Enforcement of attack delays for planned orders in 1.1

[unmerged(12303)]

just make the org loss due to move higher - that will stop people makeing very deep blitzes without org.
if you have to pause every territiory it kills the basic blitz concept of the game and turns WW2 into WW1...

 

[joeenochs]

And as for "10 provinces to Paris", that's assuming all of them are defended

Yes, but in my experience most of the time the comp gets at least some division or brigade from somewhere to cover the holes. And then that is only attack delay time for the very shortest path.

 

[DuvelDuvel]

I am already researching paratroopers > : ) If we can't go through them, let's go over them.
I will try if it's possible to uber-blitz the poles by paratrooping their VP's and sending the armed forces against the defended VP's.

 

[Lordban]

Trying to annex Poland faster than you can say "unfair"?

With Paratroopers or a few rampaging units behind the lines it's easy to exploit this, yes Especially since the AI seems to have a harder time fighting invasions back than it has launching daring raids of its own - let's not forget that on the offensive, the AI can sometimes perform impressive feats.

 

[unmerged(12303)]

OMG!! I just checked and noticed... They took out the ORG reduction for movement of troops... ARGHHH.

PLEASE for the love of God put that back.....

 

[dimstog]

combat_leader_impact = 0.05,
combat_movement_speed = 0.33,
combat_pushback_damage = 0.05,
combat_pushback_chance_for_damage = 10, -- 10 = 10%
unit_attack_delay = 168,
unit_attack_delay_modify = 10,
unit_digin_cap = 10,
bomb_strategic_resources = 0.25,
bomb_strategic_production = 0.01,
bomb_strategic_buildings = 0.01,

That right there can give a temp fix, though it brings down wait time for all attacks and seems to make the AI super aggressive when fighting XD.

Which file is this in please ?

Trying to annex Poland faster than you can say "unfair"?

With Paratroopers or a few rampaging units behind the lines it's easy to exploit this, yes Especially since the AI seems to have a harder time fighting invasions back than it has launching daring raids of its own - let's not forget that on the offensive, the AI can sometimes perform impressive feats.

Meh, it's an AI afterall. We are bound to beat it to a pulp eventually. Point is to do it with style

 

[Brasidas]

They took out the ORG reduction for movement of troops... ARGHHH.

Wow.

I hope its simply disabled, rather than not present at all.

 

[Lordban]

I'm curious as to why in terms of game balance

The defines given by Goldor2005 are found in the file: common\defines.lua

 

[dimstog]

I'm curious as to why in terms of game balance

The defines given by Goldor2005 are found in the file: common\defines.lua

Ah, thanks a ton

 

[unmerged(12303)]

I'm curious as to why in terms of game balance

that a question about removal of ORG reduction during movement??

 

[Lordban]

that a question about removal of ORG reduction during movement??

Yes. It's a little too big to be an oversight

 

[DuvelDuvel]

Trying to annex Poland faster than you can say "unfair"?

Fair isn't in the dictionary of my generals.

I just really want to get to the coast of france asap to get some airbases so I can tell those damn brit bombers to go annoy someone else, they laid waste to my economy in my last game, so this time around I am back for some revenge.

It's pretty 'gamey' yeah.. but I can live with it for now.

 

[Featauril]

This would in my opinion by far too unbalanced. A German force that can attack non-stop vs. a defender with hardly any chance of making any countermeasures just doesnt seem fair.

Leaving the multi-clicking and pre-planning as it were seems like a much better idea.


Before reading on: It is late in the evening here, and I'm tired, so I didn't read your entire article, or the majority of replies, so this might already be answered.

I read "Maneuver Warfare Handbook" (1985) By William S. Lind recently, and I got the impression that the "Blitzkrieg" tactic consisted of letting a strong unit force the crack in the enemies defences, and then pouring the reserves into this breach and exploit the initiative gained. This way, several "spearhead" units could attack different weakspots in the enemy lines, and the reserve could exploit the most suitable or successfull one. This way the defenders would face multiple attacks, not knowing which area to support with the reserve, plus the attackers would have several options as to were they should commence the "Blitz".
However, this might be awefully wrong for all I know

It was also combined with a massed attack on the entire front to encourage the enemy to commit his reserved prematurely.

 

[Lordban]

It was also combined with a massed attack on the entire front to encourage the enemy to commit his reserved prematurely.

Which worked perfectly as things were in 1.0, by the way

 

[unmerged(12303)]

golden thought: Yea so they were to make a game - grand scale so you can envelope the enemy, execute large maneuvers but you have to wait 150 hrs before you can move..... on each of the 10000 provinces... blitz just went down the drain...

Now if you played HOI2 (esp in MP) if IIRC the -0.48 per day loss which was carried on from HOI1, you could find that the org loss per day was still to low due to the fact that german tanks could have quite high org and move fast. Thus you could have a very quick game due to:

little provinces to moscow,
v fast german tanks with eng + minister + good leader
quick battles
units dissappear when overran

I myself asked for a moddable ORG loss in the misc.txt file for HOI2 as the 0,48 loss was just too low and didnt really force a panzer army to stop unless it encountered massive forces. Obv the supply system was not good enough in hoi2 as you couldnt expect panzers to move 1000 km none stop.. Its better in hoi3, but still doesnt simulate movement problems very well if i understand correctly.

Org loss forces delay in a much more realistic manner than a blant 150 hr delay. One has to carefully commit his troops and make sure he doesnt waste too much org. It also allows the PLAYER to choose when he has to rest - not a forced decision on him for EVERY province - which just brings the game back to moveing stacks 1 terrian per 100+ hrs or so (hello WW1).
I agree the delay in attack should be higher than the 24 hr in HOI2 - myself in a mod we made it 48 hrs so that people would be forced to slow down more. We also made battles last MUCH longer - also something I welcome is standard in HOI3.

However a lack of org loss kills much of the tactical element of planning. I wont claim it kills balance as I havent had the chance due to lag issues play a full MP game of ger v russia BUT slowing the game down by removeing org per day is much better in terms of keeping the flow of the game (simulating the initial fast pace of the blitzes) plus potentially balanceing germany in allowing it to win due to higher org at the start and then forceing it to wait to regain it after a couple of months of intensive movements.

Summing up IMO generally in terms of balance it slows the game down, doesnt allow for a Dday and a 14 day march to berlin where its all over as used to be the case in HOI2.

 

[unmerged(12303)]

Wow.

I hope its simply disabled, rather than not present at all.

it seems it is

not in the common\defines.lua (((

 

[unmerged(45464)]

The doctrine should be changed from Blitzkrig to Sitzkrieg.

Maybe they will change it in a patch or else it's just up to modders. However the AI doesn't seem to be able to use defence-in-deapth anyway....although I haven't fought USSR yet, most countries just put everything on the front. I rather see the AI being better and reduce the waiting period of attacks. I'd say start at 48h and lower with 8h per doctrine level maybe and make it on the German tech tree not the Soviet.

 

[dimstog]

The lack of org loss when moving kind of makes sense. I suppose the new supply system where the supplies trickle in the province and not just appear magically at full capacity, might be able to hold you back, or at least keep you from funneling a lot of divisions through one single province. I can live with that, although I believe some org loss during movement, especially in enemy territory is a must.

But the attack delay makes no sense at all, I just can't fit it in my plans. I guess pincers will have to be wider and in order to outpace the enemy retreat one will have to leap frog their divisions.

 

[grumbold]

Very disappointing to see this. I hope p'dox quickl.y work out how to tweak it back into something more sensible.

 

[Lordban]

Very disappointing to see this. I hope p'dox quickl.y work out how to tweak it back into something more sensible.

I'll drink to that Or I would, if it weren't 3 AM
Seriously, here's hoping the DEVs took the time to read some of the arguments made in this thread.

Thanks to everybody who read, replied and participated!