Divisions - any difference to HoI2.. really?

[unmerged(51140)]

I look at it like this... ok.. you have 4 brigades per division.

The values and restrictions (frontage, organisation penalty etc..) force you to mostly build 3 combat brigades and 1 support brigade... no ask yourself this:

How many different combinations of combat brigades can you make that really make sense (not like Armor + paratrooper + marine e.g.)

Do you then have REALLY more than the normal combat division types we had in Hoi2? I say no

Wait you say.. we have the 4th (support) brigade... weeeeell... we had THAT in HoI2 as well. The brigades of HoI2 that could be attached. With the addons even right from building divisions.

So to me this is really just a fancy overcomplicated way of getting the same we had before. But maybe it's just me...

(on a positive side.. at least this provides the flexibility to be modded into something worthwile this time... at least potentially)

 

[TheJoker]

what did you expect ?
200 different types of combinations that make sense so the game becomes even more complicated and you easily loose track of which division is which ?

i like the new system. you can pack armor + mot/mech into the same division to allways get the combined arms bonus.
as japan it might be usefull to have one division which combines marine & mountain infantry.
and so on ...
i have a couple of gripes with the current state of this game but this sure isnt one of them

 

[semaphore]

The values and restrictions (frontage, organisation penalty etc..) force you to mostly build 3 combat brigades and 1 support brigade...

I think some players playing a different country may be inclined to disagree. Which makes the new system quite an improvement.

 

[TheLand]

In Hearts of Iron 2, a vanilla Infantry division was almost clearly the dominant unit, unless you were very short of manpower. The only brigade really worth having was Artillery. There was extensive discussion of this, over a long period of time, in the HOI2 forums - look for posts by Kanitatlan.

HOI3 is much more complicated. You need to look at what a particular division can achieve for its cost in Combat Width, Manpower, IC and Officers. It's going to be much more difficult to 'optimise' your armies.

 

[unmerged(51140)]

In Hearts of Iron 2, a vanilla Infantry division was almost clearly the dominant unit, unless you were very short of manpower. The only brigade really worth having was Artillery. There was extensive discussion of this, over a long period of time, in the HOI2 forums - look for posts by Kanitatlan.

HOI3 is much more complicated. You need to look at what a particular division can achieve for its cost in Combat Width, Manpower, IC and Officers. It's going to be much more difficult to 'optimise' your armies.

I believe it when I see it. THEORETICALLY I agree with you that there is a potential for this. In reality I expect to see most players have Infantry, Tank and Mech divisions with artillery as a 4th brigade and that will be it.

 

[unmerged(148271)]

Divisions are fine, but ship design didn't work out very well. I mean, if you put 13'' belt instead of 15'' belt,it should increase speed at least 2-3 km/h? About whole game, they made excellent job, but like every Paradox game, it will need year or two of modding and patching untill it's really great game.

 

[Lord Ederon]

So what is your complain? Just use predefined templates if you don't want to bother. You lose nothing compared to HoI2 I say. And that's enough. Though I'll experiment with different division structures myself to surprise my opponents (or me ).

 

[Lauri]

On lovely thing about this you have to remember too... Modding possibilities There are plenty of people who wants to go even lower down to battalion size...

Personally, I love the division designer... I'll be more happy when I get to play a '36 scenario though, but for minors or minor-majors I'll most likely not go for a artillery on everyone... Many times I don't even build artillery because of the speed bump (or oil, now fuel, bump on SP)

 

[Nikolai II]

I believe it when I see it. THEORETICALLY I agree with you that there is a potential for this. In reality I expect to see most players have Infantry, Tank and Mech divisions with artillery as a 4th brigade and that will be it.

Sounds fairly historical though? And also easy.
Keep most divisions simple, and you get more time to name your "special forces" and remember where you are keeping them. (Like your six divisions of 2INF+2Art to knock out strongpoints, or the like)

(Above comment should be taken with any amount of salt, since I do not intend to install the demo. The real game is coming in two days and will have to do for me )

 

[unmerged(101225)]

From what i've seen its just about the same as HOI2. Inf-Inf-Inf-Art. In HOI2 it was just INF-ART.

The AI seems to only build INF-INF-INF (at least in the '39 scenario almost every division is this).

No change from HOI2, really.


On the other hand; other things come about.


Short on manpower? Build more IC expensive but less manpower demanding ART (reminds me of latewar Soviet massive artillery barrages to make up for manpower shortages). Maybe INF INF ART ART.

All things considered I am glad it is this way rather than how it was in HOI2, major change or not.

I'm also VERY VERY happy at how techs increase a unit's stats. This also makes a country's units unique stat-wise.

Imagine Germany's Medium\Heavy tanks with high gun\armor skill but no reliability and poor engines so they take huge loses due to attrition from air attacks (they can't move quick enough to get out of the way) and in offensives.

 

[Zwiback]

I love the new system.

It really gives you alot of possibilities. You can also have 3x/2x in combat/support or 2x/1x and so on. Or 2xCav for fighting partisans in the rear without a 3rd combat brigade.

My personal "elite" divisions are made up with 1xarmor, 2xmech,1xTD,1xSPArt. If you like more armor and hard attack, simply take armor instead mech and replace the SP-Art with another tank destroyer. The possibilities are endless. Compare that with the generic divisions in HOI2 + the new much more complex tech model it's really more complex and individual.

And really, it's what many people in the community (including me) have asked for this feature for years.

 

[TheJoker]

i also asked for this. But not looking like this. There were quite a number of fan suggestions which were far superior to this system

like what for example ?

 

[Lord Ederon]

Like a real regimental/bataillon level structure for the Divisions. if you want to look at it, go search through the HoI2 forum.

I think what is now implemented is halfway there. It allows for customization and different division patterns and is still fairly simple. I'd love regimental/battalion level of detail, but I'm fairly satisfied with this. Given the scale of the game.

 

[TheJoker]

Like a real regimental/bataillon level structure for the Divisions. if you want to look at it, go search through the HoI2 forum.

good one, even with google site search its almost impossible to find anything.

Btw.. if you disagree with me on HoI3's quality that's fine but you don't have to answer to all my posts in all threads now saying that you disagree, alright? If you like the game, go play the demo. I don't like it, accept that.

are you paranoid or something ? i merely asked what other suggestions there have been for the division designer ...

I think what is now implemented is halfway there. It allows for customization and different division patterns and is still fairly simple. I'd love regimental/battalion level of detail, but I'm fairly satisfied with this. Given the scale of the game.

i agree that the current system is quite allright. i imagine that if you add 2 more levels below that of the current brigades it would really become a chore in the long run. complexity and depth is fine but you really dont have to overdo it.

 

[Wombat24]

Like a real regimental/bataillon level structure for the Divisions. if you want to look at it, go search through the HoI2 forum

I remember but this being mentioned but surely this would make the game even more complex and slower? Considering how other people are finding the new system even more complicated and other people finding the game slow adding yet another level of detail seems to cause more problems than it solves to my mind. If you were to add 3-5 battalions in each brigade it would cause all sorts of madness and I would have thought eat up even more CPU to manage. In principle I agree, battalion level would be brilliant but I don't honestly think it is feasible and the potential customablility of the new system appears sufficient for now.

 

[unmerged(65128)]

I look at it like this... ok.. you have 4 brigades per division.

The values and restrictions (frontage, organisation penalty etc..) force you to mostly build 3 combat brigades and 1 support brigade... no ask yourself this:

How many different combinations of combat brigades can you make that really make sense (not like Armor + paratrooper + marine e.g.)

Do you then have REALLY more than the normal combat division types we had in Hoi2? I say no

Wait you say.. we have the 4th (support) brigade... weeeeell... we had THAT in HoI2 as well. The brigades of HoI2 that could be attached. With the addons even right from building divisions.

So to me this is really just a fancy overcomplicated way of getting the same we had before. But maybe it's just me...

(on a positive side.. at least this provides the flexibility to be modded into something worthwile this time... at least potentially)

Im sorry to say you apparently dont get the full picture. I find it to be vastly greater than Hoi2. For example you can now get an combined arms bonus when the situation demands it also the divisions are more realistic now with different kinds sets of brigades in one division. More historically accurate.

 

[egslim]

Either you go for the realistic way or you go for the easy gameplay way. if you try to do both you end up with HoI3...

Bang, your argument just sank.

Of course HOI3 strikes a balance between easy gameplay and realism. Already plenty of people complain about the game's complexity, and they're used to Paradox games. Do realise that Paradox wants to sell this game, and that imposes limits on the level of complexity/realism possible.

 

[unmerged(18427)]

I really like it. Not all divisions need to be of the same size, resulting in far more variations than the OP suggests. Binary divisions make perfect sense for some breakthrough exploitation scenarioes, anti-partisan duty, or beach defense, while square (or pentagonal) divisions can do the heavy lifting. This can result in a lot of different combinations and options, and if you don't like it, you can simply just stick to a few basic templates.

 

[unmerged(49695)]

In Hearts of Iron 2, a vanilla Infantry division was almost clearly the dominant unit, unless you were very short of manpower. The only brigade really worth having was Artillery. There was extensive discussion of this, over a long period of time, in the HOI2 forums - look for posts by Kanitatlan.

HOI3 is much more complicated. You need to look at what a particular division can achieve for its cost in Combat Width, Manpower, IC and Officers. It's going to be much more difficult to 'optimise' your armies.

that is untrue, plenty of divisions were worth having brigades in them. As germany having a couple of armies with AT only, others with ART, others with ENG brigades and so on was essential. Then you'd attach SP ART to arms and so on or HARMS to it, mechas and mots with harms were also a win combination.

 

[unmerged(49695)]

Bang, your argument just sank.

Of course HOI3 strikes a balance between easy gameplay and realism. Already plenty of people complain about the game's complexity, and they're used to Paradox games. Do realise that Paradox wants to sell this game, and that imposes limits on the level of complexity/realism possible.

Complexity is good, specially the logistics system and weather system. Logistics isnt as developed as i'd like, but i can live with it