• 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.

unmerged(14683)

HoI2 Shtrafnik
Feb 12, 2003
5.432
0
Visit site
I know, there are many more obvious things that HoI 2 should have, but IMHO, game should differ from HoI not only when it comes to diplomacy, economy and so on, but also when it comes to combat.

Current game, with its all great features, uses basically the same system of fight for land vs. land, air vs. land, air vs. sea and air vs. air battles. Current system, while quite good for land battles, is not the best when it comes to air vs. air battles and got serious problems with solving "big stack vs. small stack situations" (like 12 air units destroing single land divisions in 2 days or 1 air unit being destroyed by big stack of land units in hard terrain).

What I suggest, is creating specialized combat systems for every important aspect of the game. The list of systems that come to my mind right now:

1) Land vs. land unit combat. Hmmm... pretty much same as it is in HoI. I really like it, but I guess Math Guy and Mithel discussions can seriously help to develop it even better.

2) Air combat. Completly new system. IMHO mission system we have now is not too good due to the micromanagement, so should be replaced unit-task system. War in Russia players know what I mean. :) Air units "attached" to the land armies would affect land battles by various modifiers. Same would happen with air units given the task of strategic air defense or strategic bombing. I guess air units cold also have "naval patrol" task. IMPORTANT: this system allows to add recon planes units in reasonable way.

3) In previous point I've mentioned strategic bombing/defense. Here "unit-task" system can work really well... For example - as the UK you detach 4 bombers units to the strategic bombing task. You adjust extra parameters (target province, targeted resource, day/night attacks option, frequency of attacks - daily, 2,3 per week and so on)... and leave it to work. Actual bombing mission would check the level of AA fire/fighter cover there (night fighters anyone?) and on the road to the target, level of detection (radars), level of attack coordination (intel, pathfinders)... After the battle, player would be able to rest units or keep it work automatically.


4) Similar system would be good for sub vs. convoys warfare. Important thing, compared to the current system would be ability to move units back from the convoy warfare to naval encounters. So, sub/destroyer sent in one year to the convoy duty could be recalled to the other task later. IMPORTANT: The system should notice differences between vessels, not only count them.

5) Naval air combat. Again, something like task system can work here nice. Giving air groups simple, default tasks, like "CAP" or "escort" for fighters, "patrol/recon", "anti-naval armament", "land bombing mission" for bombers/torpedo planes could simply modify (sometimes seriously) task force statistics.

6) Naval combat. Huge work to do. Really. Some really important factors, like weapon ranges, combat speed, tactical detection are currently ignored in game and without creating completly new, dedicated system for the naval engagements HoI 2 will inherit all the problems of the HoI on this field.

Any other ideas, gentelmen? :)
 
Last edited:

unmerged(11610)

Colonel
Nov 9, 2002
876
0
Visit site
I agree!

Naval battles and air battles didn't seem right in HoI. It was best to stack all tac bomber to one stack and attack. :mad: Whole naval and air combat should be different than land combat.

Few notes about naval warfare:

Old cruisers without torpedoes could not even scratch new battleships or heavy cruisers. Armor points should be added as well guns caliber should make a difference. Big guns usually mean greater range and fast new bb could easily keep distance to older cruisers and bbs and blow them to pieces. Also there should be critical hit (Hood vs. Bismarc) and so on.

And what about shadowing you opponent? How about if we can choose when contact is make: 1) SHADOW YOUR OPPONENT 2) ATTACK 3) FLEE!

With better radar shadowing is easier, otherwise this soon leads to battle. Faster opponent could outrun shadower. In battle lighter ships try to close in and attack and larger ships with big guns should keep the distance. Fleeing does not lead to retreat to previous province. Sea is big and ship course should continue as planned, but with a delay.
 

unmerged(15623)

Gensui-kakka
Mar 17, 2003
2.142
0
Visit site
El Savior said:
Old cruisers without torpedoes could not even scratch new battleships or heavy cruisers. Armor points should be added as well guns caliber should make a difference. Big guns usually mean greater range and fast new bb could easily keep distance to older cruisers and bbs and blow them to pieces. Also there should be critical hit (Hood vs. Bismarc) and so on.

Old cruisers without torpedos were so rare among the major nations at the start of the war that they were not really a factor (there were three to be exact, 2 old WWI Germans ones in Italian navy, and Soviets had one from the pre-dreadnought era). On the other hand, there were plenty of new ones without torpedos (20+ IIRC, Americans are mainly to blame here since they abandoned tropedos on cruisers in early 30's). The British did convert half of their old cruisers of the C-classes to CLAA's and landed their tubes in the process, but that was mostly during the war, IIRC.

Battleships are definetly incapable of sinking other BB's and even cruisers with ease. Heck, if operational histories tell us anything, even DD's and PT's could survive barrages from BB's unharmed. And as for the battleships themselves, oftentimes, shelling could have little effect on even the oldest and slowest among them, as Yamashiro displayed at Surigao strait - being hammered by hundreads of shells from six US battleships and seven cruisers while managing to keep steady speed and even returning fire (and later being sunk by two torpedos from a single US destroyer). It seems that there always was bad luck involved when a BB was lost by enemy gunfire. Eg. Bismarck - Hood, Washington - Kirishima, Kirishima - South Dakota (had Washington not been there).

And most cruisers (even of the oldest ones) could steam ahead fast enough to aviod being overran by even the fastest battleships. Speed was a desing decision more than anything else (ie. US had a standard speed of 33 knots for all kinds of cruisers, Germans and the Brits had 29-30 for the few WWI era ones still left and 32-33 for the newer ones, and all Italian and Japanese desings generally had 34-36 top speed). Naturally, I'm not saying that they couldn't have been overran, but rather, it was definetly nowhere near certain that they would have been overran.
 
Last edited:

Pkunzipper

The Partisan
52 Badges
Aug 19, 2002
952
5
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • War of the Roses
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Colonel
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Fury
  • Crusader Kings III
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III Collection
  • Heir to the Throne
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Sengoku
  • Victoria 2
nachinus said:
I completelly agree with Copper.

Have anyone here played Matrix Games's "Uncommon Valor"? It has a great management system (but can be quite complex) for air/naval units and its worth considering something similar (but simpler) for HoI2.
Maybe Uncommon Valor is to complex for HOI scale, but HOI 2 should really keep track of penetration...
Maybe a ship weapon have a chance to penetrate enemy armour if its Naval Attack is bigger than enemy Surface Defense....Non penetrating hits should have still a chance to do 1 point of damage. In addition also torpedoes should be considered separaely by gun firepower....
 

unmerged(11610)

Colonel
Nov 9, 2002
876
0
Visit site
Okay, sinking batteships shouldn't be easy. But my point was that I hope for more realistic naval battles:

I think it's a good idea to have a pop-up when contact is made: 1) Shadow 2) Attack 3) Flee. Spotting depents on radar, visibility and weather, also speed is important factor if shadowing is used.

In combat ships armor rating and guns should make difference. Sinking heavy armored ship should be tough job, unless critical hits is made. Also I would love see different damage to ships. Ship could lose radar, guns, reduce speed, lose commander, hit to propeller, etc. More about commanders, many captains did sink with their ship. Hopefully when your fleet sinks, it's possible to lose your admiral too.

If these factors are added, naval warfare would be much more interesting. Imagine shadowing new batteship in Atlantic and trying to bring more fighting ships to trap it. Or how desperate would be to bring damaged ship to friendly port, when ship is only making 15 knots.

Also when you click your ship, I would love to see more information about it. Example is radar fitted and what model, how many torpedoes, how many guns and caliber, number of AA-guns, etc. Your ship became living thing when offering more info about it.
 

Luka

Lt. General
13 Badges
Nov 13, 2002
1.455
0
www.euriskostudios.com
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2 Beta
Air vs land unit battles are very important. Air battles took place in order to gain air supremecy so that air units could be unleashed upon ground units. In which case its all about 'air cover'. In straegic maps air units are shown to have a radius of effect. Such a thing should be implemented.
 

unmerged(17938)

Second Lieutenant
Jul 1, 2003
141
0
Visit site
Tank brigades

One thing which I would like to see would be a system where true armoured divisions are something that most countries would not be able to build due to doctrine. A significant number of countries still used armor mainly in the infantry support role, and I think that attaching tank brigades to infantry or cavalry divisions would the way to go before certain inventions (Guderian, Liddell-Hart) are made.