Hearts of Iron IV - 39th Development Diary - 8th of January 2016

[Mevsrei]

it was just an example. the default base width isnt 20 its 40. if you build a divisions of 25 battalions of super heavy tanks you'll go over it though and then will get penalty always on a divisions

But some battalions have no width? So we can have 20 super heavy tanks and instead of 5 more super havy tanks we can have 5 artillery and the default width of 20 would be perfectly filled?
Or does a full (all slots used) division allways have a penalty?

 

[agentgb]

The tech doesn't invent radio. Look at it like it develops suitable field radios and teaches the army to use them.

yeah i know, what i meant there was could it have an impact on national unity, in hoi3, you could gank someones NU down with your spies, sometimes alot quicker with a concentrated effort from allies, or affect morale on the battlefield.

Somthing like this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Haw-Haw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_Rose
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)

In HOI3, the target having no radio tech meant that eavesdropping via RADAR stations didn't really do much. I could get periodically get FOW lifted in India (at the theater HQ location) by putting a level 10 RADAR in Sicily. But against China with no radios? Couldn't get jack for intel on Chinese forces beyond the front.

But I'm not betting on radios or RADAR to win the war anyway. My money is on video.

i've never actually noticed that, and i usually put a 10+ radar station in hong kong. There no doubt TV & i guess media would eventually play a huge roles in a bunch of things, i think churchill once said, the empires of the mind would be the empires of the future.

 

[GsusNSV]

But some battalions have no width? So we can have 20 super heavy tanks and instead of 5 more super havy tanks we can have 5 artillery and the default width of 20 would be perfectly filled?
Or does a full (all slots used) division allways have a penalty?

@Johan or @podcat somwhere mentioned, probably in the support company DD, that every 'combat' battalion will add to the division width. Even arty or AT battalions.

 

[monksimus]

Radar shouldn't allow you to see submarines.

Radar ducts too far upward, and isn't precise enough during these years to make out the difference between most types of ships (is that a battleship or trade ship? Well, it's on a trade route, so hopefully....) . Much less for submarines. I understand submarines during this time couldn't stay submerged, but at too long of a distance an air search radar couldn't detect a sub and surface search radars only have a range of about 30 miles in modern cases, but like I mentioned even with surface search(designed for ships) they still wouldn't have the resolution to find subs.

Radar should ONLY be used for finding surface ships and especially aircraft, where it has always excelled because you don't need good resolution to figure out anything that big with any altitude is and airplane. But differentiating between a battleship and cargo ship, or between a light tank or armored car, should be IMPOSSIBLE at this point in history. I think maybe they should have modes to simulate what communications are being received and decrypted (in order to steal specific information) and active mode to perform those searches. (where receive mode has a much smaller chance of success, but gives more information and active mode has a much higher chance, but only for aircraft and surface ships).

I would definitely agree with this. Even with modern technology, the problem with surface radars is one of geometry. The curvature of the Earth prevents a radar on the surface from detecting something else on the surface beyond the horizon. This is why AWACS is so important and effective now, you can see over the horizon.

The only way that I can see this making sense in the time period is if radar stations act as listening posts for radio signals. You don't need to be able to pick something out on radar to know it is there, just triangulate where the signal is coming from with a couple of stations. If you know what frequencies subs use to communicate, you can get a general location and know it is a sub, which is enough to direct a few destroyers there. I imagine that encryption/decryption will play a far larger role in this in HOI4 than us that played HOI3 realize. Super excited to see how all these factors interact when I get a chance.

 

[Alpha2518]

Because your division is attacking, they are at the front. Counter attacking will try to get the flank of your attacking division. Your soldiers won't suddenly become thin air, therefore they have to defend themself.

That would only make sense, if there wern't other forces present who could cover the attacking force. Which is what I have in my example. The counter-attcking force should have to get through B division first before it can get to it's objective which is the flank of C Division.

 

[Alpha2518]

Radar shouldn't allow you to see submarines.

Radar ducts too far upward, and isn't precise enough during these years to make out the difference between most types of ships (is that a battleship or trade ship? Well, it's on a trade route, so hopefully....) . Much less for submarines. I understand submarines during this time couldn't stay submerged, but at too long of a distance an air search radar couldn't detect a sub and surface search radars only have a range of about 30 miles in modern cases, but like I mentioned even with surface search(designed for ships) they still wouldn't have the resolution to find subs.

Radar should ONLY be used for finding surface ships and especially aircraft, where it has always excelled because you don't need good resolution to figure out anything that big with any altitude is and airplane. But differentiating between a battleship and cargo ship, or between a light tank or armored car, should be IMPOSSIBLE at this point in history. I think maybe they should have modes to simulate what communications are being received and decrypted (in order to steal specific information) and active mode to perform those searches. (where receive mode has a much smaller chance of success, but gives more information and active mode has a much higher chance, but only for aircraft and surface ships).

The reason Radar finds subs is because it doubles as a radio listening post. So when you see Subs because of your radar station, you should be thinking it is intercepting the Enigma transmissions and decoding them thus allowing you see where they are.

 

[fabius]

The reason Radar finds subs is because it doubles as a radio listening post. So when you see Subs because of your radar station, you should be thinking it is intercepting the Enigma transmissions and decoding them thus allowing you see where they are.

Also let's not forget at the strategic/abstracted level- subs didn't run submerged all the time.

 

[Axe99]

Also let's not forget at the strategic/abstracted level- subs didn't run submerged all the time.

Or, indeed, most of the time for most of the war . But in this case I'd say it's the whole listening post thing and SIGINT which is where the info on both most naval and air forces come from. As best I recall, the only radar useful for detecting subs directly was the centimetre and lower wavelength radar fitted on aircraft.

 

[FOARP]

Radar shouldn't allow you to see submarines.

Radar ducts too far upward, and isn't precise enough during these years to make out the difference between most types of ships (is that a battleship or trade ship? Well, it's on a trade route, so hopefully....) . Much less for submarines. I understand submarines during this time couldn't stay submerged, but at too long of a distance an air search radar couldn't detect a sub and surface search radars only have a range of about 30 miles in modern cases, but like I mentioned even with surface search(designed for ships) they still wouldn't have the resolution to find subs.

Radar should ONLY be used for finding surface ships and especially aircraft, where it has always excelled because you don't need good resolution to figure out anything that big with any altitude is and airplane. But differentiating between a battleship and cargo ship, or between a light tank or armored car, should be IMPOSSIBLE at this point in history. I think maybe they should have modes to simulate what communications are being received and decrypted (in order to steal specific information) and active mode to perform those searches. (where receive mode has a much smaller chance of success, but gives more information and active mode has a much higher chance, but only for aircraft and surface ships).

I think the idea of land-based air-search radar detecting subs is kind of silly, even though I get that the radar stations also represent radio intercept stations.

However, as a point of fact, yes it is perfectly possible to detects submarines using radar, even the periscope could be detected and in fact it was radar that was capable of doing this that eventually helped turn the tide against the U-Boat threat. Radar sets could do this beyond visual range - US S band radar could pick up a periscope at 5 miles, RN radars had similar performance.

 

[Alpha2518]

I think the idea of land-based air-search radar detecting subs is kind of silly, even though I get that the radar stations also represent radio intercept stations.

However, as a point of fact, yes it is perfectly possible to detects submarines using radar, even the periscope could be detected and in fact it was radar that was capable of doing this that eventually helped turn the tide against the U-Boat threat. Radar sets could do this beyond visual range - US S band radar could pick up a periscope at 5 miles, RN radars had similar performance.

I already mentioned this and it's in the diary. Radar doubles as a listening post which is why it detects things other then aircraft. Because it is intercepting radio transmissions which can then be read and tell you where things are. Why is it that so many people miss this important part?

• Gives you information on enemy units in the area. The better your decryption technology is versus their encryption technology the more info you can see (such as exact numbers, division types and roughly what battalions make up their divisions).

 

[WilliamTheIII]

I like the idea of using radar and hopefully other spy like works to benefit your efforts in predicting your enemy and defeating them. Unfortunately the system still feels a little underwhelming, the tech seems nice and all but I feel that I would have no reason to waste the precious resources and time building up and researching the facilities required for it. Is it possible to add onto this system such as giving us information on what the AI plan to do with their troops and even how the generals will deploy their troops against my armies. When you think about it this is historically accurate, though you had some radio silence missions most missions used radar for plans since it was the fastest way of communication to the troops actually fighting the battle. A prominent example of where we see this is the Battle of Britain or more so the Battle of Midway where no doubt knowing the Japs plans lead to a US victory instead of a defeat and almost total defeat in the Pacific being forced to pull back to the coast of California which were very poorly defended.

 

[Nicolas I]

Yeah, it was clearly a case of "We have 10 levels for everything else, so RADAR gets 10."

Nigel Tufnel (Spinal Tap) would have wanted a radar station that goes to 11...

 

[potski]

The expression "RADAR" was first used around 1940 in the US, meaning "RAdio Detection And Ranging". There was little distinction at that time between systems which:

- detected radio signals transmitted by an enemy object, and tried to work out the location of that object
- detected radio signals from an enemy object and tried to read the data they contained, which might be encrypted
- transmitted a radio signal pulse from a friendly location, and detected any reflected signals from any unknown (and therefore likely enemy) objects, and tried to work out the location of the objects, what we would now refer to as the word which entered the English language as "radar" (no capitalisation)

Chain Home was developed in the UK in 1935, and went into operation in 1936 with five stations, in other words before the term RADAR was even coined. The overlap in technologies is shown by the radio transmitters, which were produced from the same model used by the BBC at a TV transmitter built around the same time.

These first radar stations were massive, using four towers 110m tall in a line 55m apart with the antennas strung between them to transmit the radio signal. There were a further four towers 73m tall some distance away which had the receivers to detect any signal reflected back by any approaching planes, up to 100 miles away. The stations used so much power from the National Grid that they couldn't transmit at the same time, so careful synchronisation between them occurred.

When Chain Home went into operation in 1936 there were five stations. By mid-war there were 40. Additionally, stations were developed with more antennas to provide better detection at certain heights. But they had one major flaw, caused by their huge size - they generated the signal in only one direction, out to sea. Once enemy planes passed over the stations, ie. were over Britain, Chain Home couldn't detect them. Nevertheless, by that time their height and direction had been closely plotted and ground observers and fighters scrambled to intercept them could keep the commanders informed of any changes. Nevertheless, smaller transmitters were developed at other sites that could be turned, and ultimately through 360 degrees. These proved better at direction finding, but were not as powerful. Chain Home remained in operation, supplemented by the new smaller sites, and a variant called Chain Home Low designed to detect planes flying low to the ground. Eventually there were about 100 static radar sites around the coast of Britain. Plus many other sites monitoring enemy radio transmissions, some attempting to locate where they were coming from (systems such as "huff duff" - high frequency direction finding), others recording the information in the signal for decryption/translation.

Developments of the radio transmitting/receiving technology were limited. But analogue computers were developed to automate the processes for working out where the planes were located, and CRT technology improved to plot locations on a screen. The radar transmitters/receivers were part of a massive operation, connected by their own telephone system back to central control rooms and to air bases, naval bases and army operated AA gun emplacements.

I saw nothing wrong with having 10 levels of static RADAR in a province in HOI3, to represent everything from a basic listening station, up to the complexity and scale of the systems in place in Britain by 1945, including Chain Home, the Dowding System, huff duff and Bletchley Park.

 

[Secret Master]

Nigel Tufnel (Spinal Tap) would have wanted a radar station that goes to 11...

What the Battle of the Beams might look like.

 

[Porkman]

I don't mind the idea of radar = signals intelligence.

One of the most important things for me in this game is to make it so the intangible but important stuff has a reason to be built and that it cost something. Bletchley park wasn't cheap after all.

Radar and signals intelligence were separate historically but they seemed to be proportional in given countries so that's fine to lump them together. If a country had good radar, they had good signals intelligence and vice versa.

This is different from say lumping roads and rails togetherv under infrastructure because that's a case where lots of places had rails but no roads and some places had roads bit no rails.

 

[duderino77]

Game of the year 2016 hands down.

 

[Denkt]

It seems to me that each year UK will improve the level of their radars which in turn force german submarines to increase their distances from the british islands which in the long run will likely mean defeat for the submarines.

 

[FOARP]

I don't mind the idea of radar = signals intelligence.

One of the most important things for me in this game is to make it so the intangible but important stuff has a reason to be built and that it cost something. Bletchley park wasn't cheap after all.

Radar and signals intelligence were separate historically but they seemed to be proportional in given countries so that's fine to lump them together. If a country had good radar, they had good signals intelligence and vice versa.

This is different from say lumping roads and rails togetherv under infrastructure because that's a case where lots of places had rails but no roads and some places had roads bit no rails.

It does have the problem that you can move away from where you have good radio interception, which historically wouldn't happen since the sets were mobile. Also, signals companies apparently not being able to do intercepts is a little odd, no?

These first radar stations were massive, using four towers 110m tall in a line 55m apart with the antennas strung between them to transmit the radio signal. There were a further four towers 73m tall some distance away which had the receivers to detect any signal reflected back by any approaching planes, up to 100 miles away. The stations used so much power from the National Grid that they couldn't transmit at the same time, so careful synchronisation between them occurred.

When Chain Home went into operation in 1936 there were five stations. By mid-war there were 40. Additionally, stations were developed with more antennas to provide better detection at certain heights. But they had one major flaw, caused by their huge size - they generated the signal in only one direction, out to sea. Once enemy planes passed over the stations, ie. were over Britain, Chain Home couldn't detect them. Nevertheless, by that time their height and direction had been closely plotted and ground observers and fighters scrambled to intercept them could keep the commanders informed of any changes. Nevertheless, smaller transmitters were developed at other sites that could be turned, and ultimately through 360 degrees. These proved better at direction finding, but were not as powerful. Chain Home remained in operation, supplemented by the new smaller sites, and a variant called Chain Home Low designed to detect planes flying low to the ground. Eventually there were about 100 static radar sites around the coast of Britain. Plus many other sites monitoring enemy radio transmissions, some attempting to locate where they were coming from (systems such as "huff duff" - high frequency direction finding), others recording the information in the signal for decryption/translation.

Developments of the radio transmitting/receiving technology were limited. But analogue computers were developed to automate the processes for working out where the planes were located, and CRT technology improved to plot locations on a screen. The radar transmitters/receivers were part of a massive operation, connected by their own telephone system back to central control rooms and to air bases, naval bases and army operated AA gun emplacements.

I saw nothing wrong with having 10 levels of static RADAR in a province in HOI3, to represent everything from a basic listening station, up to the complexity and scale of the systems in place in Britain by 1945, including Chain Home, the Dowding System, huff duff and Bletchley Park.

The problem with this is that:

1) The figures you recite sound impressive until you compare them to those for other weapons-systems. In reality the resources we're talking about for the radar network are still on the order of that needed for two light cruisers or a single heavy cruiser (the total cost to 1940 of Chain Home and Chain Home Low was £5 million, the 1939 cost of HMS Belfast was £2,141,514). As another comparison, the cost of the entire UK 1940 radar network was roughly that of a 100 Lancaster bombers (£45-50,000 per unit) - a single bomber unit in HOI3. However building a full Radar network with an effect comparable to the historical UK radar network in HOI3 cost far more than this.

2) The largest part of the costs related to radar were research, not industrial output. Improvements in radar may therefore be better simulated as resulting automatically from research. For example, the £5 million cost of the Chain Home and Chain Home Low stations to 1940 discussed above was half the total cost to the RAF of radar 1935-40, with the other £5 million going on research and development.

3) Continual construction of radar creates micro-management issues. You rarely want to do anything but construct a full network in an area but in HOI3 you had to click through all ten levels.​

 

[Porkman]

It does have the problem that you can move away from where you have good radio interception, which historically wouldn't happen since the sets were mobile. Also, signals companies apparently not being able to do intercepts is a little odd, no?

If I had my choice, I would want radar as a separate piece of equipment that you could add to planes and ships. I would also like the signals companies to do intercepts. (Though my recollection is that Signals companies didn't do much actual intelligence analysis, they just collected the messages they intercepted and sent it higher up the chain.)

Also, we don't know how recon by units across borders work.

Hopefully, having a division next to an enemy province will give better info than having no division. If that's the case, I would be satisfied if divisions with signal companies had a slightly better idea of the enemy divisions nearby than those without.

 

[Thrake]

all tactics do is decrease or shrink the width of the battle (encirclement increases it for example and tactical retreat decreases it). it doesnt affect any other penalties directly, but will indirectly since the width increases.

Is combat width the same for both camps in a single battle? In other Paradox games, I never really understood how to play around width because in eu4 for exemple, it doesn't allow me to bring in more forces in battle than the ennemy; the battle is just bigger instead; unless outnumbering the ennemy, it doesn't help, and if I'm outnumbered it only makes matter worse.