Command hierarchy

[Zauberelefant]

Because if you use them, I would expect there to be a distinct advantage over any other size division. I would expect your 40 width to always beat the AI, no challenge there. But you can offer no insights of how the design actually works compared to others, just that it beats the AI all the time.

I'd say it's a lot of wasted resources since a 20 width can do that as well. At least the AI can occasionally win a battle against them. I prefer that challenge to just painting the map my color as fast as I can.

On a different note, this is what PDX devs consider historical for their game:

https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Historical_divisions

I know you disagree. I don't give a flying flip.

Of course. Because you don't know who exactly puts in info in that wiki to begin with - the Community. I did a few contributions myself.
You called me out for using Wikipedia as a reference - now you do the same, but worse. Their source in the pdx wiki is...a YouTube Video.

Congrats, you played yourself.

 

[Challenge]

*sigh*

@Snagletooth Nice post. I'm not sure I want to start tracking commanders down to the division level. There would be a nightmare volume of Lt Colonels and above....

 

[Snagletooth]

*sigh*

@Snagletooth Nice post. I'm not sure I want to start tracking commanders down to the division level. There would be a nightmare volume of Lt Colonels and above....

I don't think Paradox wants to make that many generals, but I do think they need Corps and should at least start adding Generals there.
You can have and there certainly was, instances of a single division corps, although that included typical Corp level assets. When that wasn't the case, the division was usually just attached to Army level or even Army Group as an independent unit.

We don't necessarily need to make a division a command-able level be essentially the lowest echelon and depending on your template can actually be just a Brigade or a Corps in itself (Like China and USSR).

**Edit to add, Division level is usually where Generals started. There some some colonels and maybe an occasional Lt Colonel here and there, but that was not the norm. Colonels usually command regiments. I say usually because it can vary between armies, especially pre NATO/Warsaw pact era that was WWII.
1 star general Division
2 star general Corps
3 star general Army
4 star general/field marshal Army Group and/or Chief of the Army
5 start general Supreme commander/Theater commander, Chief of the Army, Chief of Staff.

 

[Gefallener_Held]

Multiple Examples for historical templates that result in 40 width or close to it were provided in this thred.
Besides most players already deviates from history by building such divisions. And if they do, AI should counter this. HoI is about non-historical but plausible paths anyway.

I have explained this before. GD for example was an EXCEPTION, the only one I am convinced of.
This is not just deviation of history but an exploit. It also further disadvantages minors in a way that make upsets in the Winter War or Vietnam less likely because the major powers are the only entities that can do 40 width.

 

[Snagletooth]

Because if you use them, I would expect there to be a distinct advantage over any other size division. I would expect your 40 width to always beat the AI, no challenge there. But you can offer no insights of how the design actually works compared to others, just that it beats the AI all the time.

I'd say it's a lot of wasted resources since a 20 width can do that as well. At least the AI can occasionally win a battle against them. I prefer that challenge to just painting the map my color as fast as I can.

On a different note, this is what PDX devs consider historical for their game:

https://hoi4.paradoxwikis.com/Historical_divisions

I know you disagree. I don't give a flying flip.

One should point, all their source references for that, 1.0 through 1.9, are all the same. militaryhistoryvisualized.com
lol.

 

[Challenge]

There is that...

 

[kimidf]

I don't think Paradox wants to make that many generals, but I do think they need Corps and should at least start adding Generals there.
You can have and there certainly was, instances of a single division corps, although that included typical Corp level assets. When that wasn't the case, the division was usually just attached to Army level or even Army Group as an independent unit.

We don't necessarily need to make a division a command-able level be essentially the lowest echelon and depending on your template can actually be just a Brigade or a Corps in itself (Like China and USSR).

I agree that the developers did not remain to put all commanders but they should also be more generous in that aspect since the absence of important historical commanders such as Reichenau, Dietl, Nagumo, Kuribasashi etc will still hold me ... instead it puts me others are totally unknown to large public

 

[Zauberelefant]

I have explained this before. GD for example was an EXCEPTION, the only one I am convinced of.
This is not just deviation of history but an exploit. It also further disadvantages minors in a way that make upsets in the Winter War or Vietnam less likely because the major powers are the only entities that can do 40 width.

You still avoid looking at data, rather choosing what suits your conclusion...

 

[Zauberelefant]

One should point, all their source references for that, 1.0 through 1.9, are all the same. militaryhistoryvisualized.com
lol.

Incorrect, because I disagree with MHV's way of looking at ART, which he considered regiments, while they are clearly battalions.
Excess guns are abstracted ammo.

 

[Gefallener_Held]

You still avoid looking at data, rather choosing what suits your conclusion...

This borders on harassment. I am asking you to drop it, as has the other guy. What part of NO! do you not understand? A three year old understands "NO!" Only a person intent on hounding continues despite being told I will never agree with you. I endorse mhv, you do not. This will never change, no matter how many times you repeat yourself.

I must reiterate however, In one of your posts, you cited six division in the German order of batttle that qualify as 40 width. I am unconvinced by all except GD, but it really does not matter. Six divisions is about what, one or two percent of all divisions fielded by Germany? And yet people who minmax field whole fucking armies of these things. That is the problem, especially as the advantage a 40 width is above beyond just numbers, which is why one 40 width beats 2 20 width etc. Why that would matter in the real world is beyond anyone, but minmax fetishists cling to it, just as they clinged to space marines, just as they cling to the delete army experience exploit.

Which is why, when considering the TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTORS, divisions should be capped well below 40. I will modify my assertion demanding a cap at 27. That is just a compromise between historicity and the width dynamic of the game. Make 30 the cap and increase width 90 on first province if that will place you. I really do not care.
My points stand all the same. 40 width divisions fielded regularly are historical, even by your bs assertions which I do not accept. Just because it was 74 on Christmas eve in New York five years ago does not mean, and cannot mean, that you model a simulation of New York having 74 degree weather in the winter time. Exceptions prove the rule.
Finally, I will reiterate that the 40 width dynamic puts countries like Finland at even greater disadvantage. In fact, now that I am thinking about it, this mechanic also sucks bc for example Expert Ai now has ai fielded these 40 widht monstrosities to compensate for this EXPLOIT. I do not want to be subjected that, and nor should any one else. BAN 40 width divisions.
Do you really want to continue on this merry go around or can we agreee to disagreeably, I suggest disagreeably, but it really does not matter to me provided you kindly back off and drop it.

 

[Snagletooth]

I agree that the developers did not remain to put all commanders but they should also be more generous in that aspect since the absence of important historical commanders such as Reichenau, Dietl, Nagumo, Kuribasashi etc will still hold me ... instead it puts me others are totally unknown to large public

Who they have and who they don't have is a different issue.

I can go on all day on how they have McNair and Hubbell, or Hubert or whatever his name is. Yes they are historically significant people, but the fact is they never actually commanded a field army during the war. They have a couple other generals that never commanded anything more then a Division. Yet they don't have Devers.

We have King and Nimitz, who were above fleet admiral. Yes they had a few support units that directly reported to them but they were supreme commanders. They should be military advisors and CoS. Yet we have Burke as an Admiral yet we don't have Hart, Carpender, English, Hewitt, or Lockwood.

I can only imagine what they did with other nations. I was in a discussion about whether De Gaulle even deserve to be a field general, much less a rank 5, when he spent most of the war as a politician in a military uniform.

 

[Snagletooth]

Incorrect, because I disagree with MHV's way of looking at ART, which he considered regiments, while they are clearly battalions.
Excess guns are abstracted ammo.

You go to MHV's site and he got all his information from various WWII sources.
I would also point out this isn't the Devs, but run by moderators. Moderators who made that page based on MHV website that used other military based sources and tried to extrapolate that into game terms as they existed at the time.

I don't agree with MHV's interpretation either, because I use Neihoster mostly. Just saying, people claiming this how Devs see it are wrong. That page is not Dev work but web page mods, and that information did not come before MHV's work, MHV's work came before and someone at the Wiki took it lock, stock and barrel and made a wiki page of it. MHV even mentions his work is taken up by wiki mods and made into pages, not the other way around as both of you arguing this are trying to insinuate.

"Second, the paradox user elfiwolfe for giving a lot of good feedback and creating a wiki page with divisions that are derived from my layouts with additional ingame values."

 

[Harin]

I don't think Paradox wants to make that many generals, but I do think they need Corps and should at least start adding Generals there.
You can have and there certainly was, instances of a single division corps, although that included typical Corp level assets. When that wasn't the case, the division was usually just attached to Army level or even Army Group as an independent unit.

We don't necessarily need to make a division a command-able level be essentially the lowest echelon and depending on your template can actually be just a Brigade or a Corps in itself (Like China and USSR).

I so agree that adding corps commanders should be considered by the developers. It was the corps commanders that Russia was so short of through out the war causing significant span of control issues for their army commanders. The lack of corps commanders meant the army commander had to give very strict inflexible orders to many division commanders simply because there is not enough hours in the day for him to receive updates and issue new orders to each of them. I can imagine other nations that would have similar issues with producing enough headquarter units with trained staff to provide the decentralized type of leadership necessary for modern (at the time) warfare.

 

[Ketchup & friends]

I have explained this before. GD for example was an EXCEPTION, the only one I am convinced of.
This is not just deviation of history but an exploit. It also further disadvantages minors in a way that make upsets in the Winter War or Vietnam less likely because the major powers are the only entities that can do 40 width.

The Winter War has a special event to end it. Finland performed well due to being on the defence.
Vietnam is well outside the scope of a WW2 game. It was also mainly an Insurgency and guerilla warfare not frontline combat between two armies as in WW2.

I don't think Paradox wants to make that many generals, but I do think they need Corps and should at least start adding Generals there.
You can have and there certainly was, instances of a single division corps, although that included typical Corp level assets. When that wasn't the case, the division was usually just attached to Army level or even Army Group as an independent unit.

We don't necessarily need to make a division a command-able level be essentially the lowest echelon and depending on your template can actually be just a Brigade or a Corps in itself (Like China and USSR).

There are several proposals to fix it.
The main problem seems the amount of unique art that for these generals. Previous HoI games used historical Photos.

 

[Zauberelefant]

You go to MHV's site and he got all his information from various WWII sources.
I would also point out this isn't the Devs, but run by moderators. Moderators who made that page based on MHV website that used other military based sources and tried to extrapolate that into game terms as they existed at the time.

I don't agree with MHV's interpretation either, because I use Neihoster mostly. Just saying, people claiming this how Devs see it are wrong. That page is not Dev work but web page mods, and that information did not come before MHV's work, MHV's work came before and someone at the Wiki took it lock, stock and barrel and made a wiki page of it. MHV even mentions his work is taken up by wiki mods and made into pages, not the other way around as both of you arguing this are trying to insinuate.

"Second, the paradox user elfiwolfe for giving a lot of good feedback and creating a wiki page with divisions that are derived from my layouts with additional ingame values."

Sorry, but no. I explicitly said what you are saying here.
Is my english so bad or are people not reading closely?

 

[Gefallener_Held]

The Winter War has a special event to end it. Finland performed well due to being on the defence.
Vietnam is well outside the scope of a WW2 game. It was also mainly an Insurgency and guerilla warfare not frontline combat between two armies as in WW2.


There are several proposals to fix it.
The main problem seems the amount of unique art that for these generals. Previous HoI games used historical Photos.

Do not be so pedantic. The point is that 40 width overshadow 20 and 10 width beyond their numbers. And only majors can field them.....

 

[Snagletooth]

Sorry, but no. I explicitly said what you are saying here.
Is my english so bad or are people not reading closely?

Well, it would appear your egllish is that bad, because as you wrote the reply, you were saying/implying that I was incorrect in the fact that the wiki uses MHV as it's prime and only source...so I posted a screenie.

 

[Zauberelefant]

Well, it would appear your egllish is that bad, because as you wrote the reply, you were saying/implying that I was incorrect in the fact that the wiki uses MHV as it's prime and only source...so I posted a screenie.

Gotcha, I thought you were talking about everyone in this thread rather than the wiki.

 

[Snagletooth]

Gotcha, I thought you were talking about everyone in this thread rather than the wiki.

The original post where I pointed it out I was talking to Challenge. As for the part after you responded I was first reacting to what I read as you implying that my point was wrong, that you were saying that did not in fact source MHV for that wiki page. The rest was point partly at Challenge but anyone else that was involved or just following along that was under the impression the Wiki was the developers "vision" by clearing up it was not.

There certainly pages in the Wiki that come from the developers, there's a lot pages that are not and are posted by mods other contributors to the wiki not associated with paradox. That specific page happens to be one of the latter.

My original point was to Challenge, not you.

 

[Harin]

Maybe I am just tired, but I cannot remember what or who MHV is. Would someone explain it to the sleepy guy in the back?