1 division was 85,000 men??? I think you made a small mistake or something; I tought the largest divisions of any nation were about 20,000 men strong...
-
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.
No, I am saying that they had 85,000 men enlisted for every combat division (7,700,000 men enlisted in the army for 90 combat divisions). Most of these men are tied up in support functions, such as logistics, medical, admin, training, military construction, military police, repair, etc, etc, etc, not to mention HQ units, and support combat trooops like artillery brigades etc, rather than employed directly in combat divisions.
Even Germany, who had the greatest manpower problems of any country, by wars end had an established strength of only 12,000 men per division, which most divisions struggled to achieve, yet had roughly 17-18,000 men enlisted in the army per division.
The disparity in numbers between the US and Germany is due to many factors, not least of which is that German supply lines by 1944 were a maximum of 2-3000 km, all over land, while the US had to ship everything 10-20,000 km across multiple land and sea routes.
This is not modelled at all in the game, and gives a huge manpower advantage to the US which it should not have.
I am not suggesting that the US could not have dramatically reduced this ratio, and I would hope that we can model this in game.
My major point is that we need to determine exactly what 1 manpower point is supposed to represent, and work on ways of modelling the numerous different ways that various countries used that manpower.
Uh, how exactly manpower was messed by 1.03b relase and how inaccurate is it when it comes to South America and Asia?
(well, i know about China. And India. And rest of Asia, except Japan. Especially monthly rates)
(well, i know about China. And India. And rest of Asia, except Japan. Especially monthly rates)