Burned Land

[Lord Finnish]

It would be great if your armies retreating from occupied province would burn land (In game terms, infrastructure and IC) after them. That would cause really big troubles for the country taking land back from the enemy. Germans used that strategy a lot during WW2, like against Finland in Lapland War.

 

[hito1]

That sort of already happens, infrastructure in the province is halved when it exchange hands.

 

[Lord Finnish]

That sort of already happens, infrastructure in the province is halved when it exchange hands.

mmm. yes but only when it changed owner. In my idea is that the infra and IC will go down when the defender loses a battle and the retreating army has walked like 50% away from the province (to make sure that no reinforcements are coming to town which is already burnt)

 

[hito1]

I see. But are you proposing it'd destroy infrastructure every time (I mean, automatically after losing a battle)?

 

[shadow737]

The problem is in provinces that will change hands repeatedly. Image what Minisk might be like after a successful Russian counterattack after initial German success, only to be countered by a German offensive taking back Minisk that is then promptly lost by Germany and then regained in the following month by German troops and lost two months later by German.
Minisk starts as either 60% or 80% infrastructure. If it permanently loses half with every retreat by occupying forces then here is the result:

If Minisk is at 60% then: 1st loss: 30% Infra. 2nd loss:15% 3rd loss: 7.5%

If Minisk is at 80% then: 1st loss: 40% Infra. 2nd Loss:20% 3rd Loss: 10%

Even rounding up would leave Minisk at 10%, therefore as the AI gets better the frontline provinces would become impassible after a short while and the offensive efforts of the modern mechanized force would worthless! Imagine a whole game spent trying to lumber through the worst parts of the passible parts of the Sahara desert.

 

[Gul Brown]

A scorched earth policy could become irritating though, as some said if you were having a "back and forth" kind of war it would be a nightmare. No a SLOW nightmare. Maybe if you were planning on a large scale withdrawal...although does anyone do that in Hoi2?

 

[{LD}Firestorm]

I did, once, as the Soviet Union, against a human player. Ended up countering after reaching Kiev, encircled and destroyed some 60 Axis divisions in a massive counter. Won the war.

Scortched earth would be a bad thing to allow automatically. If someone is losing a war they could theoritically destroy everything. Not fun.

 

[unmerged(41649)]

It's also against the rules along with some other WW2 attrocities. I'm surprised this thread hasn't been closed yet

 

[shadow737]

Scorched earth though could refer only to the destruction of vital bridges, railroads, water projects such as dams. A short term event such as the flooding of a key province in the face of a massive defeat and retreat is possible.

An event similiar to the National Chinese event of flooding several river provinces in the early stages of the war against Japan was not strictly speaking a massacre though many civilians died due to the flooding.

The problem is not the idea of degrading the infra. of a province, but rather making it permanent with the only solution being to rebuild the lost infra. with IC.

Point of fact just about everyone in the world during war burns bridges, throws iron and steel rails from railroads into fires, demolishes the businesses and factories of the enemy and their own when on the offensive or defensive. Never in the history of the world, until the modern UN era(1998-present), has anyone considered blowing up a bridge a war crime, even though blowing up that bridge might severely effect the population of the region.

Sherman once said "War is hell." This was supposedly what he said as Atlanta burned to the ground. Destruction of property is NOT MURDER! What the forum rules are against is people who want to rehash the worst offenses of the Nurmemberg Trial defendents. The game already has events where certain countries destroy dikes and dams to make terrain impassible. The game was designed with infra. degraded as a conquering army moves through from either side.

 

[unmerged(73544)]

I understand your wish to be able to permanently take out provincial assets, but in game terms everything suffers a bit when the front moves through them. However, historically many a bombed out factory or key bridge was rebuilt or at least restored to working condition in good time.
What you see in the game in some events is say Russia "transfers Industry East". This is removing the IC from that hex and relocating to another location. This is based on history...to imagine that they disassembled these factories and set them up to work again is incredible. However if you read about some of these "new" factories in the East, they weren't exactly the same. Some had no roofs, and very little supporting infrastructure. But they did the job.
Maybe in future enhancements, we'll see every nation having the ability to move their factories/IC. I know that if I had the opportunity as Germany, I would be moving the Ruhr Industries east into Saxony early in the game. This way, Britain if they begin early Strategic Bombing, will have to pay a heavier price as they have to travel farther to hit key targets.

 

[unmerged(73544)]

An event similiar to the National Chinese event of flooding several river provinces in the early stages of the war against Japan was not strictly speaking a massacre though many civilians died due to the flooding.

Interesting you mention this. I was reading not long ago that this historic event had a significant negative impact on the Chinese people, and it drove alot of them into the Communist camp. That being because their own government (Nationalist China) would do such an atrocity on their own people.

 

[shadow737]

You're right to note the effect of the Nationalist Chinese actions on their civilian population. and how these actions did lead to the increased support for the Communist Chinese under Mao. It's a shame that the game does not incorporate this shift in loyalties. As it stands starting from the 1936 GC if the Japanese are defeated often Communist China is overrun by the larger Nationalist Chinese. A better post war event in the resumed Chinese Civil War would be helpful.

An option though to destroy IC, infrastructure, etc. in the game though would be in keeping with the actions of many of the nations involved in the war. The Krupp Essen factory complex was leveled by the Allies after it was taken in part for revenge and in part to avoid the Germans using these war factories again if somehow they were retaken.

The Krupp Corporation Essen weapons factories and steel foundries were demolished so thoroughly that reuilding them would take years.

During invasion operations often the invader does plan to destroy certain factories in their advance thru a nation. At present the only way to destroy a large part of the industrial or resource base of a province is to nuke it.

In the next Hearts of Iron especially the game designers should look at both creating a system by which resources can be increased in a province by IC expediture and a way by which an invader or a defender can level those resources. This would add an element of realism to the game. For instance make IC destruction a mission type with a set amount of time for completing the task. The adavntage of this would be in the event of a losing war the player or the ai would be able to chose to destroy their important factories, bridges, dams, mines, oil rigs, steel foundries, etc. rather than turn them over to the enemy. By making this mission type time dependent an overrun by the invader or a swift counterattack by the defender could defeat the mission purpose and keep the IC or other resources intact with the repairable damage that is standard in the game.

The solution to endless upgrades of resource production that would happen would be to create a province maximum. For instance lets say that you are playing Saudi Arabia and you wanted to increase oil production in the Medina province. The current production is 10 in this hypothetical. The province max. is 30 oil production per day. The increase is 5 per 1IC and $50 for a period of 180 days. The cost is immediate the IC happens over the period of time.

 

[shadow737]

A Maybe if you were planning on a large scale withdrawal...although does anyone do that in Hoi2?

Probably as the AI improves in the game design we players might have to change tactics to include massive "repositioning" after an "accidental relocation of certain key personnel into restrictive non-allied hands."

Having the option of not turning over hard won resources and IC would be nice in that case.

 

[Gul Brown]

Probably as the AI improves in the game design we players might have to change tactics to include massive "repositioning" after an "accidental relocation of certain key personnel into restrictive non-allied hands."

Having the option of not turning over hard won resources and IC would be nice in that case.

I would only like/use the option if i knew i wouldnt be getting that land back, leaving destroying then recapturing it a week later could be annoying.

 

[shadow737]

Of course, but the point of the post is that when AI gets better at planning a war effort to the point that an enemy army might throw back a front a couple hundred miles having the option of destroying their resources and IC would greatly aid in the possible counterattack in the next campaign season as the captured land would not aid the victor greatly.

Also think about those moments when people play Britain, France, or Nationalist China or Netherlands and Belgium for that matter. Germany can potentially take a huge amount of IC in France and the low countries even if the Allies stop them from taking Paris. Resource and industrial denial is basic military strategy.

 

[Gul Brown]

Of course, but the point of the post is that when AI gets better at planning a war effort to the point that an enemy army might throw back a front a couple hundred miles having the option of destroying their resources and IC would greatly aid in the possible counterattack in the next campaign season as the captured land would not aid the victor greatly.

Also think about those moments when people play Britain, France, or Nationalist China or Netherlands and Belgium for that matter. Germany can potentially take a huge amount of IC in France and the low countries even if the Allies stop them from taking Paris. Resource and industrial denial is basic military strategy.

I agree with you, just then we will have to hope the AI improves

 

[shadow737]

I basically am talking about a potential future product from Paradox, Hearts of Iron 3. The changes I'm advocating would be rather difficult for the vanilla game now. So I figure by then as the AI seems to be improving at a rate of 5% per two month period as the new patches and boosters are produced, then in about a year to two years players might start running into problems with a wise AI.

Here's hoping anyway.

At least the AI has started learning how to fight on more than one front or dealing with beachheads.

 

[Gul Brown]

I basically am talking about a potential future product from Paradox, Hearts of Iron 3. The changes I'm advocating would be rather difficult for the vanilla game now. So I figure by then as the AI seems to be improving at a rate of 5% per two month period as the new patches and boosters are produced, then in about a year to two years players might start running into problems with a wise AI.

Here's hoping anyway.

At least the AI has started learning how to fight on more than one front or dealing with beachheads.

True, the differences can be seen in the AI between Hoi and Hoi2, patches also do improve it.