Can I bomb MP?

[TremblingBlue]

There's no evidence to say that it really had much of a positive effect at all for any cause.

It caused Japan to surrender quite rapidly. I'm not justifying it, that's just how it happened.

I think reducing MP with strategic bombing similar to they do resources and factories would be very good addition. Please let's not discuss terror bombings, massacres and other similar things here. Let's keep our wish clear and within forum rules : We want the ability to reduce MP with Strat. bombing mission or with new mission type. ( Like Strat. bombing 2 )

But your wish IS terror bombing... Manpower does not represent military personnel.

 

[General01]

Manpower on the map, tied to provinces, does not represent military personnel, no - But manpower that is in your manpower pool does. It would therefore make sense for any bombing missions against MP to target that stored up manpower - in the form of attacking training camps, new recruits in transit, etc, both from a game point of view (If you are bombing someone, you will almost certainly be at war with them. If they are at war, it is almost certain they will already have mobilized and, with the new system, effectively 'tapped out' that manpower until the end of the war anyway), and with respect to Paradox's rules on terror-bombing. To have bombing missions targeting MP on the map would certainly be a violation of those rules, as well as being pointless ingame. I'm not sure if there were any real bombing missions IRL with this kind of target in mind, though: It just makes much more sense to bomb their units directly, draining both manpower and IC's.

 

[Pepsi_max]

I think reducing MP with strategic bombing similar to they do resources and factories would be very good addition. Please let's not discuss terror bombings, massacres and other similar things here. Let's keep our wish clear and within forum rules : We want the ability to reduce MP with Strat. bombing mission or with new mission type. ( Like Strat. bombing 2 )

That would lead to huge exploits in MP games. Def not a good one.

 

[am300307]

That would lead to huge exploits in MP games. Def not a good one.

How? Airpower is extremely important in ww2.

 

[deoved]

It caused Japan to surrender quite rapidly. I'm not justifying it, that's just how it happened.

It was only final blow. Japanese cities was already burned ta ashes by allied strategic bombings. Nuclear strikes was unnecessary.

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

It caused Japan to surrender quite rapidly. I'm not justifying it, that's just how it happened.

Japan was trying to surrender as early as March 1945. I'm not criticising the nuclear bombings, that's just what happened.

It was only final blow. Japanese cities was already burned ta ashes by allied strategic bombings. Nuclear strikes was unnecessary.

I agree, the fire-bombings of Tokyo in March 1945 alone killed far more 'MPs' then Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

 

[Pepsi_max]

How? Airpower is extremely important in ww2.

By people massbombing IC provinces on purpose to lower manpower of ennemis country = terror bombing = forbidden by game rules.

 

[unmerged(59604)]

It caused Japan to surrender quite rapidly. I'm not justifying it, that's just how it happened.

The nukes were only partially responsible for the Japanese surrender. The Soviet declaration of war and the highly successful invasion of Manchuria in August 1945 were the principal reasons.

 

[Dutchemperor]

I think we all already know what will happen with this thread.

 

[am300307]

By people massbombing IC provinces on purpose to lower manpower of ennemis country = terror bombing = forbidden by game rules.

So what is nuking a province then. Happy bombing?

 

[JRHINDO]

Also, terror bombing:
1. the detonation of an explosive device, usually in a public location, by a terrorist.
2. aerial bombardment for the purpose of frightening and demoralizing an enemy's civilian population.

And keep in mind there is no population in the game as said by devs and mods since HoI1.

 

[TremblingBlue]

Japan was trying to surrender as early as March 1945. I'm not criticising the nuclear bombings, that's just what happened.

I know, but the terms weren't satisfactory. The atomic bombs presented the inevitable at a quicker pace. Needless to say, it's one of THE most important events of world war 2...to compare it to the terror bombing issue is totally ridiculous in this sense.

I think we all already know what will happen with this thread.

Indeed lol

 

[Easy1]

There is no "general population" because there is no civilians in game, MPs are soldiers and we are allowed to slaughter MPs.
We can mass slaughter troops with tac and cas planes, why cant we slaughter them with strat planes directly from the source?

I guess to carpet nuke someone is good taste? How is this more morally "tasty"?

Manpower on the map, tied to provinces, does not represent military personnel, no - But manpower that is in your manpower pool does. It would therefore make sense for any bombing missions against MP to target that stored up manpower - in the form of attacking training camps, new recruits in transit, etc, both from a game point of view (If you are bombing someone, you will almost certainly be at war with them. If they are at war, it is almost certain they will already have mobilized and, with the new system, effectively 'tapped out' that manpower until the end of the war anyway), and with respect to Paradox's rules on terror-bombing. To have bombing missions targeting MP on the map would certainly be a violation of those rules, as well as being pointless ingame. I'm not sure if there were any real bombing missions IRL with this kind of target in mind, though: It just makes much more sense to bomb their units directly, draining both manpower and IC's.

Wrong.

MP reflects civillians.

1. You have to "train" civilians into being soldiers when you build military units

2. MP is used to recruit labor for industry producing cosumer goods, supplies etc.

3. MP is used to recruit labor for merchant marine in peace time

4. Onmap MP relfects not armed personell (they are "produced" and in your armed forces), but potential soldiers in the general civilian population.

5. Militia is according to

commonly used today to refer to a military force composed of ordinary citizens

6. Countries and colonies that historically had no armed force have MP

7. Onmap MP is static

8. China have more MP than Soviet, yet they had a smaller armed force. The British Empire have more MP than the US, yet they had a smaller armed force. Brazil have more MP than Belgium, yet they had a smaller armed force.

 

[JRHINDO]

And this contradict years of developer, moderators and administrator thinking.

There is no civilians ingame. period.
No civilians -> MP is not civilians -> you can kill MP in all ways you want.

 

[unmerged(25947)]

Wrong.

MP reflects civillians.

1. You have to "train" civilians into being soldiers when you build military units

2. MP is used to recruit labor for industry producing cosumer goods, supplies etc.

3. MP is used to recruit labor for merchant marine in peace time

4. Onmap MP relfects not armed personell (they are "produced" and in your armed forces), but potential soldiers in the general civilian population.

5. Militia is according to

6. Countries and colonies that historically had no armed force have MP

7. Onmap MP is static

8. China have more MP than Soviet, yet they had a smaller armed force. The British Empire have more MP than the US, yet they had a smaller armed force. Brazil have more MP than Belgium, yet they had a smaller armed force.

wrong. problem`s?

 

[Easy1]

wrong. problem`s?

Hm?

 

[TremblingBlue]

And this contradict years of developer, moderators and administrator thinking.

There is no civilians ingame. period.
No civilians -> MP is not civilians -> you can kill MP in all ways you want.

Civilians not by name, but civilians all the same. We all know that they represent civilians by default, there is no denying it.

 

[JRHINDO]

Well a dozen devs seem to disagree/deny this and a staff's word is holy word. There is no Civilians.

 

[Easy1]

Well a dozen devs seem to disagree/deny this and a staff's word is holy word. There is no Civilians.

Indeed. This illusion is still living strong on the forum. Balancing political corectness and realism will lead to contradicitons. But it doesn't matter really, padox is balancing it pretty good. I just wished people would be open to achknowledge the civilian part in the war effort, and not use the "civilan" card everytime someone tryes to point this out..

 

[unmerged(238359)]

How about this as something of a sidestep of the issue? Much of the German bombing campaign against cites in their invasion of the Lowlands and France wasn't done with a direct intent to kill the population, but rather to drive the populace into fleeing to the countryside, clogging up the roads, and paralyzing troops movements and resupply by the defending forces. How about having strategic bombing missions temporally drive up the logistical load on the targeted nation, consummate to the number of MP's in the target province? This would also be a good way to simulate the damage that Germany suffered to her transport network by the Allies bombing campaign. Logistical strike only decreases the infrastructure in a single province, and makes no difference to the targeted nation unless a unit is actually inside the same province. The leveling of a major transport hub through Logistical strike, like say, Berlin, has no effect on the TC of the nation. Making Strategic bombing more effective at driving up the TC of an enemy nation through something other then the IC reduction might lead to people actually using them.