Development Diary #7 - 26th of November 2008

[jocke_p]

This is great news. But what about retrofitting/upgrading already build divisions?

This is a great news indeed, just the kind of news i was looking for. This model of creating divisions is just what we need to simulate a historic use of manpower and should enable us as players to design divisions to handle any kind of task we want.

Now to another issue, i know several posters have asked this in this thread but i would very much like to know how/if upgrading/refitting divisions will be possible, as it would enable the player to reorganize their armies to reflect technological advancements without the need to build entirely new division with updated templates.

My hope for a solution would be to make the brigades/regiments upgradeable, if that would be done on a divisional basis using divisional templates or on a brigade basis, i would prefer upgrading brigades themselfs. Of course i would also like to be able to attach/detach brigades to/from a division to adapt to the war and theatre situation. Hopefully this means that we can build stand alone brigades (which would not be able to act outside the realm of a division), which we can attach to divisions when they are constructed.

I understand/suspect that this issue might not be decided yet by the gamedesigners but one can at least hope

I am looking forward to more information about this in the future.

Again, excellent game design by the developers. A giant step towards handing the players the tools they need to customize and plan their military organisation. Be it historical OR deciding that they know better than the military leaders of the era. I bow to the developers for their wisdom.

Enough a**kissing for now , keep up the excellent work paradox.

// Jocke

 

[gregor_mendel]

Anyone else notice the -0.1 for dissent in the top right corner of the screenshot? Negative dissent rates... interesting.

 

[unmerged(46602)]

I'm not so sure - I think its 270 for that particular combo as the Armoured Car brigades take much longer (270 days infact). If the division were just infantry brigades then I think it would be 95 days.

yeah

Well, I'm sure this isn't the final design, but just adding up the IC and using the longest construction time of the included brigades doesn't make any sense. In this case the only way to go would be to produce Divisions which only include one type of Brigade and reshuffle them into whatever Divisions you actually want after they are produced (assuming it is possible to change a Division's setup after production)... everything else would be a huge waste of IC.

Or the IC requirement can change during the production process, but it's still a bit clumsy.


You should "spread" the production of the Brigades to the Brigade with the longest production time (i.e. the Infantry will also take 270 days, but only about 1/3 IC in the example of the Screenshot)

so, your screen:

MP = 2 x 3,33 (Inf) + 2 x 1,66 (AC) = 10 Manpower
IC = 2 x 2,33 (inf) + 2 x 5,33 (AC) = 15,32 IC

with IC spread to the longest production time

MP = 2 x 3,33 + 2 x 1,66 = 10 Manpower
IC = 2 x (2,33 * 95 / 270) + 2 x 5,33 = 12,3 IC

Now you're probably aware of this and I typed this for nothing, but there you go anyway. Other then that this is great stuff!

btw. IC and MP seem to be mixed up in the Table

 

[PlacidDragon]

I'm curious how the final unit attributes are computed. Now it looks like straight add-up with bonus 1 in some places. Also, "little" brigades (ACs) seem not to contribute to final width. I seriously hope that it's not final, because since when (example) 3 brigades have more Air Defense than 2? As Defence stats defined ability to resist, that's kind of weird. That would also mean there's no bonus for certain combinations, just straight sum - just like in the old system.

Maciek

Guys, before you go totally overboard with the numbers game (guess its about 10 pages too late for that..), please re-read this post by King.

The game is in alpha, and the numbers doesnt mean much, so please dont go haywire if whatever number doesnt correspond to your reality

 

[Darth Tracid]

Guys, before you go totally overboard with the numbers game (guess its about 10 pages too late for that..), please re-read this post by King.

The game is in alpha, and the numbers doesnt mean much, so please dont go haywire if whatever number doesnt correspond to your reality

replace "much" with "nothing" and you´re right

 

[e-stab]

The numbers don't mean nothing?

 

[Darth Tracid]

if i wasn´t in a good mood you´d get a warning for spamming and a ban for arguing a mod post

 

[hendriks]

I think it looks absolutely great, very exciting! Great ideas.

On one side note, we have seen with games that adding complexity and diversity are not the AI's favorite dishes. It wouldn't react in i.e. HOI2 to countries just building ships or infantry and invading everywhere, UNLESS scripted as events to change the build prios. In other words, the AI would never surprise you, it would REACT to YOUR plans once you had started to execute them, bringing the AI already down before it had started. We have rather balanced mods now but they have been years in the making, if you remember the delivery of HOI2, I think I can remember it was very playable, but not very challenging for any nation. Only far after, things got more balanced.

I hope that designing this game will be over by February 2009, as probably 6 months are required to balance the whole lot. That is vital for this game, that not only new functionality is introduced, but that the whole way of AI thinking/acting and reacting (if at all) is completely improved. I know it will be based on EU3, so those experienced players will know probably were the AI weaknesses might be, if any...

This is just a concern, I am very excited about all the new work and brilliant ideas and am surprised those can find the light after 2 series in the game already + various add-ons. I'm sure it is going to be great!

 

[unmerged(122975)]

between "mph" and "leadership" there is space for another column.

 

[Bobb4]

Not sure if this has been asked but can divisions be de-constructed?

Basically how I see it I may build a division as you have set out above and it takes 1080 days to build four.
If I was to build two infantry divisions and two amoured car divisions could i later recombine them into what you have above or am I stuck with what i have designed.

The reason I ask this is I may get an extra months use out of the infantry divisions, when the armoured car divisions come online I then split them into your set-up.

In the reverse I may while advancing need fast mobile units but once I occupy I may want to redesgn my divisions as an occupation force. Puting my mobile (fuel hogs) brigades into reserve.

To cut a long story short can brigades be split from their mother divisions and reassembled into new fighting units. Or are you stuck with a build template. What you build is what you have.
In HO2 you could add and remove brigades. While I understand the new system I would hate to be stuck with a particular template. Even if you cannot physically re-arrange I hope you can upgrade/downgrade at cost in time or IC if needed even if it is only to other predefine templates in you skillset.

On the issue of frontage will a skilled logistic's wizard/or insert any skill here be able to reduce the size of the frontage meaning you can cram more units into the battle model???
I know this is not the right section but, if you don't ask you will never know

 

[unmerged(122975)]

So many questions...

Does experience belong to the division or to the brigades?

 

[unmerged(44030)]

So many questions...

Does experience belong to the division or to the brigades?

Brigades. Since I think it would be very likely and useful to be able to move brigades between divisions. In the division's stats could be an average number of experiences of the brigades.

Or, if experience belongs to the division, then taking a brigade out of it would give some sort of a penalty to the experience value.

Actually I have no idea...

 

[Meanmanturbo]

Well, I'm sure this isn't the final design, but just adding up the IC and using the longest construction time of the included brigades doesn't make any sense. In this case the only way to go would be to produce Divisions which only include one type of Brigade and reshuffle them into whatever Divisions you actually want after they are produced (assuming it is possible to change a Division's setup after production)... everything else would be a huge waste of IC.

Or the IC requirement can change during the production process, but it's still a bit clumsy.


You should "spread" the production of the Brigades to the Brigade with the longest production time (i.e. the Infantry will also take 270 days, but only about 1/3 IC in the example of the Screenshot)

so, your screen:

MP = 2 x 3,33 (Inf) + 2 x 1,66 (AC) = 10 Manpower
IC = 2 x 2,33 (inf) + 2 x 5,33 (AC) = 15,32 IC

with IC spread to the longest production time

MP = 2 x 3,33 + 2 x 1,66 = 10 Manpower
IC = 2 x (2,33 * 95 / 270) + 2 x 5,33 = 12,3 IC

Now you're probably aware of this and I typed this for nothing, but there you go anyway. Other then that this is great stuff!

btw. IC and MP seem to be mixed up in the Table

Yeah I thought about this to. IC cost/day should be total IC-days/ longest production-time

 

[little_napoleon]

I would like to see the system very flexible, with the divisional organisation not set in stone.

ie. You build a division with 2 brigades of medium tanks and one brigade of motorised infantry. Later in the game you decide on reorganising your armed forces. Would you be able to attach and detach brigades to alter the division make up ? Or is it a case of once built, that is it ?

This would be good for simulating what actually happened in many armies during the time period. The 10 Heer Panzer Divisions during 1940 shared 35 battalions of tanks between them. In 1941, 21 Panzer Divisions (to be maintained at the same strength) would have required another 40 or so batatalions to be built. Only 22 had been formed (6 of which were not combat ready). It would be nice to simulate something like this - a weakening of the strength of divisions to allow an increase in numbers of divisions.

Also, can the individual brigades within the division be named ?

 

[unmerged(10977)]

This would be good for simulating what actually happened in many armies during the time period. The 10 Heer Panzer Divisions during 1940 shared 35 battalions of tanks between them. In 1941, 21 Panzer Divisions (to be maintained at the same strength) would have required another 40 or so batatalions to be built. Only 22 had been formed (6 of which were not combat ready). It would be nice to simulate something like this - a weakening of the strength of divisions to allow an increase in numbers of divisions.

Yes, but on the other hand the german tank battalions of Panzer I and II were replaced with Panzer III and IV. So it was more like a change from two light tank brigades per division to one medium tank brigade per division.

 

[unmerged(94130)]

Yes, but on the other hand the german tank battalions of Panzer I and II were replaced with Panzer III and IV. So it was more like a change from two light tank brigades per division to one medium tank brigade per division.

It's a progress, yes but not a revolution...
The Panzer I and II was interim vehicles...

As has told little_napoleon, there is the double of Panzer division, but 10 divisions with 4 armoured bataillons and 20 Panzer divisions with 2 armoured bataillons, it's the same same thing...but he second solution is more souple, so more adapted with the Russian theater.

I also hope, that a sort of HoI2 brigades transfert system will be kept...
But with the possibility to attach these briage to the divisions which are deployed on controled provinces and not only owned provinces

 

[WarDog]

This rely looks great! This is exactly the kind of things I love fiddling with in the build up period. Hopefully when war comes I can use a template with my favorite set-up.

 

[Veldmaarschalk]

Simple fix to this problem. Paradox only need to put a restriction on the number of support brigades per division.

i.e. each support brigade must have an associated front line brigade

one infantry brigade - one supporting artillery brigade
one armoured brigade - one supporting SPA brigade

No, no limits please (and Paradox has already said that there won't be)

I want to be able to rebuilt the elite 52. Panzer-Fallschirm-Kavallerie Gebirgsjäger-Division (mot.)

 

[wukk]

Why not make brigade as the base unit for production and combine them at deploy time? This would enable serials of any brigade and you could still use templates etc.

A losing nation could then field "interesting" division compositions when they have only some wierd combination of brigades available, but need to pull together something fast...

 

[dublish]

No, no limits please (and Paradox has already said that there won't be)

I want to be able to rebuilt the elite 52. Panzer-Fallschirm-Kavallerie Gebirgsjäger-Division (mot.)

The limits he's talking about wouldn't affect ARM, PAR, CAV, MTN, or MOT brigades, just the support battalions that don't add frontage to the division. I wouldn't mind having limits on support units per manuever units, as building divisions that have no frontage seems like a very gamey proposition.