Can overseas conquered territory with IC and resources supply the invading army?

[Lord Jarski]

Not the German-Americans, no - at least not to the same degree as they were historically. They would presumably have perceived an immediate potential threat and while the hardcore Bundists might well have continued their opposition they would have been unlikely to create more than a blip of dissent. But I think the Italian-Americans might have been a different kettle of fish. Italy wasn't landing troops on America's doorstep, it wasn't 'intruding' into the Western Hemisphere in violation of the Munroe doctrine, and in fact it was taking no aggressive action against the US at all. Why then would they suddenly abandon their attempts to keep the peace between their old and new homes?

Im sure you a correct there, however, thats where the game mechanics hit in. Italy wasnt taking actions against USA, true, although being MCd by Germany, it certainly would have, if gotten the chance.

In a situation like this, with Germany and Italy being allied, there is no way for USA to get in a war with Germany without breaking the NAP with Italy. Either USA breaks it by joining Allies against German invasion, or Italy breaks it by joining the war with Germany against USA.

Would the Italian people be equally upset by attacking USA with a big Italian minority?

Sadly there is no way to limit your involvements in the war or anything of the sort.

On this side issue, you might be surprised to find just how many did think fascism was a very good thing to have around.

I seem to be getting suprised often these days

 

[Epaminondas]

In a situation like this, with Germany and Italy being allied, there is no way for USA to get in a war with Germany without breaking the NAP with Italy. Either USA breaks it by joining Allies against German invasion, or Italy breaks it by joining the war with Germany against USA.

Aha! Point well made. (Note to self: Before opening mouth, open eyes.)

I seem to be getting suprised often these days

I like a man who can laugh in the face of disaster.

 

[Lord Jarski]

Well this particular disaster has been rather fruitfull. Pang improved the USA gearings to include Bermuda as a trigger, a welcomed addition, as well as gave USA more starting IC and adjusted gearings accordingly! USA will be a tougher nut to crack if somebody tries to invade it early again.

Also it gave me motivation to update the UK AI for my modded scenario. Attempting to make their AI UK ships scout the atlantic more frequently and with better efficiency, as well as making sure theres some ships guarding Canadian waters, so that nobody can sneak in without opposition with a big TP fleet. In addition, I told the UK AI to try and capture Bermuda and Azores quickly, hopefully to prevent them from being used as bases for an invasion of America.

Either way, from mistakes we learn and improve, and from disasters we make sure they never happen again.

 

[MagooNZ]

Great thread guys. I have learnt a lot. Thanks for starting it Mr B0narpte.

I havent loaded 1.09, so still on 1.08. Good to know USA is being made a bit stronger. Dont know if it is enough to discourage this exploit. The Gearing Up events should be there to discourage USA from early aggression. But what discourages others (GER,JAP) from early aggression vs USA? If others DOW USA, seems fair that USA gets all the Gearing Up event advantages.
This still wouldn't compensate for the speed of a human enemy travelling across an undefended US mainland. Gearing up allows USA to start producing divisions, but there is a retooling delay, so a long wait before those first divisions become available. Even an event for instant Milita units will have an initial organisation regain time, & Milita wont be effective against modern, fully brigaded Armour/Motorised/Infantry unless in large numbers. An event for instant Milita is historically plausible given the high rate of gun ownership in the USA.

The other majors (ENG,GER,SOV) have their own start of 36 game reasons to wait before being aggressive, but these are mostly gone by April 1940. Only USA is left severly impaired at this time. So I think an instant Milita event is worth considering for this special case.

Pang, the conversion of Transports to Convoys exploit should be corrected. It should always be more expensive to convert rather than build directly. How does converting Destroyers to Escorts compare with directly building Escorts? Destroyers seem expensive to build compared with Light Cruisers so perhaps this one is okay.

So ITA was being militarily controlled by GER, but wasnt an ally of GER?, so that when GER DOW USA, USA got 5% dissent hit from cancelling its NAP with ITA when USA joined the Allies. Does this mean that ENG was also at war with ITA? Suggest add an event to cancel out the USA 5% dissent hit or just terminate the USA/ITA NAP at an earlier date. When does ITA invade ALB? Cancel the NAP at that time if early enough. The USA wont DOW ITA early if it means missing out on valuable Gearing Up events.

 

[Epaminondas]

So ITA was being militarily controlled by GER, but wasnt an ally of GER?

From what I now understand ITA and GER were in fact allied.

In a situation like this, with Germany and Italy being allied

I think a small dissent hit might still be warranted in this case, but nothing like 5%.

As far as remediating the US position in all this, I'm not a big fan of instant militia - or instant coffee for that matter. What might work a little more plausibly (and historically) would be to escalate the gearing up effects for the US. Its very broad industrial base and experience with advanced production methods meant that it was able to achieve gearing much more rapidly than most other nations.

 

[Titan79]

What if you people wrote an AAR (although brief) of your multiplayer game? It sounds very interesting from the accounts you posted here .

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Militia is extremely cheap. It takes half a month to build the first unit and if you use 200 ic you can build 100 divisions at once.

Pang, the conversion of Transports to Convoys exploit should be corrected. It should always be more expensive to convert rather than build directly. How does converting Destroyers to Escorts compare with directly building Escorts? Destroyers seem expensive to build compared with Light Cruisers so perhaps this one is okay.

I have reduced the manpower exploit. When it comes to icd building transport flotillas and destroyer divisions is more expensive than building the civil variants that are produced like buildings. And here is the crack. Buildings are only reduced in time. Units are reduced in ic and time. At full free markets and full hawk lobby buildungs cost 60% icd, units costs 36% icd.

 

[Lord Jarski]

What if you people wrote an AAR (although brief) of your multiplayer game? It sounds very interesting from the accounts you posted here .

Im certainly up for it, with all the stir this has caused so far it might be fun to let you guys know how it continues/ends, will suggest it to my companions although im sure they will notice it here aswell.

Militia is extremely cheap. It takes half a month to build the first unit and if you use 200 ic you can build 100 divisions at once.



I have reduced the manpower exploit. When it comes to icd building transport flotillas and destroyer divisions is more expensive than building the civil variants that are produced like buildings. And here is the crack. Buildings are only reduced in time. Units are reduced in ic and time. At full free markets and full hawk lobby buildungs cost 60% icd, units costs 36% icd.

Excellent news about the manpower exploit.

I had a change of heart about the insta-militia event aswell, I think its not needed, like Epa says, as long as the gearings are made to have more sensible triggers, my lack of units was not helped by the fact I still was 2-3 clicks away from being fully hawk, due to the gearings not triggering before the war, which also meant I wasnt going to get them anytime soon either. Besides giving more IC for production, the hawk lobby clicks they give are equally essential, speeding up the production of units a great deal, which is important with the damn John Nance Garner giving a +10% price tag on them.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

The logical conclusion is to build cheap units like unbrigaded infantry first and build expensive units after full hawk lobby is reached.

 

[Lord Jarski]

I also thought at one point to keep, say, a motorized division serial at the top of the production queue, untill its retooling has gone away, and then drop it down to bottom and spend no further IC to it, and make a new motorized serial to be at the top of production. That way I could have a bunch of unit serials ready to start as soon as I get the IC for it, without having to wait for the dreadfully long retooling time to pass. Dunno if it had been cost-effective but the retooling time for early USA is deadly.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Imo it is more elegant to stockpile money and then use a huge deficit 80 days before starting real production. Simply switching like you suggest is a bit less efficient. Something worth considering is building divisions first and brigades later. Brigades have half the retooling time.

 

[Pang Bingxun]

Excellent news about the manpower exploit.

It does not solve the real exploit. The real exploit is that building transport flottilas will cost 1 manpower and converting then will give back exactly 1 manpower. The same would apply to destroyers. I will change the icd of the civil versions so that at full free markets and full hawk lobby the icd of escort and DD1918 are the same so at least there will be no icd exploit without using minister boni.

 

[Lord Jarski]

It does not solve the real exploit. The real exploit is that building transport flottilas will cost 1 manpower and converting then will give back exactly 1 manpower. The same would apply to destroyers. I will change the icd of the civil versions so that at full free markets and full hawk lobby the icd of escort and DD1918 are the same so at least there will be no icd exploit without using minister boni.

Even better!

 

[Mr_B0narpte]

Great thread guys. I have learnt a lot. Thanks for starting it Mr B0narpte.

I'm glad I opened this thread too, I've learnt a lot and am very glad that changes are being made for 1.09 due to this thread.

As to making it into an AAR, I've been keeping screenshots so it's a possibility!