Different Units

[Madmonkey24]

Obviously World War II was characterized by the different forces used by each nation, early German tanks were clearly superior to those of the Allies, and the American Garand was a superior rifle to the Kar 98k and Mosin Nagant. It would be great to have these differences in the game in order to make each nation have more of an individual playing style.

 

[Easy Max]

The problem with trying to make this assumption is that it simply doesnt always hold.

For example, The soviet T-38 was arguably superior to most German armor as early as the winter of 1941. While I wouldnt necessarily disagree that the german's made some stellar improvements in tank technology - they were by no means in a class of their own. In fact, I wouldnt be opposed necesarily to there being individual stats for tanks, but if the German Panther exists with superior stats to the Sherman, then the Sherman ought to be compensated for either a faster creation time or less ICs per unit.


More to the point - German advantage in tanks shouldnt come from having inherently better units, but for being better at using them. This manifests itself in land doctrines.

 

[theusje]

Obviously World War II was characterized by the different forces used by each nation, early German tanks were clearly superior to those of the Allies, and the American Garand was a superior rifle to the Kar 98k and Mosin Nagant. It would be great to have these differences in the game in order to make each nation have more of an individual playing style.

Right ...

To keep it short, German tanks were used in a more superior way then the Allies used them. German tanks were outgunned, outnummerd and outarmoured(is this a word?), but this will lead us to much offtopic.

It would indeed be pretty nice to have somewhat different units. This well need to be very well ballanced.

 

[unmerged(94130)]

We know there will be national units in HoI3.

After if we can create our own unit like a heavy US tank or a Japanese strategic bomber, it's another history...

 

[Naga Niome]

As we know, research in HoI3 allows you customization by some system involving Components that you can use in technologies. Thus I could imagine Germany putting in one of their 1941 Armored Division slots Christie treads while in Russia's 1941 Armored Division Sloped Armor, equivalent to their T-34.

As Paradox has stated, a mixture of HoI1's and 2's research features will allow us to customize our technologies to give every nation a chance at having unique Land, Air and Naval divisions.

I'm gonna love it.

 

[Chief Savage Ma]

As we know, research in HoI3 allows you customization by some system involving Components that you can use in technologies. Thus I could imagine Germany putting in one of their 1941 Armored Division slots Christie treads while in Russia's 1941 Armored Division Sloped Armor, equivalent to their T-34.

As Paradox has stated, a mixture of HoI1's and 2's research features will allow us to customize our technologies to give every nation a chance at having unique Land, Air and Naval divisions.

I'm gonna love it.

That's exactly what I wanted.

 

[Lazy_Boy]

Yeah the Germans were never at a firepower advantage throughout the whole war. It was all about absolutely genius doctrines. Complete revolution in the way war is waged.

The problem HOI1/2 had is that advantage wasn't represented well. Doctrines help but generally they just balance the countries with IC, resources, and manpower. IRL Germany was at a huge disadvantage in production capability and manpower yet their fighting forces performed amazingly well.

 

[krieger11b]

As we know, research in HoI3 allows you customization by some system involving Components that you can use in technologies. Thus I could imagine Germany putting in one of their 1941 Armored Division slots Christie treads while in Russia's 1941 Armored Division Sloped Armor, equivalent to their T-34.

As Paradox has stated, a mixture of HoI1's and 2's research features will allow us to customize our technologies to give every nation a chance at having unique Land, Air and Naval divisions.

I'm gonna love it.

Me too because the whole point of the game was to give whatever kind of leadership style you wanted in as many aspects as practical. I would hate to be stuck on some of the poor decisions made by countires of WW2 when the whole point is to be able to make your own mistakes, not repeat the historical ones.

Good example would be:
Using American style carriers with wood tops instead of the steel ones the Royal Navy used that hampered the amount of aircraft it can carry.

Germany wasting time with Battleships when it should have had more subs or carriers.

The US stacking all their ships in Hawaii with not enough forthought on air attacks. (although in HOI the port strike with carriers is kind of broke and doesn't do much damage anyways)

Italy, well Italy entering the war to begin with :rofl:

 

[Myrmidon]

The US stacking all their ships in Hawaii with not enough forthought on air attacks. (although in HOI the port strike with carriers is kind of broke and doesn't do much damage anyways)

When you get a few levels of the Carrier doctrine and some level 5/6/7 Carriers it can get pretty nasty

 

[bz249]

Germany wasting time with Battleships when it should have had more subs or carriers.
:rofl:

Just one question: what kind of advantages could a German carrier bring to them? Germany is a mostly landlocked country and British air superiority above North Sea and the Channel can be easily established by land based units... Carriers would not change this bit by any proportion

In the Scandinavian invasion surface units provided fire support, and aircraft... well they simply fly from Germany or operated from captured airfields. Any carrier would give no further benefits.

Carriers are also extremely useless in convoy raiding missions...

While the possible threat from German battleships forced the British to have battleship escorted convoys. Since they only have 16 of them that meant larger, slower, less frequent convoys, thus less supplies from the see... So a logistical success simply by having those units. What was stupid from the German that they actually tried using their surface fleet.

 

[krieger11b]

Just one question: what kind of advantages could a German carrier bring to them? Germany is a mostly landlocked country and British air superiority above North Sea and the Channel can be easily established by land based units... Carriers would not change this bit by any proportion

In the Scandinavian invasion surface units provided fire support, and aircraft... well they simply fly from Germany or operated from captured airfields. Any carrier would give no further benefits.

Carriers are also extremely useless in convoy raiding missions...

While the possible threat from German battleships forced the British to have battleship escorted convoys. Since they only have 16 of them that meant larger, slower, less frequent convoys, thus less supplies from the see... So a logistical success simply by having those units. What was stupid from the German that they actually tried using their surface fleet.

This what I am getting at. If you are going to spend the amount of resources to build a Battleship your better off getting several carriers instead.

In any area not covered by land aircraft, especaily the critical early war years a carrier would have been tremendously sucessful. The ability of carrier aircraft to be able to spot a merchant ship is 20 times greater than a battleship. Imagine a ship with 20 JU-87C stukas ready to wreak havoc on a convoy?

The best example of why the Kriegsmarine surface ships were useless was the Battle of the Barents Sea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Barents_Sea

A far superior German surface force was turned back by an inferior one without sinking one sigle Merchant, just one DD and a minesweeper.

 

[bz249]

This what I am getting at. If you are going to spend the amount of resources to build a Battleship your better off getting several carriers instead.

In restricted waters or in the range of land based aircrafts carriers are less useful... think Glorious http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Glorious

In any area not covered by land aircraft, especaily the critical early war years a carrier would have been tremendously sucessful. The ability of carrier aircraft to be able to spot a merchant ship is 20 times greater than a battleship. Imagine a ship with 20 JU-87C stukas ready to wreak havoc on a convoy?

To defend a convoy against submarines you need hordes of light ships with depth charges and sonar, to defend against aircrafts also all you need to do is add AA sites... in the end you spend resources for let's say five carriers and the all your enemy have to is add more AA guns to the ships he already ordered not the best trade-off IMHO.

The best example of why the Kriegsmarine surface ships were useless was the Battle of the Barents Sea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Barents_Sea

A far superior German surface force was turned back by an inferior one without sinking one sigle Merchant, just one DD and a minesweeper.

Again as I stated the main problem was with their surface fleet, that they tried to use them... when simply the threat of their existence was enough to cause some trouble for the British... like PQ-17 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ-17 This is how the surface fleet should have been used (or not used indeed )

On the other hand this starts to become off-topic

 

[unmerged(94130)]

To defend a convoy against submarines you need hordes of light ships with depth charges and sonar, to defend against aircrafts also all you need to do is add AA sites... in the end you spend resources for let's say five carriers and the all your enemy have to is add more AA guns to the ships he already ordered not the best trade-off IMHO.

You need destroyers, frigates...and planes...a plane is able to strike a submarine before its diving...

But planes used form escorts carriers...an aircraft carrier is used in a combat fleet not for escorts.
I know English used aircraft carriers for escorting convoys for Malta, but the situation was different.

So for HoI3, the possibility to send escort carriers in a convoy escort pool, or convoys will be units selectable on the map.

 

[unmerged(13008)]

Obviously World War II was characterized by the different forces used by each nation, early German tanks were clearly superior to those of the Allies, and the American Garand was a superior rifle to the Kar 98k and Mosin Nagant. It would be great to have these differences in the game in order to make each nation have more of an individual playing style.

This has allready been discussed here:


http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=371168

 

[bz249]

I know English used aircraft carriers for escorting convoys for Malta, but the situation was different.

And cruisers and slow, obsolete battleships also... so it would be nice if convoys will be represented as a fleet also.

 

[unmerged(94130)]

And cruisers and slow, obsolete battleships also... so it would be nice if convoys will be represented as a fleet also.

Every carriers need an escort. A carrier, it's a floating airfield, not a combat ship, so you have to escort them.

But every ship gets its advantages. The best solution is using every ships in a combined fleet...

And that's right a German carrier in the North sea is not the best idea...perhaps if the carrier follows the Norvegian fleet and keeps the land-based fight coverage...