Coastal forts defend only against amphibious invasions, land forts only against normal combat.
-
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.
Coastal forts defend only against amphibious invasions, land forts only against normal combat.
A coastal fort will only defend the province from attacks across straights and beaches while land forts only protects from land connected attacks. So if you want to protect an important province with a port from enemy troops landing beside them you also need land forts. Islands can safely build only coastal fort installations.
Thanks both you and Slan.
I had assumed it was as you state but never really looked into it.
Does MP suppression still have a radius effect from where they are in HoI3? What effects this? radio_strength = ?
Supression is excerted (although halved I think) 2 provinces out from where the unit is. The range is not upgradeable.
I always use x3 Gar to defend ports and important provs. I'll try adding a ART brig to each one in my new game though. I didn't even know you could move gar! I guess I'm still stuck in HoI II lol
Yeah. Gar have a move rate of 1 kmph lol. They don't march, they Mosey.
Btw, careful putting support units in divisions that are liable to draw attack from enemy air. That hammers the crap out of support units double quick and can cause a div to retreat while the actual units with frontage still have a lot of juice left.
What if we take ideas from Canada: Police Horseman?
Cavalry with one or two MP brigade or CAV-AC-MP?
By the way does it count in reducing partisans if I put more MP in a division or just stuck with one per div?
Cavalry with one or two MP brigade or CAV-AC-MP?
By the way does it count in reducing partisans if I put more MP in a division or just stuck with one per div?
A div will only go as fast as the slowest unit in the div. Mixing an MP in with cav negates the cav's speed.
Don't discard militia entirely. With the right Human Wave tech their combat width goes down so you can use more of them than infantery in combat, They need almost no officers and take a third of the time to build than inf.
By the way, does anyone other than me liked the tech layout of Hoi2 better where you could not have all doctrines on all units at the same time? Human wave should lower combat width by shitloads but increase casulties by shitload as well.
Spearhead should also make your units very prone to being out of supplies since their tacticts kinda depend on it.
Supperior firepower should be useless on well fortified enemy or in difficult terrain or people using elastic defence. etc etc
By the way, does anyone other than me liked the tech layout of Hoi2 better where you could not have all doctrines on all units at the same time? Human wave should lower combat width by shitloads but increase casulties by shitload as well.
Spearhead should also make your units very prone to being out of supplies since their tacticts kinda depend on it.
Supperior firepower should be useless on well fortified enemy or in difficult terrain or people using elastic defence. etc etc
Just to point out that according to the tooltip suppressing Partisan Activity has no effect on resource output.
The reduction in resource output is twice the base revolt risk, not the effective revolt risk.
see some examples here:
I'm now starting to wonder if MP help supply throughput, because it would be their only use left.
Just to point out that according to the tooltip suppressing Partisan Activity has no effect on resource output.
The reduction in resource output is twice the base revolt risk, not the effective revolt risk.
see some examples here:
I'm now starting to wonder if MP help supply throughput, because it would be their only use left.
That's very interesting. How many MP did you have in there?
Moscow: 2GAR, 2MP, 3 HQs
Kryvyy Rih: 1 GAR, 1 MP, 1HQ
Paris: 2 GAR, 2 MP, 2 HQ, 4 MECH, 3 INF. Plus there are other INF and MECH in neighboring provinces, don't know if their suppression extends outwards.
All my MP have suppression value of 5.
edit: and looking at those numbers something seems pretty wrong, I should have much less PA in these province if the suppression value had full effect in the province.
edit2: Corrected suppression value, I was looking at a wrong save. Also the numbers of troops in Paris are probably a bit off.
Last edited:
After further investigation, it seems the effects of supressions are recalculated at the start of the month.
I rechecked the numbers a few months later and the ressource production is more consistent with the actual revol risk, and not the base one.
I tested to see if it had an impact on IC, manpower and leadership by boosting the base supression value of GAR and MP tenfold. IC and manpower were improved, but not leadership. Again, I had to wait until the next month to see the effect of the improved supression values.
The one thing that remains strange is how I can have 18 worth of suppression in Moscow but only see a reduction of barely 3% in the RR.
I rechecked the numbers a few months later and the ressource production is more consistent with the actual revol risk, and not the base one.
I tested to see if it had an impact on IC, manpower and leadership by boosting the base supression value of GAR and MP tenfold. IC and manpower were improved, but not leadership. Again, I had to wait until the next month to see the effect of the improved supression values.
The one thing that remains strange is how I can have 18 worth of suppression in Moscow but only see a reduction of barely 3% in the RR.
Last edited:
I'm only seeing around 1/10th the expected amount of RR suppression from the "listed" values for the units. A 3XGAR unit should reduce RR by 6 (3 units X 2 reduction per unit), but I'm seeing more like 0.6 in the province display.
At this point, other than using GAR units as a cheap way to guard locations, even MPs don't seem to have enough effect on RR to make them worth building for suppression purposes.
Rather than the "fixed" 0.3 or so per year drop in Nationalism, it would be a really nice "feature" to have that and RR "absorbed" by suppression units, sort of like supplies in reverse. Over time, you could increase the drop rate in defended and surrounding provinces with heavier garrison and MP placement, causing a gradual decline in suppression of provinces still further away over even more time. After a few years, you'd have "safe" control of the cities and surrounding zones, with higher risk in the backwater areas. Leaving a wide area unsuppressed, or only marginally occupied, would mean an ongoing high risk in the entire region throughout the game.
At this point, other than using GAR units as a cheap way to guard locations, even MPs don't seem to have enough effect on RR to make them worth building for suppression purposes.
Rather than the "fixed" 0.3 or so per year drop in Nationalism, it would be a really nice "feature" to have that and RR "absorbed" by suppression units, sort of like supplies in reverse. Over time, you could increase the drop rate in defended and surrounding provinces with heavier garrison and MP placement, causing a gradual decline in suppression of provinces still further away over even more time. After a few years, you'd have "safe" control of the cities and surrounding zones, with higher risk in the backwater areas. Leaving a wide area unsuppressed, or only marginally occupied, would mean an ongoing high risk in the entire region throughout the game.
The suppression value cannot be directly translated into reduced revolt risk. It is a means to measure how good different regiments are at supressing compared to each other. MP regiments are much better at supressing than garrison regiments and the difference just increases over time.
Now that the monthly update is mentioned, I seem to remember hearing or reading somewhere that changes not only in occupation policy, but also supression will take a while to take effect. It makes sense too. It is nice that someone can confirm resources, industry and manpower are all affected by supression. I guess it can be argued leadership should not be affected.
Personally, I think the supression / revolt values are fairly well balanced. If you are not happy with the supression your garrisons give, then increase the proportion of MP regiments. Maybe you would prefer more garrison, artillery or AA regiments but you cannot eat your cake and have it too. Do you want to entirely pacify a rebellious nation? Expect to have to station a lot of troops there. To entirely pacify key regions does not require an excessive amount of manpower. I do it all the time.
Now that the monthly update is mentioned, I seem to remember hearing or reading somewhere that changes not only in occupation policy, but also supression will take a while to take effect. It makes sense too. It is nice that someone can confirm resources, industry and manpower are all affected by supression. I guess it can be argued leadership should not be affected.
Personally, I think the supression / revolt values are fairly well balanced. If you are not happy with the supression your garrisons give, then increase the proportion of MP regiments. Maybe you would prefer more garrison, artillery or AA regiments but you cannot eat your cake and have it too. Do you want to entirely pacify a rebellious nation? Expect to have to station a lot of troops there. To entirely pacify key regions does not require an excessive amount of manpower. I do it all the time.