Unless vanilla+ doesn't have the first amphib tech until 1940, reducing the division amount won't matter.
Frustrated!!!
- Thread starter GPounda
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I'm ok with them taking shortcuts if it means getting a product out there that works better, faster.
I'd like them to keep looking into ways to improving the AI overall though. I have lofty ambitious goals for it, so it's probably lucky that I'm not in charge. I want the AI to be able to more realistically evaluate it's own strength and the enemy strength before deciding to declare war or commit to invasions or whatever. I want the AI to be able to correctly realize when certain national focuses are stupid things to pick, don't make any sense for their objectives and so on. This would have to tie in to a system of national goals. This would be based on faction, country and ideology. Fascist Germany has territorial goals of annexing Polish land then going after the USSR. Democratic Germany does not have these goals. It doesn't make any sense for Democratic germany to pick focuses like "war with USSR" even though it just sort of will do that in game because of scripted focus orders. The AI should work towards its goals.
But speaking in such terms already necessitates AI much more complex than what we have. Although they talk about how this is less scripted, it still is scripted, just in a general sense instead of being scripted to go down specific paths every time. That's an improvement in flexibility, but we're also sort of missing the mark. Countries are heavily steered by their National Focuses to an uncomfortable degree, and there's no easy fix for this. They can't just scrap the AI and start over with a much larger and broader system, they're sort of locked in to working with what they have and polishing the sharp corners.
Why would it not? Colonial system still exists, Germany's products are not welcome in most of the world. Own natural resources are still scarce. Only "free" markets are closed by ideological borders. Domination is still possible in minds of the elite.
Plan Dropshot, a nuclear attack out of the blue on USSR, was created and almost approved by a democratic country.
Completely agree. Hopefully they will go back to it at some point. I can see Naval Invasions getting a rework in future expansions.
and they will do that for the rest of the war too.... just keep your ports and beaches defended in Germany and Holland mostly. Have a Quick Reaction Force on stand-by to respond if needed. easy to have by Fall 1939 over 40 infantry, 6 tank, some MOT to invade Poland have 20 infantry divisions protecting your the North Sea ports and some for the Baltic Sea (just in case). And enough fighters to keep the sky over Germany and Poland (very important)
One should also not forget that it takes only a small force to conquer Denmark. 6-8 infantry divisions is plenty. Once that it taken you stop more invasions from coming into the Baltic and may even trap an enemy fleet or two inside. I like to hit Denmark early, often while I am still conducting the Polish operation.
It does not, but that was not the portion I was commenting on -- the poster had said they saw no need to reduce the initial transport tech capacity below 10, and I disagreed with that. In the current game, transport tech capacity goes from 10 divisions to 50 divisions (1940) to 150 divisions (1944), which might be fun (and helpful for a transatlantic invasion of the USA by Germany) but it's also ludicrously ahistorical. If you consider the number of divisions that were actually involved in Avalanche and Overlord (i.e., exclude units that didn't storm the beaches, but disembarked in following days), the Vanilla+ sequence of 6 to 18 to 42 is more reasonable, though still high (but I attribute that to the overall "inflation" in division numbers in HOI4, as compared to "real life" numbers).
FWIW, I would also disagree with eliminating any possibility of an amphibious invasion before the 1940 transport tech is researched, since the threat of an early invasion (even if just a Dieppe-style raid) should always be there.
A 1940 tech is only 3 mos. after the historical start of the war, so it is not unreasonable. The problem is not players but the AI. If the AI has the tech, England WILL launch invasions into the Baltic, N. Germany, and Italy as soon as the war starts. And that would also prevent minors with large amounts of convoys from making totally ahistorical invasions on their own, as they would likely never research the tech at all.
A 40/42/44 tech progression would be better. And I agree the capacity is way to high.
The Dieppe raid was only about 10,000 men, and wasn't until August of '42.
In HoI3 AI was almost incapable of launching naval invasions, only on very rare occasions did it happen. Because of that US was a nonexistent threat to Germany. A huge flaw in the game that never really got fixed.
The decision removing "transports" was a bad decision likely forced upon the design team because they could not get the programming to work using the transports. Anyone who played HOI3 will remember that this was an "issue" and as a result the Pacific war was, to be charitable, sub-optimal. Of course, seeing as how there is still issues with the Pacific island war perhaps the issue wasn't and isn't transports but theater coding and battle planner coding not working across water.
There is absolutely no historically plausible reason for nations to be allowed to plan and execute 10 division opposed invasions before 1942. Historically the Allies did not try anything remotely that big until 1942 Torch. The Japanese did not ever execute invasions that large. What the Japanese did was launch a sequence of smaller invasions over about 3 months, the largest at one time being the 14th Army's invasion of Luzon (2 large divisions, a brigade, and a bunch of attached regiments) and that invasion was split between 2 beaches (Lingayen and Lamon) and the units didn't all land at once.
Neither the Allies or the Japanese possessed the landing craft, support vessels, or logistical train to support landings larger than perhaps 2-3 divisions at one time until late 1942. Torch was the first attempt and anyone who has read anything on the subject knows what a complete snafu that landing was. Had it been opposed by German troops instead of Vichy French the landings probably would not have even been attempted considering the shocking results of the Dieppe Raid.
The best solution imo now assuming the continued use of convoys is to push back access to transport tech and limit the size of invasions to Tech 1: 1922-2 divisions, tech 2: 1940-6, tech 3: 1942-12, tech 4: 1944-40 divisions. This tech access is closer to historical ability and would help to limit the ai from invasion idiocy and the waste of Allied manpower.
There is absolutely no historically plausible reason for nations to be allowed to plan and execute 10 division opposed invasions before 1942. Historically the Allies did not try anything remotely that big until 1942 Torch. The Japanese did not ever execute invasions that large. What the Japanese did was launch a sequence of smaller invasions over about 3 months, the largest at one time being the 14th Army's invasion of Luzon (2 large divisions, a brigade, and a bunch of attached regiments) and that invasion was split between 2 beaches (Lingayen and Lamon) and the units didn't all land at once.
Neither the Allies or the Japanese possessed the landing craft, support vessels, or logistical train to support landings larger than perhaps 2-3 divisions at one time until late 1942. Torch was the first attempt and anyone who has read anything on the subject knows what a complete snafu that landing was. Had it been opposed by German troops instead of Vichy French the landings probably would not have even been attempted considering the shocking results of the Dieppe Raid.
The best solution imo now assuming the continued use of convoys is to push back access to transport tech and limit the size of invasions to Tech 1: 1922-2 divisions, tech 2: 1940-6, tech 3: 1942-12, tech 4: 1944-40 divisions. This tech access is closer to historical ability and would help to limit the ai from invasion idiocy and the waste of Allied manpower.
That is a bloody myth; the AI at least in HOI III TFH was well capable of launching amphibious invasions. In fact it was invasion happy but not as much as in HOI IV due to lack of transport ships. Any country with transport ships would/could do it but since even TP ships with no practical were expensive mostly only the majors or regional powers could afford to do it. Even the regional powers would struggle if their expensive transports were sunk en route.
I understand why it was done (UK in EU IV anyone?) but that change had dreadful consequences in a game like HOI because it augmented the consequences of the invasion happy AI and brain-dead level of strategic decision making combo.
Changing the tech 1 to a two division limit won't help. They will just launch many more unsuccessful invasions.
But isn't this a good thing? Surely you just quickly crush them and move on with your life.
Amphibious invasions by Britain in 1939, or as I like to call them, "free XP for leaders."
It's not...But isn't this a good thing? Surely you just quickly crush them and move on with your life.
Amphibious invasions by Britain in 1939, or as I like to call them, "free XP for leaders."
The AI is slaughtering its troops for no reason against a human German, and just might succeed against an AI Germany busy in Poland and France that frequently leaves leaves Berlin undefended.
It's not...
Well, the OP made it sound like the invasions were seriously threatening. They really shouldn't be a threat.
Regarding the AI: If AI Britain and France managed to succeed in an amphibious invasion against AI Germany in 1939, I'd start huffing paint and doing heroin, since the End of the World was clearly upon us.
Then, I'd tell the Devs to rethink Germany's build, since it really shouldn't be happening.
Now, I do agree that the AI shouldn't be doing that to a human, as its just a waste.
I've seen England taken Berlin in '39 twice in 1.3.2 when I was playing Japan, while AI Germany was fighting in Poland. I've only played one 1.3.3 game with an AI Germany and thry did OK in that one.
Well, the OP made it sound like the invasions were seriously threatening. They really shouldn't be a threat.
Regarding the AI: If AI Britain and France managed to succeed in an amphibious invasion against AI Germany in 1939, I'd start huffing paint and doing heroin, since the End of the World was clearly upon us.
Then, I'd tell the Devs to rethink Germany's build, since it really shouldn't be happening.
Now, I do agree that the AI shouldn't be doing that to a human, as its just a waste.
Hi, I'm the OP!!! LOL
Luckily I saved the game the day I declared War. . . I have now run the scenario five times since and each time it is the same thing.
I have put 15 divisions, of infantry and Panzer, to garrison the coast and ports yet the Allies just keep throwing troops into the mix. I've tried large surface navies, 30 U-boats, hundreds of aircraft and the AI keep landing troops. . .
I invade on September 25th and by the 29th Canada had 10 divisions in Bremen. . . HOW is that even remotely possible? In 1939 Canada only had a standing army of 4,200 with 51,000 reserves. . . how do they land 100,000 trained and equipped troops, on the other side of the Atlantic, four days after the outbreak of War? The time to embark, sail, and disembark alone would have taken two weeks.
Tag switch to Canada prior to DOW, and view their army, disposition and battleplan. If they don't have an army poised to strike (divisions created and equipped, invasion already planned out) - then you have a point. The game does not imitate what happened in reality to the lowest detail.