For the love of sane decisions.

[KopiG]

- Germany please dont declare war when you are fighting Poland and the Comintern, finish those wars first, then you can go against the allies.
- Duh I dont care, I finished my national focus Around the Maginot so I do what I want, duh lets do all the wars and lose all the time

Seriously Paradox, how can these insanely trivial errors still be present in the game? This is not an edge case, nor it is rare, it happens almost all the time, so how come these issues arent seen and resolved asap?

 

[TallTroll]

Soooo... basically totally historical then? What's the issue?

 

[aono]

- Germany please dont declare war when you are fighting Poland and the Comintern, finish those wars first, then you can go against the allies.

Yeah, Germany never, never would allow itself two-front war.

 

[JerkyJerry]

Soooo... basically totally historical then? What's the issue?

Noooo...basically totally Ahistorical then. That's the issue

 

[DoctorDanny]

To be fair, when Germany declared on Sovjet Union the war in the west was basically over.
US wasn't part of the Allies and the UK + Empire didn't have the means to mount a full scale invasion of western europe.

 

[TallTroll]

Noooo...basically totally Ahistorical then. That's the issue

I'd be fascinated to know how you came to that conclusion. Germany declared war on several nations without finishing other wars first (the US, the Balkans, the USSR all spring to mind), so I don't see how "ahistorical" can possibly apply

when Germany declared on Sovjet Union the war in the west was basically over.

... but not *actually* over. So the US joined the Allies, and mangled the Axis powers

 

[aono]

US wasn't part of the Allies and the UK + Empire didn't have the means to mount a full scale invasion of western europe.

Yup. I believe that's why Germany declared war to USA as soon as they have excuse. I mean, that's the thing - Germany' politics wasn't something I'd call "sane" IRL, and if somebody want "historical situations", he need to somehow model it.
Just in case, Germany wasn't exactly unique in unreasonable politics, so it's more that just Germany issue.

 

[KopiG]

In Ahistorical setting it is about the AI. The AIs goal must be winning. In this case it should be able to evaluate that opening an unnecessary second front vs the allies will be a very bad move until the USSR is defeated. This usually happens and Germany in most of my games is defeated. This does not happen rarely as I said before, AI suiciding is pretty common by declaring unnecessary wars before the ones are finished.

 

[Khevenhuller]

Yeah, Germany never, never would allow itself two-front war.

The avoidance of a two-front war was the German's main aim.

1) In 1939 they had not expected Britain and France to stand by their guarantees, taking them to be effete and morally weak based on past experience. Poor diplomatic intelligence really.
2) Weserubung and France/Britain was strategically vital to secure the winter deliveries of iron ore and to prevent raiding by the maritime powers into the Baltic using submarines.
3) Britain and the USSR. Hitler believed that Britain's only hope was to bring in the USSR as her continental ally and chose to strike first. Everyone, Washington and London included, expected the USSR to last 6-8 weeks. A total underestimation of the Soviet State and the people to resist and overestimate of the Wehrmacht's capability, but only just.
4) Britain and the Balkans. Germany conquered Yugoslavia after a coup toppled the pro-Axis Prince Paul. The country fell after less than a 1000 German casualties were taken. The argument that this delayed Barbarossa has been challenged by historians looking at German West-East redeployment.
5) North Africa-USSR. Do you save the Italians with a couple of Divisions and let them go down?
6) December 1941. Hitler does not understand the USA. 'Half negrified, half judaised' was his summation, and it looked like Japan had struck a killing blow. The USN had also been fighting an undeclared war against the KM in the Atlantic for months. I think, by this time, with Moscow looking shaky and the appearance of victory in his grasp...

I am not sure that fighting on two fronts is the issue, but rather making sure the resources are there to do so. This does not really begin to make itself felt until late '42? If you want to look at bad multi-front decisions look at Italy (oh boy) and Britain by the end of 1941. The Germans manage happily for nearly three and a half years, because they had the resources to do so and their victories were generally quick.

How the AI is expected to make that call, I am not entirely certain. If it continues with 'Operation Lemming' and loses half the army attempting to support Spain in Rio del Oro, or even Japan in Thailand then lets, for the moment, assume that this judgement is beyond it. So, 'one at a time' seems a reasonable enough compromise.

K

 

[aono]

The avoidance of a two-front war was the German's main aim.

...and that's why Hitler always escalated his war, right? The seeming victory was German's main aim, and they lost.
My point is, if we do believe there was reasonings behind Barbarossa, Weserubung and declaring war USA, if we giving Hitler benefit of doubt, so AI who supposed to play Hitler (or Japanese rulers who attacked USA still being in war in China, and please, I know about economical issues!) doing same-type things is valid.
Then we can play historians and ask ourselves how did they thought they would win. I do it frequently about Japan.

 

[Khevenhuller]

...and that's why Hitler always escalated his war, right? The seeming victory was German's main aim, and they lost.
My point is, if we do believe there was reasonings behind Barbarossa, Weserubung and declaring war USA, if we giving Hitler benefit of doubt, so AI who supposed to play Hitler (or Japanese rulers who attacked USA still being in war in China, and please, I know about economical issues!) doing same-type things is valid.
Then we can play historians and ask ourselves how did they thought they would win. I do it frequently about Japan.

But that is my point, it doesn't. The AI will attack the USSR, for example, when it has barely an army at all. It is not 'the benefit of the doubt', it's a generally accepted thing now that Hitler was not mad, so the reasoning behind the war(s) are rational. So these are not 'same type things' because they are not based on rational calculation. It is not like the AI takes a balanced risk and then it may go right, it may go wrong. It just does things based on God knows what maths they have running this thing.

K

 

[aono]

The AI will attack the USSR, for example, when it has barely an army at all.

And I believe, following German generals, that attack on Poland was a gamble, that by all rational means army wasn't ready for a war against France and Britain, and it's miracle that Germany managed to fight as she did for 6 years. Hitler just did it, because he was... well, let's not say "mad". He was exalted and believed in destiny. We can explain why he managed to win, but - as it's generally accepted as well - he didn't same predictions, he just believed he will. Japanese military leaders also knew how BAD they would end in Pacific War, but tried to do it anyway. The only difference is we CAN see maths AI doing, and CAN'T - maths behind Hitler reasoning. So we believe he wasn't mad, and so we believe Japan rulers wasn't mad attacking USA. And we definitely know that AI isn't mad, so when they do actions that looking mad, we just can say "hey, it's bad programming".
I'm saying that actions of world leaders in 1936-1956 didn't always looked rational, even if we can reconstruct a possible logic behind them. But they happened to be mistaken, to be wrong, to make bad, bad, very bad calls. Not as I believe AI deliberately programmed such way. But it looks better that "you can always definitely and unmistakably predict any action he does".

 

[Aries666]

People arguing historical semantics in justification of a dumb AI committing suicide .
Things like this are very easy to solve eg the NF to declare war on SOV can only be taken if Paris is occupied. However, the devs in their hubris wont take the obvious simple fix whilst they work on creating a competent AI.

 

[Corner79]

There should be some checks in place but a couple of points mentioned here are not correct.

1. Germany wanted to avoid a two front war at all costs
2. Germany's invasion of Denmark and Norway was not a separate war but rather an extension of the War in the West. The objective was to secure a northern pincer arm against great Britain and to protect steel trade with Sweden.
3. Even after the failure of the battle of Britain, great Britain was seen as a defeated country more or less that could be dealt with later.
4. The Poland offensive was the main focus at the beginning of the war, Hitler did not anticipate the West declaring war on Germany nor did he divert his main forces until Poland was defeated.
5. Germany's war in the Balkans against Yugoslavia and Greece only came about due to the failure of the Italians in that theatre. German forces were sent to secure victory quickly, postponing Barbarosa.

All that being said, German AI should have a check (When on historical mode) to finish Poland and allowing a phony war to happen before a spring offensive. To maximise good weather and terrain. It worked in HOI3 it would be nice if they could do it in HOI4 when again historical mode is on.

There never seems to be a phony war when the AI runs Germany

 

[KopiG]

People arguing historical semantics in justification of a dumb AI committing suicide .

Exactly my point, thank you for understanding even if the others do not. This should be fixed, simple like that.

 

[Anaraxes]

Things like this are very easy to solve eg the NF to declare war on SOV can only be taken if Paris is occupied.

Never mind General Winter, everyone knows that historically and rationally, the Soviet Union was only kept alive by the freedom of Paris! Without taking Paris, there's no way Germany could have carried out Hitler's long-planned Lebensraum expansion into the east, because everyone knows Paris is the gateway to Moscow.

See? Just as silly-sounding with throwaway forum mockery, and not such a simple fix after all. Germany might never even fight France.

If you want a straight replay of a history book with all events occurring exactly in the sequence and the time they did historically, read a history book.

 

[Khevenhuller]

Never mind General Winter, everyone knows that historically and rationally, the Soviet Union was only kept alive by the freedom of Paris! Without taking Paris, there's no way Germany could have carried out Hitler's long-planned Lebensraum expansion into the east, because everyone knows Paris is the gateway to Moscow.

See? Just as silly-sounding with throwaway forum mockery, and not such a simple fix after all. Germany might never even fight France.

If you want a straight replay of a history book with all events occurring exactly in the sequence and the time they did historically, read a history book.

Well, even in the children's game I guess you would want the AI to behave in a rational way, otherwise you would not have much of a game, so the problem still exists. Until the AI can make reasonable judgements about force balances and take acceptable risks then the only other option seems to be triggers based on gates or milestones.

K

 

[Aries666]

Never mind General Winter, everyone knows that historically and rationally, the Soviet Union was only kept alive by the freedom of Paris! Without taking Paris, there's no way Germany could have carried out Hitler's long-planned Lebensraum expansion into the east, because everyone knows Paris is the gateway to Moscow.

See? Just as silly-sounding with throwaway forum mockery, and not such a simple fix after all. Germany might never even fight France.

If you want a straight replay of a history book with all events occurring exactly in the sequence and the time they did historically, read a history book.

Way to completely not read what I said.

 

[Holy.Death]

You are both right and wrong at the same time.

The main problem with National Focuses is that AI will use them once it has them and can enforce them, regardless of its strategical situation. Limiting their use in some way might be seen as the way out, but at the same time Germany, for example, should be able to declare war on Soviet Union if Paris is part of the Axis.

 

[Redz28]

People arguing historical semantics in justification of a dumb AI committing suicide .
Things like this are very easy to solve eg the NF to declare war on SOV can only be taken if Paris is occupied. However, the devs in their hubris wont take the obvious simple fix whilst they work on creating a competent AI.

Couldn't agree more. It's embarrassing watching the homers jump through insane hoops to defend the "AI" taking NFs and declaring war just because it can, no matter what the strategic situation.