• 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.
Basically the game should play so that the Germans have a fighting chance till very late 42 or early 43, but at the same time the Russians must not be weakend so much that they get crushed in a couple of weeks. If the Germans can't win by Stalingrad time or Kursk time, then they should lose the game.
 
boromir said:
Basically the game should play so that the Germans have a fighting chance till very late 42 or early 43, but at the same time the Russians must not be weakend so much that they get crushed in a couple of weeks. If the Germans can't win by Stalingrad time or Kursk time, then they should lose the game.


exactly right, but I dont know if thats possible to simulate due to the fact that you can 1) quickly cover a lot of territory in a short period 2) reinforce a divsion of tanks from 1 str to 100 overnight

F
 
Fiendix said:
exactly right, but I dont know if thats possible to simulate due to the fact that you can 1) quickly cover a lot of territory in a short period 2) reinforce a divsion of tanks from 1 str to 100 overnight

F

Add to that the fact, that so great early success of Barbarossa was possible only because Soviets were totally unprepared for German attack (divisions were relocated, no defensive formations, supplies were still on the rail stations, some units were not fully manned...)...

Tell it to the human player - "Hey, to keep things historical, please make sure that all your units on the western border got org lower then 10"... :D

In SP it's somehow managed by dissent hit on the start of game, but it's obviously too low to make the difference. In case of ahistorical occupation policies it appears that dissent hit is too high, though...
 
Copper Nicus said:
Tell it to the human player - "Hey, to keep things historical, please make sure that all your units on the western border got org lower then 10"... :D

:rofl: lets implement a house rule to make sure that happens :D

F
 
To reinforced panzer division from 50% to 100% you should spend IC and TIME equivalent to cost and time of 1/2 new panzer div.

Or at least something similar. As long as this is not represented you can easly reinforcing your current divisions and also building new ones. It is not only the IC cost, because we can easly rise cost of supplies needed for panzers, but it's the question of time in wich you can build enough equipment to reinforce them.

In current game army od 12 panzers with eng. brigades need about 7000 supplie units to reinforce from 20 to 100%. How much time do you need to produce 7000 supplies? All you have to do is just switch supplies button to max, i.e. 2000 supplies per day. 4-5 days and you have all equipment need to reinforce your Panzer Armee - equipment that normally you build in at least 4 months. The only time is that need for recovering organisation, but it does no even touch the area of reality.

Question is how to represent this in HoI?

Cheers

P.S. In june 1941 Soviets had 1200 T34/76, they were well prepared against The Germans.
 
Orthank said:
(...)Question is how to represent this in HoI?

Read Math Guy threads. :)

BTW, anyone tried to MP Mithel's Starfire mod? Opinions?

P.S. In june 1941 Soviets had 1200 T34/76, they were well prepared against The Germans.

Yup, and over 600 KV-1 and KV-2. T-34 was something Germans could handle, but KV... whole different story. :)
 
Kindjal said:
Yeah, the airfilters were shit and no mechanic was trained for the engines, so it was easier to grab a new tank than try and fix it.

:eek: maybe we should add an extra supply consumption to the russian tanks for the first few months or whenever this problem was solved

Ghost_dk
 
Kindjal said:
Yeah, the airfilters were shit and no mechanic was trained for the engines, so it was easier to grab a new tank than try and fix it.


That's Russia, all right - besides their tanks rarely fought so long. If any of them survived 340km, it's engine was changed. Not possible in the middle of Barbarossa (obvious reasons)...
 
Last edited:
Copper Nicus said:
Read Math Guy threads. :)

BTW, anyone tried to MP Mithel's Starfire mod?

I've just downloaded it and will look at it from an MP perspective, though its unlikely I will get to MP play it soon.

Btw, I heard that there are some MP vets involved in testing 1.06, so we may see some significant MP improvements there too.
 
A few ideas that may help get more "historical" results:

1) Add a loss of doctrines to the Soviet Officer Purges. Things like Modern Tank Warfare. Historically the Soviet skill level dropped considerably across the board when Stalin purged the army, and more than the loss of the generals can reflect in the HoI.

2) As was pointed out, supplies to rebuild units are too easy to acquire. The best solution would be to seperate the current supplies catagory into "supplies" (ammo, clothing, rations, etc.) and "military hardware" (rifles, tank/ship/plane components. By making the second catagory much more expensive than the first and tying a required amount to setup a new unit and to repair existing ones. These values of course could be modified by technologies and events (mass production, nation specific events, etc.).

3) More tank technologies, such as tank to tank radios and tank navigational equipment could be added. Then doctrines could be tied to these techs. So, you would not be able to research say, "Blitzkrieg Tank Tactics" unless you had good tank to tank, and tank to higher command communications. This would help the Germans a lot.

Other ideas not necessarily for this thread, but just to get them out:

4) I would like to see a German event in '37, Guderian publishes "Achtung Panzer". Germans get free armor doctrines.

5) The USA is still missing some techs at the beginning of the game that they should have.
"Basic Submachine Gun" - The Thompson was invented during WWI.
Light and Heavy Machine Guns - The US air cooled 30 and 50 cal machine guns were introduced in 1919.
Vehicle Mass Production - I don't remember when Ford invented this....

6) At some point every country (just Major?) should have the opportunity to buy 20 and 40mm Bofurs design from Sweden. This is more or less what happened.

7) USA industry should be tied more closely to the recovery from the Depression. Maybe, +1 IC per month until war, then +3? Lower the initial IC for USA inconjunction with this.

8) Kinda like to see a "Jesse Owens shows up the Ubermensch" event similar to the Nobel Prize events. Only, Germany gets a small increase instead of decrease.

9) Democracies' elections should not be chosen by the player. They should be events with random outcomes, biased to historical of course.

10) Should be a penalty of some kind for not having arctic warfare equipment if deployed in such conditions. Not just a combat penalty. Replicate the winter of 41-42 for the Germans. (idea while writing this, not sure of the details)

Thanks for reading.
 
Untermensch said:
A few ideas that may help get more "historical" results:

1) Add a loss of doctrines to the Soviet Officer Purges. Things like Modern Tank Warfare. Historically the Soviet skill level dropped considerably across the board when Stalin purged the army, and more than the loss of the generals can reflect in the HoI.


In HoI, technologies can be only gained. You can't loose the tech you already got. Also, Soviet units got generally lower organization thanks to the "Political Control Over Army" doctrine.

I would like to make one thing clear - there is no proof, that before the purges Soviet Army had better skills then after that. It's sort of thinking - "Stalin was evil and paranoid, he killed general "A", so general "A" had to be good and talented". It's true that purges rised distrust in Army and limited initiative, but RKKA was never based on initiative or trust to commanders - it was always under firm control of the Communist Party.

In fact, HoI simulate it rather well, as in purges you loose some good commanders (in CORE we have added some historical names instead of totally random purge), but you still have others, even more talented.

What we lack in current Purges model is temporal, sudden drop of Army effectiveness in 1937-1938 years, and fast regain of this effectiveness in 1939/40 years (especially after the Finland/Kalkin Gol experience).


2) As was pointed out, supplies to rebuild units are too easy to acquire. The best solution would be to seperate the current supplies catagory into "supplies" (ammo, clothing, rations, etc.) and "military hardware" (rifles, tank/ship/plane components. By making the second catagory much more expensive than the first and tying a required amount to setup a new unit and to repair existing ones. These values of course could be modified by technologies and events (mass production, nation specific events, etc.).

Sorry, but it's not moddable.

3) More tank technologies, such as tank to tank radios and tank navigational equipment could be added. Then doctrines could be tied to these techs. So, you would not be able to research say, "Blitzkrieg Tank Tactics" unless you had good tank to tank, and tank to higher command communications. This would help the Germans a lot.

I'm not sure if adding even more to the tank tree is right idea. Soon we will be revisisting land doctrines though, so maybe this idea will be implemented via existing electronics and tank technologies.

Other ideas not necessarily for this thread, but just to get them out:

4) I would like to see a German event in '37, Guderian publishes "Achtung Panzer". Germans get free armor doctrines.

Germans got lots of free doctrines in 1936-1938, plus special national doctrine. As far as I remember, someone had this event in plans, but not sure if it was finished...

5) The USA is still missing some techs at the beginning of the game that they should have.
"Basic Submachine Gun" - The Thompson was invented during WWI.
Light and Heavy Machine Guns - The US air cooled 30 and 50 cal machine guns were introduced in 1919.
Vehicle Mass Production - I don't remember when Ford invented this....

Basic submachine gun is cheap front line weapon. Thompson was expensive, and US Army was not interested in using those. They changed mind during the war of course, but not in 1936.

USA got HMG and LMG in CORE.

Vehicle Mass Production tech is not about the Ford T, but also tanks and halftracks. IMO should be invented by the US like by everyone else. :)

6) At some point every country (just Major?) should have the opportunity to buy 20 and 40mm Bofurs design from Sweden. This is more or less what happened.

Usually if we find detailed historical data about such a deal, we create the event. :)

7) USA industry should be tied more closely to the recovery from the Depression. Maybe, +1 IC per month until war, then +3? Lower the initial IC for USA inconjunction with this.

It is tied to that. In 1936-38 period USA got whole pack of events that keep it's IC low via dissent.

8) Kinda like to see a "Jesse Owens shows up the Ubermensch" event similar to the Nobel Prize events. Only, Germany gets a small increase instead of decrease.

There is already 1936 Olympics event.

9) Democracies' elections should not be chosen by the player. They should be events with random outcomes, biased to historical of course.

It's not possible to force random choice in players event.

10) Should be a penalty of some kind for not having arctic warfare equipment if deployed in such conditions. Not just a combat penalty. Replicate the winter of 41-42 for the Germans. (idea while writing this, not sure of the details)

It's very hard to model in CORE from many reasons:

- we don't know, if Germans will actually be there in 1941/42,
- we have no tools to temporary lower combat effectiveness of chosen units,

What's more, even if we create some sort of 'penalty' it's perfectly possible that weather will change on blizzard, and Germans will be penalized twice.

Overall, fighting in rain/snow in CORE is harder then in vanilla HoI, so IF Germans got no luck and it starts to rain/snow, history can be recreated. :)


Thanks for the suggestions!
 
@ Copper Nicus - I was wondering about the 3 policy events- I read the 3 one and the Russians get a -20% dissent :eek:.. I dont think he will be to happy if I choose that ;). Also as an after event it seems that I have to give independence to Ukranine, baltic states and other right? If so and they will be my allies I will be conquering territory for them + since they have so little supplies + not port I will not be able to supply my armies on their land..? Is that correct????

F
 
Fiendix said:
@ Copper Nicus - I was wondering about the 3 policy events- I read the 3 one and the Russians get a -20% dissent :eek:.. I dont think he will be to happy if I choose that ;). Also as an after event it seems that I have to give independence to Ukranine, baltic states and other right? If so and they will be my allies I will be conquering territory for them + since they have so little supplies + not port I will not be able to supply my armies on their land..? Is that correct????

F

Third option (Ribbentrop-Schulenburg) in fact forces on you creating independent states, but second (Rosenberg) - not. You can simply lie to them. :) One thing I suggest is creating Vlasov Russia (You will keep Ukraine, Belorussia and Baltic States) - I know, USA will constanatly invade them, but it's HUGE help in fighting USSR and later - quite powerfull ally (although AI controlled... :rolleyes: ).

Second option also hits Soviets with only 10% dissent (and some small hits later), so it's not overkill like option 3. I've seen suggestion to leave Germans with only first occupation policy option, but I'm rather for keeping option 2 as interesting twist of action.
 
Copper Nicus said:
Third option (Ribbentrop-Schulenburg) in fact forces on you creating independent states, but second (Rosenberg) - not. You can simply lie to them. :) One thing I suggest is creating Vlasov Russia (You will keep Ukraine, Belorussia and Baltic States) - I know, USA will constanatly invade them, but it's HUGE help in fighting USSR and later - quite powerfull ally (although AI controlled... :rolleyes: ).

Second option also hits Soviets with only 10% dissent (and some small hits later), so it's not overkill like option 3. I've seen suggestion to leave Germans with only first occupation policy option, but I'm rather for keeping option 2 as interesting twist of action.

A little confused..
1)so in the 2nd option I still can create the states whilst in the 3rd option I have no choice with it and I have to create them?
2) I think option 3 is a no - no due to the supply issue I wrote about... Am I correct with it?

F
 
Fiendix said:
A little confused..
1)so in the 2nd option I still can create the states whilst in the 3rd option I have no choice with it and I have to create them?
2) I think option 3 is a no - no due to the supply issue I wrote about... Am I correct with it?

F

1) Yes. Second option allows you to choose if you want to create Eastern Europe puppets (and you can choose, which ones you want, and which - no), while in the 3rd option you are obliged to keep the promisses of 'liberation'.

2) Hmmm... There is couple of events that give those nations some initial supplies for start. I guess we should develop those events more (by creating land convoys that will make units supplying possible). But IMO 3rd option is simply to much too bear in MP game - 20% dissent hit plus some more later... :rolleyes:
 
Copper Nicus said:
2) Hmmm... There is couple of events that give those nations some initial supplies for start. I guess we should develop those events more (by creating land convoys that will make units supplying possible). But IMO 3rd option is simply to much too bear in MP game - 20% dissent hit plus some more later... :rolleyes:

yes well I have a devilish mind ;) I have 8 dissent right now whilst he has 0 so if we put it at 8:10 we are basically even.

F
 
Copper Nicus said:
In HoI, technologies can be only gained. You can't loose the tech you already got. Also, Soviet units got generally lower organization thanks to the "Political Control Over Army" doctrine.

I would like to make one thing clear - there is no proof, that before the purges Soviet Army had better skills then after that. It's sort of thinking - "Stalin was evil and paranoid, he killed general "A", so general "A" had to be good and talented". It's true that purges rised distrust in Army and limited initiative, but RKKA was never based on initiative or trust to commanders - it was always under firm control of the Communist Party.

In fact, HoI simulate it rather well, as in purges you loose some good commanders (in CORE we have added some historical names instead of totally random purge), but you still have others, even more talented.

What we lack in current Purges model is temporal, sudden drop of Army effectiveness in 1937-1938 years, and fast regain of this effectiveness in 1939/40 years (especially after the Finland/Kalkin Gol experience).

Your last sentence is much the same thing that I was aiming for, though the recovery per would need to be from 39-41. The Red Army was better before the Purges. The Purges was more than killing officers. One example: Before the Purges the Soviet had an armored force structure much like the Germans, after, the structure was much like the French and British. The Soviets returned to the previous structure in 41-42.

Sorry, but it's not moddable.
Yes, I agree. I should have added "not possible with a mod, must be a change to the base program". I was and am interested in feedback on the general idea.

I'm not sure if adding even more to the tank tree is right idea. Soon we will be revisisting land doctrines though, so maybe this idea will be implemented via existing electronics and tank technologies.

Sounds good to me.

Basic submachine gun is cheap front line weapon. Thompson was expensive, and US Army was not interested in using those. They changed mind during the war of course, but not in 1936.

USA got HMG and LMG in CORE.
I will go along with your explaination on the Thompson. My apologies regarding the HMG and LMG.

Vehicle Mass Production tech is not about the Ford T, but also tanks and halftracks. IMO should be invented by the US like by everyone else. :)
An assembly line is an assembly line. It is a concept where the item being assembled does not normally make a difference. You break a large task into small ones, and then have specifically trained personnel perform each of the small tasks. Why do you think the auto industry was also called upon to build aircraft? Ships are different because they are so large, you can't really move them along an assembly line. The Higgins boats may have been made that way though. A part of the German's tank production problems was that they used locomotive manufactures to handle a sizable chunk of their production.

Usually if we find detailed historical data about such a deal, we create the event. :)
If I get the time, I will see what I can find. Along similar lines, I know that the Dutch had an order with a USA firm for some armored cars, but that these were not able to be delievered before Germany invaded. I don't have anymore details, and I am not sure where to look right now.

It is tied to that. In 1936-38 period USA got whole pack of events that keep it's IC low via dissent.
The problem with this method is that dissent also affects other things, not just IC.

It's not possible to force random choice in players event.
Okay.

It's very hard to model in CORE from many reasons:

- we don't know, if Germans will actually be there in 1941/42,
- we have no tools to temporary lower combat effectiveness of chosen units,

What's more, even if we create some sort of 'penalty' it's perfectly possible that weather will change on blizzard, and Germans will be penalized twice.

Overall, fighting in rain/snow in CORE is harder then in vanilla HoI, so IF Germans got no luck and it starts to rain/snow, history can be recreated. :)

Thanks for the suggestions!

I understand, this one was a "wish-and-know-it-won't-happen list" thing.

Thank you for responding. Sometimes posting suggestions is like throwing money down a hole.