Now that it is official, Hitler is rolling over in his grave. He was beat by an expoit. LOL.
-
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.
Now that it is official, Hitler is rolling over in his grave. He was beat by an expoit. LOL.
Fortress Texel
Why bother defending the northern part of the country, it's the southern part that's important.
They also lost most of their blue water navy. U-boats are a tool for assistance against hostile regimes, not a be all end all war winner. The problem was that Germany had no hope to compete against Britain for naval superiority, and thus while the U-boat action helped, it could not ultimately be successful. This is a bit differant in modern eras due to nuclear and AIP propulsion, but it's not really within the scope of the games timeframe to discuss further.
Glad to see the logistical side of the game being more realistic. I'd love to see a proper Battle of Atlantic with the German AI doing it's best to eliminate the convoys and the British AI doing it's utmost to counter that. I like that continous losses in the Atlantic will affect the stability back home.
I look forward to decimating British shipping with U boats.
I look forward to decimating British shipping with U boats.
Well, like several others, this is the first DD that has disappointed me a little. The handling of overseas posessions is to be almost as bad as ever, it would appear. It's sad, because I can think of a few very simple tweaks that would have made it considerably better:
1) Overseas Industry
Why could resources to feed local industry not be added to the stockpile instantly? I mean, having a single stockpile of "usable resources" is fine as a simplification, but why is the conceit that "it's all at the capital" needed? Just say that resources up to the amount needed to supply the ICs in the contiguous land area are "teleported" into the stockpile. E.g., if India has 10 IC, up to 20 Energy, 10 Metal and 5 Rares from India are teleported into the UK stockpile without being convoyed (since they don't need to move anywhere). That way, building ICs close to sources of resources becomes worthwhile.
2) Land Trade
I can trade by land with countries on "the same continent" as me - what does this mean? Does their capital have to be on the same continent as my capital? If so, that would mean that I can't trade with nations with which I have a land border in my overseas "trading posts" like, oh, say, trading with Nepal via my "trading post" in India... Could not trades with overseas territories be simply added to the shipping requirement of the territory?
Actually - does this mean that it will be impossible for the UK to trade with Nepal, etc. even in peacetime??
3) Convoy Routing
I can fully understand why players should not have control over the exact routing of convoys; that would be a nightmare. I would really like some way to add some "intelligence" (in the 'thinking about it' sense, not the 'collecting information' sense) to the routing in general terms, though. How about:
- The convoy AI already avoids some sea areas based on enemy raider sightings, intelligence pickups, etc., correct?
- Could the player maybe specify (in the logistics view) other sea areas to be avoided? The AI could then treat these just as if an enemy raider had been detected there - a simple tweak, surely?
To be really spiffy, you could even allow the player to deliberately allow convoys where a raider has been spotted - using the convoy as "bait"...
4) The Dreaded Uber-Stockpiles
Stockpiling to silly levels was too easy in HoI2. Cutting the resource supplies on the map and the fact that un-transported resources will disappear will help, but even so I can't help thinking that some limit would be reasonable. Six months' supply would seem the most that industries normally contemplate - maybe 180 days supply for your ICs, maximum? Capturing ICs should give a proportion of the stockpile, too - the idea that the entire stockpile goes when the capital is captured is just dumb, IMO.
Other tweaks would be good - supplies and fuel coming from all ICs, not just the capital, for example - but the ones above have the benefit of being easy to code in, unless I misunderstand the way it already works...
1) Overseas Industry
Why could resources to feed local industry not be added to the stockpile instantly? I mean, having a single stockpile of "usable resources" is fine as a simplification, but why is the conceit that "it's all at the capital" needed? Just say that resources up to the amount needed to supply the ICs in the contiguous land area are "teleported" into the stockpile. E.g., if India has 10 IC, up to 20 Energy, 10 Metal and 5 Rares from India are teleported into the UK stockpile without being convoyed (since they don't need to move anywhere). That way, building ICs close to sources of resources becomes worthwhile.
2) Land Trade
I can trade by land with countries on "the same continent" as me - what does this mean? Does their capital have to be on the same continent as my capital? If so, that would mean that I can't trade with nations with which I have a land border in my overseas "trading posts" like, oh, say, trading with Nepal via my "trading post" in India... Could not trades with overseas territories be simply added to the shipping requirement of the territory?
Actually - does this mean that it will be impossible for the UK to trade with Nepal, etc. even in peacetime??
3) Convoy Routing
I can fully understand why players should not have control over the exact routing of convoys; that would be a nightmare. I would really like some way to add some "intelligence" (in the 'thinking about it' sense, not the 'collecting information' sense) to the routing in general terms, though. How about:
- The convoy AI already avoids some sea areas based on enemy raider sightings, intelligence pickups, etc., correct?
- Could the player maybe specify (in the logistics view) other sea areas to be avoided? The AI could then treat these just as if an enemy raider had been detected there - a simple tweak, surely?
To be really spiffy, you could even allow the player to deliberately allow convoys where a raider has been spotted - using the convoy as "bait"...
4) The Dreaded Uber-Stockpiles
Stockpiling to silly levels was too easy in HoI2. Cutting the resource supplies on the map and the fact that un-transported resources will disappear will help, but even so I can't help thinking that some limit would be reasonable. Six months' supply would seem the most that industries normally contemplate - maybe 180 days supply for your ICs, maximum? Capturing ICs should give a proportion of the stockpile, too - the idea that the entire stockpile goes when the capital is captured is just dumb, IMO.
Other tweaks would be good - supplies and fuel coming from all ICs, not just the capital, for example - but the ones above have the benefit of being easy to code in, unless I misunderstand the way it already works...
I agree, and your stockpile max should relate to your inustrial capacity. A country with very little industry is not going to stockpile what would take them 100 years to use. They would let the market buy it up so they could at least tax it and make money, the people wouldn't stand for all their governments money going into building warehouses filled full of steel the government is buying for stockpiling. The only thing that really gets stockpiled in large amounts is oil, or at least left in the ground and not allowed to be drilled for.
We have not heard anything about stockpiles, so we cannot assume massive stockpiles will or will not be there. In fact, I'm curious as well.
And does Nepal only can trade with the countries on the same continent?
Will damaging ports degrade their ability to receive goods, thus requiring convoys to re route to other ports?
Exciting DD, looking forward to the U Boat campaign.
Exciting DD, looking forward to the U Boat campaign.
Yes what did sink Japans blue water navy? The single ship or aircraft type sinking most of Japans navy was.... Submarines!
Actually when your enemy is not protected against them and have all industry on islands, they are an "end all war winner".
Serious research on the subject concludes the following in regards to the US submarine campain:
"Conclusion: The Japanese lost or spent 42.3 times as much as the Americans."
Source.
I would have hoped to hear more about how Submarines can be a threat against single surface navy ships without wolfpacks of hundreds of them duking it out with the Royal Navy home fleet.
Because that beeing modeled correctly is what will make or break a big part of the naval battles in both Oceans for me.
Submarines were built in larger numbers and in more combined tonnage than any other naval ship class and were used in massive amounts by all serious navalpowers.
When on the subject of conovys here is another question. How will enemy convoys slipping by your warships on other missions or no mission be handled?
Most likely, damaging infrastructure already makes the amount of supplies that can pass through it lower
A few questions
1 - With land trade, say Switzerland and Poland want to trade, does it matter that the trade route would have to go through other countries on the way? Also say Germany and Hungary were trading, could this be hurt at all by say bombing in infrastructure on their border?
Finally does the UK also count as an Asian country so it can land trade with the likes of Nepal and Bhutan?
2 - I take it that Suez and Gibraltar will block any Italian trade to say Venezeula for oil, will the game know this and say to the Italian player this trade cannot be done even though they have loads of transports?
3 - If your capital is surrounded like say Moscow, would your resources suddenly be in free fall because you can't get them to the one stockpile in the capital every day after they're produced? Also would the whole country be out of supply after 30 days of this seige?
1 - With land trade, say Switzerland and Poland want to trade, does it matter that the trade route would have to go through other countries on the way? Also say Germany and Hungary were trading, could this be hurt at all by say bombing in infrastructure on their border?
Finally does the UK also count as an Asian country so it can land trade with the likes of Nepal and Bhutan?
2 - I take it that Suez and Gibraltar will block any Italian trade to say Venezeula for oil, will the game know this and say to the Italian player this trade cannot be done even though they have loads of transports?
3 - If your capital is surrounded like say Moscow, would your resources suddenly be in free fall because you can't get them to the one stockpile in the capital every day after they're produced? Also would the whole country be out of supply after 30 days of this seige?
Yeah, I'm just saying that the 900 day "siege" of Leningrad and the 8-10 month holed up garrisons of the atlantic ports under german occupation at the wars end held out a lot longer than what 30 days with supply and 30-45 days to lose all org can simulate in HOI2. I wouldn't mind supply depots in fortifications or a very much slower org loss in fortifications than what is the case in HOI2. The current supply system can fx however model the siege of Tobruk very well since its had sea supply during the siege.
The difference between the Atlantic and Pacific convoy tactics could be solved by a simple click. I’ve proposed in the past that convoying is a strategic decision that has wide reaching ramifications. There should be a decision box in the convoy screen that says “Convoy Sailing” or “Independent Sailing”.
If you choose independent sailing and you pass through a sea zone with a submarine or merchant raider you have a 30% increase in losing the ship to an attack.
If you choose convoy sailing it will require 25% more merchant ships to run this route and your risk factor is -15%.
This would allow the completely different strategies employed by Great Britain and Japan to exist in the game. Prior to the war no country is going to run convoys. After the war starts it becomes a decision. The US didn’t convoy off the east coast in 1942 and it resulted in the “2nd Happy Time” for German submariners. They corrected their mistake which would be click the convoy button in what I’m proposing.
My explanation of the increased merchant ships required when employing a convoy strategy is that when the convoy system started it slowed down the flow of material because it forced ships to wait for a group sailing. It also forced ships to sail at the speed of the slowest ship in the group. Evasive maneuvers like zig-zaging and evading known submarine contacts made the distances traveled increase dramatically. I’ve seen estimates all over, but I believe Britain lost 25% of their capacity simply due to reduced efficiencies of merchant shipping.
The devs have said that they have something prepared in case of a surrounded capital, but haven't said or shown what specifically
Thats a low estimation. Most Ive seen say 33% lost. (thats 50% extra ships needed to sail in convoys).
But it was very efficient protection. If a submarine surfaces you have 5-10 cannons that can fire instead of a single one.
I also agree it should be active decision you take (or law). And that convoys should be needed to even allow you to use escorts.
OMFG!!!!!!!
I HONESTLY GOT A BIT AROUSED BY THIS!!!!!!!!!!!
(Sorry, but I've been awaiting this diary so long)
I HONESTLY GOT A BIT AROUSED BY THIS!!!!!!!!!!!
(Sorry, but I've been awaiting this diary so long
)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship
Early on, each ship took about 230 days to build (Patrick Henry took 244 days), but the average eventually dropped to 42 days. The record was set by Robert E. Peary, which was launched 4 days and 15 1/2 hours after the keel was laid, although this publicity stunt was not repeated—and in fact much fitting-out and other work remained to be done after the Peary was launched. The ships were made assembly-line style, from prefabricated sections. In 1943, three new Liberty ships were being completed every day. They were mainly named after famous Americans, starting with the signatories of the Declaration of Independence.