Barbarossa is too easy

[Jays298]

In my first play thru on NSB, it was an easy victory over USSR as Germany.

Couple patches later, still a 3 to 4 month operation, battle plans mostly. Having double the number of tanks helps, but even without tanks having some artillery with infantry would push them back.

Tried twice, once on 1940 when they declared on Axis Lithuania, and once in June 41 when I reloaded and kicked Lithuania out of the axis to see if maybe a year would make a difference.

Still effectively done by November 1941.

Other weird thing is no invasions at least before US joins the war.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

What difficulty are you using?

Difficulty - Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki

hoi4.paradoxwikis.com

Germany is in most Paradox games stronger than in history, to be able to succed consistently where historically they sometimes won more out of luck than numbers or resources. So if you make the ingame Germany even stronger it is no wonder that you can win against the USSR.

IMO the game seems to be balanced that the USSR can only win vs. Germany if it receives the lendlease aid of the western allies as it did historically.

No invasion before the US joins - as far as I remember the western allies had no resources to invade Germany or occupied lands before the US joined and practically added almost unlimited resources to the allies.

 

[Jays298]

What difficulty are you using?

Difficulty - Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki

hoi4.paradoxwikis.com

Germany is in most Paradox games stronger than in history, to be able to succed consistently where historically they sometimes won more out of luck than numbers or resources. So if you make the ingame Germany even stronger it is no wonder that you can win against the USSR.

IMO the game seems to be balanced that the USSR can only win vs. Germany if it receives the lendlease aid of the western allies as it did historically.

No invasion before the US joins - as far as I remember the western allies had no resources to invade Germany or occupied lands before the US joined and practically added almost unlimited resources to the allies.

Normal. In prior editions UK would often do Dday before or without US backing. But I did not have one nuisance invasion, nor did Italy invade anywhere.

I think maybe having Bulgaria as a solid Axis ally since BotB may have helped some too.

I didn't micro Barb either. I just thought the supply system and weather would have some effect, but no, no effect outside of Belgian Africa Congo which is a no supply zone.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Normal. In prior editions UK would often do Dday before or without US backing.

Well, historically the only "invasion" the allies tried in occupied Europe before D-DAY was the raid on Dieppe which resulted in some information but generally was a disaster for the canadians participating. So I would not expect the UK+Canada to create a successful invasion of Europe without the US and good if the AI had become smarter.
What the raid on Dieppe made clear was that the existing ports were all garrisoned and would be too costly without enough time to take and still be able to sufficiently supply a landing army.

Dieppe Raid - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The next invasion together with the US in Europe therefore brought artifficial ports with them and landed outside the defended portcities.

But I did not have one nuisance invasion, nor did Italy invade anywhere.

I think maybe having Bulgaria as a solid Axis ally since BotB may have helped some too.

I didn't micro Barb either. I just thought the supply system and weather would have some effect, but no, no effect outside of Belgian Africa Congo which is a no supply zone.

Well then the first steps are simple:
Be aware that ingame Germany is a bit stronger than historically.
Then be aware that a player usually outplays the AI under same circumstances in a complex game.

If you expect the game to be a challenge you therefore have to either raise the difficulty or make the USSR a bit stronger in the settings.

 

[Qwerlancer]

My opinion is Germany is fine but Axis minors are overpowered. Bulgaria, "Prussia" in Balkan, with insane buffs with army; Romania, various IAR buffs and Ftr2 rush , is the best air controller in game.

 

[Simon_9732495]

Game options -> Strengthen Soviets, UK, USA to max

Only had 1 Germany run since nsb and it took me until 1943 to cap Soviets with these settings (historical run, so not capping Allies before or other shenanigans…)
For it me it seems a lot harder (better!) with the new logistics and tanks

 

[Jays298]

Game options -> Strengthen Soviets, UK, USA to max

Only had 1 Germany run since nsb and it took me until 1943 to cap Soviets with these settings (historical run, so not capping Allies before or other shenanigans…)
For it me it seems a lot harder (better!) with the new logistics and tanks

Thanks for the idea. I might have to try that.

I don't expect a historical recreation but the stock game doesn't do enough to slow Germany down once winter sets in, much less make supply lines difficult.

If anything I now believe that the supply system is basically "lipstick" over most of the game and has no real effect outside of the most remote areas. Though it does really improve the war in Africa, Asia, etc.

Thus I find NSB to be easier than pre-NSB due to better supply.

I agree that Romania and Bulgaria are pretty powerful. Bulgaria is the real power over Greece.

Romania offered me like 14 divisions. Like thanks but...I think 5 armies in the east is enough.

I do train everyone to vet status (ground anyway). Maybe that's an unfair advantage.

 

[FlinzP]

Update about making defending more interesting was mentioned. That is very much what is needed as I have always believed with this game that launching continious attacks with divisions should not be possible so some prep time would be alright. NSB atleast added that now having hubs you have locations where to build some land forts.

Atleast following simple solutions could help defending side already:
1. Radars should be destroyed when a nation loses control of where they are built on.
2. Forts should work only to certain direction. However, since that is probably not simple I would have them have a full effect to only original land owner side and a partial effect to occupation side until peace conference changes it. Most forts are built towards enemy or on hill sides so those wouldn't help that much in reality.
3. Railroads should be damaged by defender (with engineer support?) when retreating.

 

[Casko]

IMO the game seems to be balanced that the USSR can only win vs. Germany if it receives the lendlease aid of the western allies as it did historically.

Which, I feel is tad stupid design vice. As when I play, Allies never ever ever, not even once, give any support to Soviets.

Soviets however are giving all their guns away to Communist China/Sinkiang. the Lend lease AI definitely needs some major rebalancing that's for sure.

This is why I give Soviet AI a tick or two of the "Major Nation Buff" at the game start. so the WW2 isn't over by 41

 

[ruzen]

Give AI max bonuses. Give yourself max handicaps... nothing will change
The core gameplay isn't ww2
Just make a big arrow and push.
The game is designed for ww1.

I found the only solution to play this game and have some slight enjoyment is to never micro-manage!
and never to change your manpower laws.
Vicky3 has better battle system than hoi4

 

[coffeelingfine]

I found the only solution to play this game and have some slight enjoyment is to never micro-manage!
and never to change your manpower laws.
Vicky3 has better battle system than hoi4

wut. A game not about warfare somehow has better warfare than a game that;s all about warfare?

Vicky3 isn't even out yet anyway

 

[warchief1978]

Does that help only the USSR to better reinforce it´s border forces? Or does it help the axis too, once they push the soviert border forces back and occupy the border area?

Not during testing, I just looked at the extent to which this affects the size of the Soviet Army. Which meant about 20 divisions with the original Ai section. In other words, it only favored the Soviet side.
But in the mod I made, I redrawn the railway map, which is good for both parties, and combined it with the test results and modified the Soviet focus for that reason as well. I know it's a pretty interesting solution, but I was forced to fix it because the nudge tool is useless for some reason and constantly crashes with me.
The mod is available here.
moddb

Ai is not yet included in the mod because it is being tested.

I am aware that he has defended that area with considerable force. But it looks pretty ridiculous that 42 fully loaded divisions protect only Vladivostok and about another 30-40 divisions protect other areas. Meanwhile, he is defending against the German attack with only about 100-120 divisions, and German troops have already been to Moscow.

 

[Jays298]

I also faced this problem and started researching the game a bit,and what I found shocked me. Axis is much stronger only the tiny and insignificant part of the problem. The painful truth is that the developers don’t know what drug they are using, but it can certainly be very percussive as they are completely disconnected from reality or worse....
Why am I writing this?
- The first problem:
The new supply system.The developers have completely forgotten to teach Ai how to handle it.Ai will not build a new railway line, port or supply hub, it will only develop existing railway lines.
- The second problem:
The Soviet Union has significant border areas where there are no supplies, therefore, the troops suffer significant losses.As a test, I modified the map and designed several railway lines and supply centers for the Soviet border areas.As a result, by 1941, the Soviet army had grown by about 20 divisions.
- It is the third and biggest problem:
Ai has been modified.
Before the appearance of the NSB dlc, the Soviet Ai built a huge army that tied up the Axis troops.He is currently only slightly increasing his army. One of the developers modified the Soviet Ai to increase his army with large armored troops (about 40% of his total army size is trying to create armored troops). Because of this, he will increase his army with far fewer divisions.I changed the proportions to form many more infantry divisions and therefore immediately created a larger army, and in addition, the production priorities had to be changed.I haven’t even found the right proportions, but it’s only a matter of time.
- Fourth problem:
Italian Ai assigned to protect Romanian, Hungarian, Bulgarian borders from Soviets.That is why it faces not only German, Romanian and Hungarian troops, but also a lot of Italian divisions.Yet in reality only a small force (an army) was sent to the Soviet front.Therefore, about 120-140 Soviet divisions stand against about 300 Axis divisions by 1941.The funniest part of it all is that with this change, Italy is creating a much larger army than the Soviets.
But all this was supplemented by the Soviets trying to protect the other border areas in the meantime, and I also found that when I reached Moscow with the Germans, the Soviet AI defended Vladivostok with 42 divisions.
- Fifth problem:
In more than one case, Soviet Ai sent more weapons to China, Communist China ... etc. than it could produce per month.
- Sixth problem: USA land lase
Well that has also been modified and the US does not really like to send infantry weapons to the Soviets.But if this amazing American Ai has already been mentioned, that will only start defending Australia and India once they have reached a certain percentage of capitulation. More clearly, after the Japanese occupied quite a lot of their territory. Instead, he is having a mass picnic with his troops in Africa and England ........
Anyone can see all of this within the game You need to look at the files in the location below:
Hearts of Iron IV/ common/ai_strategy

+1
If Ai has been mentioned, it is true that it does not belong here, but if it is not a problem, I would mention it as well.
Ai naval production:
View attachment 820059

View attachment 820060
Isn't it interesting?
I also modified the part of Ai naval production.Since I started experimenting with modifying Ai, I got into this part as well.The result spoke for itself, the Italian Navy could not be exterminated by the Allied fleet by 1942. Instead, quite large naval battles took place even in the Mediterranean. Germany also built a normal fleet and successfully landed in England. The Italians defended Libya with significant armies, the Americans did not ignore the Japanese threat either, and so Japan did not conquer Australia, India, and the entire region by the end of 1942. All that was needed was a change in territorial priorities and a few other things.Also, due to changes in naval production, Ai suddenly learned to build shipyards as well....
Also, I remember Ai not canceling shipbuilding once it has reached a certain percentage of readiness. But I didn’t experience that in the game and, interestingly, I didn’t find it in the Ai part either.
I may not remember this thing well, or it was just an empty promise from the developers?!

Dear developers!
I’m not a programmer, just an amateur modder!Nevertheless, with a few minutes of work and a lot of testing, I made the Ai much more usable!
But when their incompetence is so obvious, it’s simply a shame!
At work, I would do my job in the same style as you develop this game, so I would be unemployed very quickly.

Sorry for the bad English, but I hope you understood what I described!

This is very interesting.

I loaded up my own save game from april 1941, about halfway into the war focus against USSR.

And I loaded up the USSR to see what they were doing.

They are making 9 inf / 3 artillery infantry units. Which is too much artillery. It's a terrible defensive unit perhaps.

Maybe that makes sense based on your thesis that they have basically programmed the USSR to act as like a zerg rush kinda country...but they need to be defensive at first.

While the vast majority of their existing infantry has support artillery only, that's it.

But what I noticed is the AI has their battleplans set to activate before the war! So they will immediately lose their entrenchment and attack the attacking Germans?!

I'm actually impressed by AI battle plans (including an amphibious invasion into a Romanian port!), even though a lot of their army is guarding victory points.

Also USSR (sometimes china too) runs out of manpower because they have the wrong policy set!!! That shouldn't happen for majors, much less mass assault countries.

 

[warchief1978]

This is very interesting.

I loaded up my own save game from april 1941, about halfway into the war focus against USSR.

And I loaded up the USSR to see what they were doing.

They are making 9 inf / 3 artillery infantry units. Which is too much artillery. It's a terrible defensive unit perhaps.

Maybe that makes sense based on your thesis that they have basically programmed the USSR to act as like a zerg rush kinda country...but they need to be defensive at first.

While the vast majority of their existing infantry has support artillery only, that's it.View attachment 820290

But what I noticed is the AI has their battleplans set to activate before the war! So they will immediately lose their entrenchment and attack the attacking Germans?!

I'm actually impressed by AI battle plans (including an amphibious invasion into a Romanian port!), even though a lot of their army is guarding victory points.

Also USSR (sometimes china too) runs out of manpower because they have the wrong policy set!!! That shouldn't happen for majors, much less mass assault countries.

Unfortunately, I have to say this is not just a peculiarity of the Soviet ai, but of all of them. Ai always forces a 9 inf / 3 artillery infantry units during production..

 

[Harin]

Probably because the game is difficult to learn quickly, the game settings of normal and below become very easy, once that learning difficulty is passed.

For myself, it was hard to start playing on higher levels, like Elite. When I say hard, I do not mean the game play. After one learns the game, even Elite is not hard. No, the hard part was being spoiled and expecting to have all my land and air doctrine done, all my important research done, and a host of other things I had come to expect as "normal" by specific dates, such as Sept 1939 and June 1941.

That is a shame, because the AI does not have half the things done by those dates that I have done. Even so, I feel like I accomplished something by having "X" things done by "Y" date, despite the fact it means I am going to walk over the AI. It would really help if the AI could use its superior computing skills to actually be more efficient than a human player. It is not like the AI is going to win. It still does not know what direction to attack in, let alone how to concentrate its best divisions for the attack. Still, if the AI could super efficiently coordinate focus tree choices/timing, with research, etc... it would be more competitive. Frankly, how is it that I am able to out produce an Intel i7 chip? The AI should at least make production a challenge to the player, even if it cannot figure out how to use the units it makes.

 

[ltccone]

Probably because the game is difficult to learn quickly, the game settings of normal and below become very easy, once that learning difficulty is passed.

For myself, it was hard to start playing on higher levels, like Elite. When I say hard, I do not mean the game play. After one learns the game, even Elite is not hard. No, the hard part was being spoiled and expecting to have all my land and air doctrine done, all my important research done, and a host of other things I had come to expect as "normal" by specific dates, such as Sept 1939 and June 1941.

That is a shame, because the AI does not have half the things done by those dates that I have done. Even so, I feel like I accomplished something by having "X" things done by "Y" date, despite the fact it means I am going to walk over the AI. It would really help if the AI could use its superior computing skills to actually be more efficient than a human player. It is not like the AI is going to win. It still does not know what direction to attack in, let alone how to concentrate its best divisions for the attack. Still, if the AI could super efficiently coordinate focus tree choices/timing, with research, etc... it would be more competitive. Frankly, how is it that I am able to out produce an Intel i7 chip? The AI should at least make production a challenge to the player, even if it cannot figure out how to use the units it makes.

I never playing anything but normal. I prefer difficulty increase to buff my opponents, and not nerf me.

That's why I play harder settings in Expert AI.

 

[Casko]

But what I noticed is the AI has their battleplans set to activate before the war! So they will immediately lose their entrenchment and attack the attacking Germans?!

Every AI Does this as far as I know. its just more noticable with Soviets because of the whole Soviets Zerg rush to loose at 1941.

 

[Jays298]

Every AI Does this as far as I know. its just more noticable with Soviets because of the whole Soviets Zerg rush to loose at 1941.

They should really improve AI handling of defensive war. Something as simple as just defending for 6 months shouldn't be that difficult.

This also explains why the AI does so many doomed to fail attacks whenever it is invaded.

I guess you could make an argument that the AI isn't even using half the systems that the player is given.

It isn't adequately using support companies, nor entrenchment (attacks all the time). I guess divisions are still designed not for NSB. And the doctrine / XP stuff I guess AI can't handle that kind of strategic thinking.

 

[sergeixxivxii]

Give AI max bonuses. Give yourself max handicaps... nothing will change
The core gameplay isn't ww2
Just make a big arrow and push.
The game is designed for ww1.

I found the only solution to play this game and have some slight enjoyment is to never micro-manage!
and never to change your manpower laws.
Vicky3 has better battle system than hoi4

Let the ai move your divisions is optional not mandatory, play at low speed doing micro and your game experience will be different

 

[Casko]

They should really improve AI handling of defensive war. Something as simple as just defending for 6 months shouldn't be that difficult.

I forgot to add this to my previous post, but there is one AI that is different. and that is Blum government France. Which will always be on defensive due to the leader modifier. It will literally never attack unless it feels it has overwhelming advantage.
This is why it always attacks through alps into Italy and murder its equipment trying to break into Savoy. But never attacks through Benelux because Italy is weak enough for AI to think it can win easy. But does not account for the terrain.

this is also why when a player plays historical Poland, the player can feel that the allies are doing nothing.