Everything Wrong with Sweden in 1.1

[unmerged(15982)]

Current patch:

"Tankette" tech is said to be implemented, but is not.


Changes that ought to be made, 1936:


Tech:

Add the following tech:
Tankette - New Model: Strv m/31
Early Light Tank - New Model: Strv m/38
Early Anti-Tank - New Model: 37mm m/34
Early Artillery
Early Fighter - New Model: J-8 Gloster Gladiator
Census Tabulating

Perhaps also add Basic Machine Tools. However, Germany currently also lack this seemingly basic tech.


Order of Battle:

Sweden should have no airunits or 1 interwar fighter unit in Stockholm depending on game design policy. In reality there were 17 J-6 Jaktfalken I and 11 J-7 Bristol Bulldog MkIIA in 1936. The bombers given in version 1.1 represent exactly 6 aircraft! Remove them!

Sweden should not have 2 infantry divisions. It should have the following:
I. Infanterifördelningen - Inf/18 - Malmö
III. Infanterifördelningen - Inf/18 - Göteborg
IV. Infanterifördelningen - Inf/18 - Stockholm
VI. Infanterifördelningen - Inf/18 - Sundsvall
Övre Norrlands trupper - Bodens Garnison - Gar/18-art (18hvy) - Luleå
Gotlands trupper - Gotlands Infanterikår - Gar/18 - Visby

There would be good sense in also adding the following unit:
V. Infanterifördelningen - Inf/18 - Norrköping

This division formed during 1936 but used units already available. It did not have its headquarters in Norrköping, but when formed removed the "Östra Brigaden" which did. Placing it in Norrköping would therefore symbolize the actual geographical strength distribution well at the time.

Remove the militia division: "Hemmaförsvaret - Landstormen". Landstormen was spread out across the country and does not warrant its own unit.


Suggested Model name changes:

Tankette: Strv m/31, not "Tractor nr.53"
Early Light Tank: Strv m/38, not "Strv m/39"
Basic Light Tank: Strv m/39, not "Strv m/31"
Improved Light Tank: Strv m/40, not "Strv m/38"
Advanced Light Tank: Leave this blank

Basic Medium Tank: Leave this blank, not "Strv m/40"
Advanced Medium Tank: Leave this blank, not "Pvkv m/43"

Improved Tank Destroyer: Pvkv m/43

Early Anti-Tank: 37mm m/34 (see above)

Interwar Fighter: J-6 Jaktfalken I, not "J-11 Fiat CR.42"
Early Fighter: J-8 Gloster Gladiator, not "J-9 Seversky P-35"
Improved Esc Fighter: Leave this blank, not "J-7 Bristol Bulldog MkII A" (as this would be highly obsolete by the time)
Basic Fighter: J-22, not "J-8 Gloster Gladiator" (drop the FFVS tag from J-22 as well: as far as I know unofficial as part of Flygvapnet and looks silly)
Improved Fighter: J-23 (promising prototype, never realised), not “FFVS J-22”
Advanced Fighter: Leave this blank, not "P51 D Mustang" - what if Sweden does not stay neutral or joins the Axis?

J-21 has not been chosen as an alternative by me since it wasn’t an improvement over J-22 in any case.



Minister Improvements:

Please change weird photo of Gustav V. Preferrably for this one:

General reflections:

A note on IC. There seems to be something strange about IC distribution. Stockholm 7 IC and Göteborg (second largest city) only 1? Malmö 2? Won't give any precise recommendations though.

How come Swedish military leaders are so extremely incompetent? One or two have a skill rating of 3, most have 1. However, this is of course a problem that plague many neutral European nations. Do compare percentages for the Soviet Union! Oh, if only Sweden or Belgium had been wise enough to institute Gulags, massed human wave attacks, irresponsible wasting of human lives, persecution of military commanders so they would be assured never to present actual or negative information (the general staff can carry out its planning so much better that way!), massmurder of civilians and lower the general educational level to Russian peasant status!
:rofl:

There could also have been several things to say about the Fascist/NS cabinet as many of the choices seem curious or badly researched, but this will do for now. Safe to say they would not have removed Gustav V as head of state.


Sources consulted:

Nordisk familjebok (third revised edition 1923-1937), article: "Sverige"
http://www2.landskrona.se/kultur/landsverk/
http://mailer.fsu.edu/~akirk/tanks/swe/Swedish.htm
http://www-solar.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/~aaron/sweeds.html
http://www.smb.nu/svenskavingar/jaktflygplan.asp
http://www.all2know.com/sv/wikipedia/f/ff/ffvs_j_22.html
http://hem.passagen.se/hankri/21_1.htm

 

[unmerged(38672)]

Current patch:

A note on IC. There seems to be something strange about IC distribution. Stockholm 7 IC and Göteborg (second largest city) only 1? Malmö 2? Won't give any precise recommendations though.

[/url]

Paradox is based in Stockholm, not Gothenburg...

 

[Vulture]

Capitals have higher IC across the board... WAD

The Gustav pic can be used

The leaders are deliberate... Sweden was not involved in any war, they were not geniusses like Rommel, Manstein, Patton or Nimitz. Not up for discussion. This is not EU II where Sweden was a powerful nation.

 

[Van der Gent]

We could add 2 more IC in Göteborg and let sweden have 20 IC and then have 2 teach teams.

Good changes!

 

[Van der Gent]

Capitals have higher IC across the board... WAD

The Gustav pic can be used

The leaders are deliberate... Sweden was not involved in any war, they were not geniusses like Rommel, Manstein, Patton or Nimitz. Not up for discussion. This is not EU II where Sweden was a powerful nation.

Rommel Patton etc. got experience during the war but they all have it before!! All leaders have! Give all leaders low skill and let them aquire experience faster!

 

[unmerged(14249)]

The leaders are deliberate... Sweden was not involved in any war, they were not geniusses like Rommel, Manstein, Patton or Nimitz.

Come the hour, come the man. Sweden is just an unknown quantity because, unlike the "geniuses", they sensibly stayed out of the fighting. In the absence of hard evidence, I'd expect them to have performed similarly to Finland and so their leaders should be of comparable quality.

Andrew

 

[unmerged(15982)]

Come the hour, come the man.

Precisely.

It should be duly noted that this situation isn't unique for Sweden. Many minor powers have exceedingly worthless leaders. Who can say they didn't have any "geniuses" when they were never tested?

I'm not saying they should be as good as the German general staff. These nations should, however, be at least as good as the Russians, who for social and political reasons were hindered from pursuing effective field command, no matter how brilliant leaders like Konev or Rokossovsky might have been on a purely individual basis. Leadership in this game, which mainly influences casualties and org. loss, cannot be the possession of a single individual, but rather has to be the result of interaction between leaders and led.

A general lowering of skill ranks sounds like a meaningful idea, and reduction of Soviet skill in particular is what I would suggest.

Anyway, this wasn't a thread primarily about leadership. I'm surprised Vulture didn't comment on anything else concerning my errata (the leadership note wasn't the serious part), but nevertheless pleased that he likes the portrait. I didn't find it though. Someone else did, and for the same reasons.

 

[Grosshaus]

I don't see any point in removing any model names, it's boring to use the generic ones. And I'm quite certain no change that involves leaving any filled spot blank will ever be involved in patches.

 

[unmerged(15982)]

Okay.

As you might have noticed though, most removals of models are in fact not removals, but transfers to where the models belong and a few are even added.

Generally, these placements are self evident if one studies the systems in question. Only one is a little doubtful to me and that's the Strv m/42 'Lago', mainly because I'm not certain of the capabilities of the 75mm gun this tank was armed with. Paradox had this as Improved Medium, I put it in the Basic Medium category.

If relevant substitutes could be found for those that are removed, so much the better.

EDIT: Changed the Strv m/42 back into its original position. Just dawned on me that Paradox uses the BT-7 light tank in the basic medium category and whatever one might say, it would probably not be that bad.

 

[unmerged(38419)]

I think generals should gain abilities (like offensive doctrine or stuff) by fighting wars. I mean if a general wins some offensive battles (especially hard battles) he shoud gain Offensive Doctrine. Or if he manages to finish enemy off before his army runs out of supply he can have logistic doctrine. Also this traits can gain levels like Basic Logistic Wizard, Advanced Logistic Wizard and so on.