Experience?

[unmerged(15998)]

Well, I assume that Divisions will have experience in HoI2. At least like in Vicky. I'm wrong?

How will you deal with it?

Units should be able to be upgraded, at least from infantry to motorized to mechanized. Or to remove/attach/change a special brigade to it. All at the cost of a decrease in experience.

Also, experience should decrease if the unit takes too many casualties. I mean, the SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler is no longer to be the same after the Russians have beaten it at Kursk

 

[unmerged(27215)]

so something like this:



Imagine you have X Division with 100 pts.

You lose 7 pts in a battle in which 12 Exp is gained.

So 93 pts of the division now has 12 exp, 7 [the reinforcements, have 0]
maybe average it or something and get a cummulative.


Is that what your thinking, if so, it makes sense

 

[killerdude11]

you could just have it that diviosion s get experience as they fight, and everytime the diviosions are reinfroced they lose experience.

 

[unmerged(27215)]

that would be way easier

 

[unmerged(26982)]

you could just have it that diviosion s get experience as they fight, and everytime the diviosions are reinfroced they lose experience.

They shouldnt completely lose it. But there definitely should be a loss of experience as a result of having the division reinforced with unseasoned new recruits. But if they did this, there should be a way to combine two divisions into one if both were under half strength in order to preserve the experience between them. Or something to that effect...

 

[unmerged(10750)]

That was similar to the way that the late Talonsoft East Front/West Front series used to handle experience - unit stats would increase between scenarios, but as you reinforced them, their stats would decrease to reflect the lack of combat-readiness of the new troops.

To do things really really well, you'd need two MP pools - "experienced" and "inexperienced" MP. The losses you take in combat that get thrown back into the MP pool (returning wounded) would go into the "experienced" pool. If you reinforce from the "experienced" pool, you wouldn't lose the experience.

 

[unmerged(12895)]

I'd have to say I'm not in favour of divisional experience, as I think its effect is at the division-operational level, not at the corps-operational level which is where I think the game finds its natural level of abstraction with land warfare. An asset is an asset is an asset.

This doesn't mean that sub-standard infantry divisions shouldn't be able to be upgraded to standard or "guards &tc status" divisions. Just don't expect the world of elite units.

I'm all in favour of leader experience (its not what you've got but how you use it).

I certainly like the suggestion for infantry divisions to be upgradeable into motor / mechanised. But wouldn't it be easier & more economical just to produce a new mot/mech instead?

 

[mvsnconsolegene]

Well, I assume that Divisions will have experience in HoI2. At least like in Vicky. I'm wrong?

How will you deal with it?

Units should be able to be upgraded, at least from infantry to motorized to mechanized. Or to remove/attach/change a special brigade to it. All at the cost of a decrease in experience.

Also, experience should decrease if the unit takes too many casualties. I mean, the SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler is no longer to be the same after the Russians have beaten it at Kursk

I defiantely hope so.

- MVSN

 

[unmerged(15998)]

I certainly like the suggestion for infantry divisions to be upgradeable into motor / mechanised. But wouldn't it be easier & more economical just to produce a new mot/mech instead?

Yes, in HoI it's more economical. But IF units get experience, then it makes sense that you want your best warriors in the elite forces.

There was experience in Vicky so I think they will include it in HoI2 also. No extra micromanagement needed to handle with that.

Experience should not be lost so aritmetycaly. I mean "if you reinforce 10% the division, you lose 10% experience" is not the way. As long as there are enough veterans and the staff of officers remained intacted, the new recruits could learn very fast and reach the level of their veteran comrades. However, if the unit loses 50% strengh in a single battle, his experience should suffer...

 

[berhaven]

A good way to handle it could be to have two factors: combat experience and training, and two "areas": units and replacement pool (manpower).

All units start with a given value in both factors.

Drafts (increase in manpower) have 0 experience and 0 training.

A unit not fighting gains training up to a certain level (say 100), consuming supplies.

The replacement pool gains a little training if you invest resources in it.

A unit gains experience fighting. When it take losses and it it replenished its values are averaged out with the replacements.

When you disband units its experience is added (and averaged out) with the one of the pool.

In theory you could even "choose" the manpower from your pool, sending to field divisions experienced and trained troops, deteriorating on the other side the quality of the pool.

Looks complex but is I think is much easier to do than it is to explain.

 

[Ghost_dk]

However, if the unit loses 50% strengh in a single battle, his experience should suffer...

Keep in mind though that half of the mp loss from battles is returned to the MP pool and those same men are most likely candidates to be returned upon reinforcement.

Ghost_dk

 

[unmerged(10574)]

A good way to handle it could be to have two factors: combat experience and training, and two "areas": units and replacement pool (manpower).

All units start with a given value in both factors.

Drafts (increase in manpower) have 0 experience and 0 training.

A unit not fighting gains training up to a certain level (say 100), consuming supplies.

The replacement pool gains a little training if you invest resources in it.

A unit gains experience fighting. When it take losses and it it replenished its values are averaged out with the replacements.

When you disband units its experience is added (and averaged out) with the one of the pool.

In theory you could even "choose" the manpower from your pool, sending to field divisions experienced and trained troops, deteriorating on the other side the quality of the pool.

Looks complex but is I think is much easier to do than it is to explain.

Nice ideas but i prefer the notion of experience gained during combat lost during reinforcment. (relative to the amount of)

 

[Adam B.]

Also, experience should decrease if the unit takes too many casualties. I mean, the SS Leibstandarte Adolph Hitler is no longer to be the same after the Russians have beaten it at Kursk

You should not be so sure;

When divisions get casualties; it mean that the Survivers will be much more experienced; and majbe this will balance things.

 

[unmerged(15998)]

You should not be so sure;

When divisions get casualties; it mean that the Survivers will be much more experienced; and majbe this will balance things.

That should be reflected in the fact that the division will have won exp. after the combat.

In my post nº9 I made a clarification of my idea. Combat losses should take a big hit in exp. only if the unit has got gross casualties. And exp loss should increase exponentialy, not aritmetically, with casualties. Let's say:

Strenght lost/Exp lost:

0-9 = 0%
10= 5%
20= 10%
30= 20%
40= 25%
50= 33%
60= 45%
70= 55%
80= 70%
90= 90%
91-99 = 100%

(the exp loss is expresed as a percentage of the unit's exp. A unit with 10 exp losses 1 point if reduced to 80% strenght, not 10 points)

Keep in mind though that half of the mp loss from battles is returned to the MP pool and those same men are most likely candidates to be returned upon reinforcement.

Then we may have two pools, one for green replacements (generated through normal MP growth) and other for elite replacements (generated through the MP recovered from battle casualties). If you replace with Elite, you lose no exp.

Reminds me to Panzer General, however the idea is maybe too complex for Paradox.

 

[Adam B.]

But The MORE ppl lost; the harder the battle was; the MORE experience the remaining units get.

 

[unmerged(15998)]

But The MORE ppl lost; the harder the battle was; the MORE experience the remaining units get.

Not necessary. If a squadron of Sturmoviks has blowed out half the tanks of your panzer division, the survivors may have got a trauma, but not so many extra exp. Anyway your point in you last post is related to how units gain experience (the harder the battle, the more exp won) but not to how they lose it.

I agree with one fact: The first to die are usually the less experienced. This is why I said that the loss of exp should be exponential, because you will only slash in great numbers the veterans if you inflict heavy casualties.

P.D: No need to shout

 

[Adam B.]

Not necessary. If a squadron of Sturmoviks has blowed out half the tanks of your panzer division, the survivors may have got a trauma, but not so many extra exp. Anyway your point in you last post is related to how units gain experience (the harder the battle, the more exp won) but not to how they lose it.

I agree with one fact: The first to die are usually the less experienced. This is why I said that the loss of exp should be exponential, because you will only slash in great numbers the veterans if you inflict heavy casualties.

P.D: No need to shout

I Didn't shout !; I wanted to make a point .

Now I think Exp should only start declining when at 50 % strength.

 

[unmerged(15998)]

Now I think Exp should only start declining when at 50 % strength.

Then we are agree with the idea, but discussing the exact numbers

I agree that exp loss should begin to increase dramatically from 50%. But replacing 25% of your troops with green recruits is also an impact. If we add the "elite replacements" rule, then you could normally replace medium-sice losses with elite replacements and suffer no loss.

By the way, I like the "elite replacement" idea, because since they should be limited, the player will be forced to privilege a small bunch of elite forces. It's not a complex idea and adds a lot of color and strategic perspective to the game.

 

[Adam B.]

Then we are agree with the idea, but discussing the exact numbers

I agree that exp loss should begin to increase dramatically from 50%. But replacing 25% of your troops with green recruits is also an impact. If we add the "elite replacements" rule, then you could normally replace medium-sice losses with elite replacements and suffer no loss.

By the way, I like the "elite replacement" idea, because since they should be limited, the player will be forced to privilege a small bunch of elite forces. It's not a complex idea and adds a lot of color and strategic perspective to the game.

Yes.

Like the SS Divisions that almost won the day at Zitadelle; but lost because their flanks were ungarded by the losing "green" german forces.

The Loss of experience Starts at 30 %; but only a small number; because the CORE elite divisions are MUCH better at defending and surviving.

then exponentially it should rise when at 70 %.

And the numbers offcourse depend on how large experience is ...
If 10 is large then 6 should be lost at 70 % ...

ect...

 

[unmerged(15998)]

The Loss of experience Starts at 30 %; but only a small number; because the CORE elite divisions are MUCH better at defending and surviving.

But because of that, they recive a combat bonus, and then already take less casualties, etc...

The rest are just the figures There will be people more preparated than me to fine tune the exact statics. However I dunno that Paradox will pay any attention.