside, these are really two separate functions:
Organization has already been well covered, so nuff-said. It's fine by me the way it is.
Attack delay is a function of doctrine and leadership.
For example, just watched a D-Day documentary where the chief-of-staff to Rommel was trying to get the 4th Panzer division into the battle at Caan. Rommel was back in Germany, and had to get back and forth by car because of Allied air superiority. So, naturally, there was Attack Delay because the leader, in this case, Rommel wasn't on hand at HQ to get the ball rolling.
As with the French high command in 1940, Attack delay depends on leadership at HQ. Someone with lots of traits as Rommel or Patten should be able to get divisions rolling a lot quicker than, say, Maurice Gustave Gamelin.
Of course, how does one code this? I don't know. But, here's the logic chain:
As soon as a unit has completed movement (movement as combat), they check back with HQ by radio.
Attack delay is then a function of the number and quality of leaders they are in contact with.
As currently implemented, HOI3 has a default Attack Delay timer, which is tied to the Operational Level Organization doctrine. This is the default Attack Delay.
What is needed in addition to the above is a multiplication factor based on hierarchy. If one has experienced leaders with appropriate traits, then reduce attack delay accordingly. If the leaders are none too experienced, have few traits, or the wrong traits (too defensive minded), then increase the delay.
I assume the above is programmable since these factors are already included in combat statistics.
What say yea?
Organization has already been well covered, so nuff-said. It's fine by me the way it is.
Attack delay is a function of doctrine and leadership.
For example, just watched a D-Day documentary where the chief-of-staff to Rommel was trying to get the 4th Panzer division into the battle at Caan. Rommel was back in Germany, and had to get back and forth by car because of Allied air superiority. So, naturally, there was Attack Delay because the leader, in this case, Rommel wasn't on hand at HQ to get the ball rolling.
As with the French high command in 1940, Attack delay depends on leadership at HQ. Someone with lots of traits as Rommel or Patten should be able to get divisions rolling a lot quicker than, say, Maurice Gustave Gamelin.
Of course, how does one code this? I don't know. But, here's the logic chain:
As soon as a unit has completed movement (movement as combat), they check back with HQ by radio.
Attack delay is then a function of the number and quality of leaders they are in contact with.
As currently implemented, HOI3 has a default Attack Delay timer, which is tied to the Operational Level Organization doctrine. This is the default Attack Delay.
What is needed in addition to the above is a multiplication factor based on hierarchy. If one has experienced leaders with appropriate traits, then reduce attack delay accordingly. If the leaders are none too experienced, have few traits, or the wrong traits (too defensive minded), then increase the delay.
I assume the above is programmable since these factors are already included in combat statistics.
What say yea?
The AI is already tracking its divisions' strength, and organization for the purpose of rotating them out of action, so it should be trivial to make it wait for some specific org value before commiting units. Seriously, it's not hard to imagine that a "ready for action" flag already sits in the code.
Ridonkulus. Then as the player I would always have "Rommel" at his HQ.
That's not what attack delay is so no. But you can easily turn it off by setting the delay to zero.
The Attack delay is not what you think it is, it is something to prevent unrealistic moves, not simulating anything realistic.
Problem is, attack delay doesn't really prevent unrealistic moves (like attacking again right after a prolonged battle), but it does introduce completely unrealistic problems (like not being able to overrun a much weaker unit, and just keep on attacking). I don't see what it does that can't be done by attaching various conditions to org and/or strength (a mechanism already used for things like paradrops).
Hm, so the org loss value for movement in enemy territory is moddeable aswell as the attack delay?
I guess increasing org recovery when resting aswell as lowering attack delay to a few hours and increasing org loss when moving in enemy territory would do the trick, or?
UNIT_ATTACK_DELAY = 168,
UNIT_ATTACK_DELAY_MODIFY = 10 - that is the doctrine each level lowering by 1/10 of max value?
I guess increasing org recovery when resting aswell as lowering attack delay to a few hours and increasing org loss when moving in enemy territory would do the trick, or?
UNIT_ATTACK_DELAY = 168,
UNIT_ATTACK_DELAY_MODIFY = 10 - that is the doctrine each level lowering by 1/10 of max value?
Last edited:
I concur.
Attack delay is fundamentally flawed as it's currently works.
Its existence and usefulness could be justified it in many ways, several contributors in this thread have already done so.
My favorite would be for an experienced (commando?) unit to add an Attack Delay to another unit, to slow down its further movements, reduce its coordination/efficiency (officer leadership) in battle, or even halting/pinning it for some time (like Artillery, in HoI2), but it is not how it currently works in the game.
This in turn, combined with another issue, leads to silly situations where 12 000 men of the Elite of Japanese army can move just fine, occupy provinces, but are stopped somehow for 5 days by a couple hundreds of battered Chinese troops, mostly unfit to fight directly out on the field anyway :
I believe this feature could just be removed from the game, since an organization after-battle penalty already exists (like in HoI2), and it wouldn't be any worse without it.
Attack delay is fundamentally flawed as it's currently works.
Its existence and usefulness could be justified it in many ways, several contributors in this thread have already done so.
My favorite would be for an experienced (commando?) unit to add an Attack Delay to another unit, to slow down its further movements, reduce its coordination/efficiency (officer leadership) in battle, or even halting/pinning it for some time (like Artillery, in HoI2), but it is not how it currently works in the game.
This in turn, combined with another issue, leads to silly situations where 12 000 men of the Elite of Japanese army can move just fine, occupy provinces, but are stopped somehow for 5 days by a couple hundreds of battered Chinese troops, mostly unfit to fight directly out on the field anyway :
I believe this feature could just be removed from the game, since an organization after-battle penalty already exists (like in HoI2), and it wouldn't be any worse without it.
Next person that brings up Rommel, his car, and his vacation time gets a History Geek Alert.
I think the major problem in simulating the pace and tempo of operations is logistical. In order to launch a major attack, sometimes months are needed to bring up supplies and ammo, in particular artillery ammo. Now, an interesting mechanic in an old board wargame was the ability to choose the type of attack, deliberate or hasty.
In a hasty attack, the unit has little preparation and can launch a attack basically off the march. IIRC the attack uses only 70-80% of its strength, but can move immediately after the attack if successful (and uses less supply). For a deliberate attack, it can take a few days, but the unit attacks at a multiple of its strength, but uses up a lot of supply.
How is this relevant? Well, one way to control the pace of attacks is to tweak the supply situation (not sure how easy?). If the battle is won in a matter of, say, a day or less, the current system stands. If not, say 80% of supply is instantly consumed (representing artillery usage). If the attack succeeds after this delay, the unit will not be able to progress to another attack until it's supply is replenished, which is pretty realistic.
Most major offensives either have purpose designed breaks or forced breaks in order for the supply needs to be met. Think of the Western Allies in the aftermath of the Cobra breakout or the Soviets during their 1944 offensives. These stops can be months on end in order to reorganize and resupply. Now, it's just unrealistic the way you can attack and attack.
A simpler solution would be having artillery brigades having their supply usage in combat go up 400-500%, but I don't know if there is a difference between supply usage in combat and not. I get the feeling there is just a set per day usage per brigade type.
The idea would make sense if the supply system was sensible, but it isn't. If the battle happened at a spear head, the automatic supply system would strip other privinces instead of the one you're attacking from. Also, units take over supplies when conquering territory, so when fighting a strong force (that eats a lot of supply), you often don't have a bottleneck until the front stops or the enemy runs out of units.
I would like to see the attack delay gone and only org being counted. I compare to TOAW, where in one turn you attack and, depending on lets say the "brutality" of the engagement (strong defenders, weak attackers = long battles) your units could won the battle, but next turn they would be "reorganizing" and could not be given orders. By only moving some divisions needlessly around the map, they could enter a "reorganizing" state.
In HOI3, the attack delay is higher for quicker battles than it is for long battles, I don't get it. A division attacks an understrength militia brigade, wins quickly but cannot attack again for 2 days? But if the same division engages another division and the battle takes 2 days, when it ends it can fight again immediately.
In HOI3, the attack delay is higher for quicker battles than it is for long battles, I don't get it. A division attacks an understrength militia brigade, wins quickly but cannot attack again for 2 days? But if the same division engages another division and the battle takes 2 days, when it ends it can fight again immediately.