I'm a HOI3 player and am a bit confused.

[jdavis86]

So yeah, as the title says I've played a ton of HOI3, though that was my first in the series.

I picked up Darkest Hour as the depth/mods/immersion looks amazing.

I have many questions, however, and very much appreciate anyone willing to answer them!



1) Building divisions. Divisions take a long time to build, so I imagine it's best to do lots of serial runs. Whenever you get a better infantry tech, however, you have to start the build over? Or just upgrade the old ones after?

2) Industry. It seems pretty expensive and I'm not sure I understand it's usefulness. Does DH use practicals the same way HOI3 does? Will my industry get cheaper the more I build? And is it generally a good idea to do so?

3) Techs. So you have to assign research teams to each tech. The higher the skill and the more "qualities" that match the tech the better. Is leadership represented through the quality of the tech teams at your disposal? For example, the UK will have much nicer tech teams than Italy?

If that's the case, how does one over come that?

4) Unit composition. So I build lots of divisions. I then can add two brigades to each division, but have to build them separately? Is it generally best to add art, at to inf as we would in HOI3?

Is there a generic sort of corps build? 5inf divisions with brigades attached to each?

Is it best to put an HQ in every corps? The tooltip specifies the importance of the HQ, but doesn't say how far an HQ will influence a unit.

5) Naval and air units. This seems like it doesn't matter as much. Just max out your air wings? And 1:1 ratio for capitals and screens?

6) Spying. Is it best to just put things on automatic? I couldn't even figure out how to raise the spy budget on a nation myself.

7) Are strategic effects in this game?

8) Trade. Seems like it's set to automatic, is that okay?

 

[Epaminondas]

You've noted the depth of the game, jd, so please take these as introductory comments only. As you come to grips with the system you'll develop your own wrinkles (literally as well as figuratively) and will want to test and modify this advice. But for what it's worth:

Divisions take a long time to build, so I imagine it's best to do lots of serial runs. Whenever you get a better infantry tech, however, you have to start the build over? Or just upgrade the old ones after?

Serial runs are very good and long serial runs are very good indeed (save IC points) so the good news is that you don't have to ditch a serial and replace it when your infantry tech upgrades. There's a box you can check that will move your serial to the improved model, and while it will cause a hiccough in the progress of that line you'll get a better result than starting all over.

Upgrading old divisions is generally something you'd only do if you have lots of spare IC. In DH numbers tend to be more important than quality (upgrades don't increase performance as much as in other HoI games) so as a rule of thumb, keep what you've got and use new serials to improve the quality of the mix.

Industry. It seems pretty expensive and I'm not sure I understand it's usefulness. Does DH use practicals the same way HOI3 does? Will my industry get cheaper the more I build? And is it generally a good idea to do so?

Industry (IC = Industrial Capacity) drives your whole war effort, so as long as you can fuel it with raw materials the more you can build the better. It doesn't get cheaper as you build more of it, but there are techs you can develop that make it more effective. It takes IC to build IC, however, and you're going to be spending a lot of it producing your fighting units and improving your infrastructure so you can't go hog-wild building new factories.

Techs. So you have to assign research teams to each tech. The higher the skill and the more "qualities" that match the tech the better. Is leadership represented through the quality of the tech teams at your disposal? For example, the UK will have much nicer tech teams than Italy?

Pretty much, yes. Doctrines interact with techs, however, so it will take you a little while to work out what's the best route for you to take through the tech forest, depending on which nation you're playing and how welded that is to particular doctrines.

So I build lots of divisions. I then can add two brigades to each division, but have to build them separately? Is it generally best to add art, at to inf as we would in HOI3?

You don't have to build brigades separately. When you're setting up your division builds you can nominate allowable brigades to be included in the build. But again numbers count, so most of the time it's better to have more divisions with fewer brigades than fewer divisions with more brigades. When you to decide to build brigades artillery is reckoned by most to give you the greatest and most versatile bang for your buck.

Naval and air units. This seems like it doesn't matter as much. Just max out your air wings? And 1:1 ratio for capitals and screens?

How much it matters depends on which nation you're playing. In DH aircraft are very expensive, ships have a long build time, and you have limited IC; so you need to cut your coat according to your strategic cloth. A 1:1 screen to capital ratio is probably the safest way to go but you'll get a lot of argument on this.

Spying. Is it best to just put things on automatic? I couldn't even figure out how to raise the spy budget on a nation myself.

I hate this whole aspect of the game and try to avoid it as much as I can. Others love it and you'll get much more useful advice from them, but I invest only in counter-espionage, and then only when I have spare change in my industrial pocket.

Are strategic effects in this game?

Oh yeah!

Trade. Seems like it's set to automatic, is that okay?

When you get a few games under your belt you'll probably want to tinker with this, and if you're any kind of a micro-manager you can spend many happy hours doing so. Most players switch on automatic, though, and it seems to work well enough.

 

[Limith]

Trade automatic is recommended, it does a very good job.
Intelligence automatic is recommended as well, I usually adjust my automatic settings though, you want to tinker that.
Regarding improving research: you do that via the "Invest in Research" decision (costs money) or setting "Techteam takeover" to on in scenario options before you start a game.
Regarding building ICs: You don't get bonuses for building many, but you do get serial build bonuses if they are in the same province from production lines. Investing in "Money Devaluation" is more important than spamming IC once you reach your IC limit based on your resource production since industrial efficiency also increases resource production. Invest in Research reduces dissent, so using both is a good way to increase your research and IC.

 

[jdavis86]

Thank you for those very help responses guys!

I'm going to take them and dive right in .

 

[parnis]

Building one IC point costs 5 IC per day and takes about a year, so the rule of thumb is it takes 5 years for it to pay off. It's longer in peacetime and shorter in wartime.

I would NOT put the Intelligence function on automatic, because it will spend you broke all the time, leaving you no money for ANYTHING else. I feel that most intelligence actions are not worth the money, because the odds of success are so low. However, it is worth increasing your intelligence level to at least 12, to prevent other countries from succeeding against you.

There are technologies that speed up your ability to research technologies; they are the "computing machine" series on the Industrial Technology page.

Trade is automated, and that is a godsend. However, you can still make one-shot deals by selling technology or resources. Selling tech is how you can raise large amounts of money. You try to sell tech to any country you want. but some have no money. It is done via the "Diplomacy" page, under "Open Negotiations". It costs small amounts of money to make the deal, so make sure you make enough to cover the cost of selling.

You can also buy and sell resources that way; supplies and oil are the best bets. You can even sell warships if you want! I do that to get rid of obsolete ships and to arm minor allies like Norway and Greece.

Researching technologies ahead of their stated year is very slow, unless all the items required for it have low numbers, like 1 or 2, or unless you have a blueprint for it given to you by an ally.

Dissent is a key concept. 6% dissent reduces your production by 6%, for example. You reduce dissent by producing more consumer goods than the minimum required. Reducing it is very slow unless you produce enough to reduce it by at least .01% per day. The slider well tell you how much it will go down given how much you are producing.

This is a good game, IMO. I have never played HOI3 so I can't compare, though.

 

[jdavis86]

You can sell old ships? That's super neat!

 

[jdavis86]

OH, and any thoughts on HQ units and corps building?

 

[Epaminondas]

Ah, sorry, forgot about that. HQ are extremely important in DH since they confer a range of benefits on every adjacent unit. From that you'll have already figured out that you don't need one for each corps - in fact corps don't really feature in DH. If you sit a HQ adjacent to say three provinces with nine or ten divisions in each province you'll get supply, movement, and combat benefits for each of those units - and that's a mighty big payoff considering the cost of the HQ.

Of course the AI knows all about this so it will try to take out your HQs whenever it can. It's very difficult for it to do that through land combat, but air attack is a different matter so this is one instance in which an AA brigade makes much more sense than an Arty.

 

[Limith]

I would NOT put the Intelligence function on automatic, because it will spend you broke all the time, leaving you no money for ANYTHING else. I feel that most intelligence actions are not worth the money, because the odds of success are so low. However, it is worth increasing your intelligence level to at least 12, to prevent other countries from succeeding against you.

That's cause the default intelligence settings are stupid. It's useful to let auto-intelligence get your counter-intelligence to max asap with the right settings as you don't have to manually raise it. Level 10 spying results in maximum counter-intelligence, so I set my auto-spy settings to minimum level 10, maximum level 20, spend only if >100 (set to >1000 after you reach level 10 spy level) and setting thresholds for missions to be 10-20% (only tech team delay, nuclear, and industrial sabotage are kept, I turn off every other mission by setting requirement to 100% since none of the other missions are useful). Priorities are 30 industrial, 20 tech team delay, 60 nuclear sabatoge (it doesn't do it unless possible) with nuclear sabatoge set to 5% threshold. I also remove the minor nations from my target list and pick majors. For friendly majors, I set tech sabatoge and nuclear sabatoge priority to 0. For enemy majors, I keep it, unless I won't face them soon and am a minor, then I only keep industrial sabatoge (for blueprints). Tweak national priorities as needed.

 

[parnis]

That's cause the default intelligence settings are stupid. It's useful to let auto-intelligence get your counter-intelligence to max asap with the right settings as you don't have to manually raise it. Level 10 spying results in maximum counter-intelligence, so I set my auto-spy settings to minimum level 10, maximum level 20, spend only if >100 (set to >1000 after you reach level 10 spy level) and setting thresholds for missions to be 10-20% (only tech team delay, nuclear, and industrial sabotage are kept, I turn off every other mission by setting requirement to 100% since none of the other missions are useful). Priorities are 30 industrial, 20 tech team delay, 60 nuclear sabatoge (it doesn't do it unless possible) with nuclear sabatoge set to 5% threshold. I also remove the minor nations from my target list and pick majors. For friendly majors, I set tech sabatoge and nuclear sabatoge priority to 0. For enemy majors, I keep it, unless I won't face them soon and am a minor, then I only keep industrial sabatoge (for blueprints). Tweak national priorities as needed.

Holy crap, I didn't know all that was possible! Thanks. (I assume you are talking about in-game settings, not modding.)

 

[Skywalker_T-65]

If there is any one thing I can say I prefer about DH compared to HOI3 (and this from someone who otherwise likes the latter) its the ship construction. I've always found ships cost absolutely absurd amounts of IC for how long they take to build in HOI3, and while they take just as long in DH you're not crippling your economy by trying to play a naval power.

 

[parnis]

You can sell old ships? That's super neat!

You can also convert unwanted warships to convoy escorts. I think using that option on an old destroyer gives you 5 escorts, for instance. An old heavy cruiser gives 7. I know that because I always scrap the cruisers Terror and Erebus as the UK; they were actually coastal bombardment monitors, not CA's.

 

[jdavis86]

Are convoy escorts actually useful in DH?

 

[Jazwana]

yes they substantially reduce the # of convoys destroyed by a successful attack and do damage to the convoy raiding force. Reduction is on the order of ~ 0-2 escorts and 0-2 convoys destroyed vs 8-15 convoys destroyed.

 

[parnis]

In reference to your question 4, the part about generic corps builds:

General's greatest span of command runs in multiples of 3: Major Generals can command up to 3 divisions (with brigades or not) efficiently, Lieutenant Generals = 6, Generals = 9, Field Marshals = 12. So most people tend to make armies that are multiples of 3 divisions.

Personally, I segregate my divisions into corps based on movement speed. Since artillery bridges slow units down (no other brigade does that I can recall), I group divisions with it into separate corps, at least unless I am expecting to mount a defence in a static position. (Actually, in spite of the span of command, I tend to stick with 3 and 6 division armies. I used to use 9, but that proved too cumbersome. The higher ranks are still very useful, however, because they allow you to launch larger attacks with efficiency.)

I also usually segregate Militia into separate corps, since it does not have the offensive potential of regular infantry (unless equipped with Artillery, which slows it down).

 

[jdavis86]

Thanks for all the help guys.

I've played through a few different tries now, my longest being an Ottoman game that's in 1916 now. I've been using the AAR Grand Campaign MOD.

Perhaps this is MOD related, but I find the 1st war goes pretty quick. France seems to beat Germany in about a year. I suspect this is related to Germany having success on the Eastern front and getting deeper there.

Anyway, I'm enjoying things.

The "feel" and immersion is far deeper and more satisfying. With regard to land wars I feel more like a strategic minded General. Though most of my Ottoman campaign was spent holding fronts where I could, and playing footsy (maneuvering wars) with the British in the mid east.

Results of battles don't seem as predictable as they are in HOI3. In Darkest Hour, I feel I'm experiencing a unique occurrence with variables being Generals.

Things I find odd:

in my Ottoman game the war ended in late 1916 and I had not produced a single division. My IC was constantly tied up in supplies and getting my considerable dissent down. After that I thought it best to get the instant rewards of upgrading my exceptionally outdated divisions facing the British, which helped stall them.

My navy (though lacking in techs and doctrines no doubt) really sucked. Even with the bought British battlecruisers making it home. I made a fleet of 8-9 ships and they were insta sunk by a British fleet of 30, and after a reload the Russian fleet did the same.

When peace came I was a bit frustrated with the deal. In this game Germany actually beat France first and Austria Hungary held out too. Anticipating Russia peaceing soon, I grabbed Sevastopol in a daring amphibious op. My goals were to secure Crimea and Baku. I was able to do both. When peace was made, I didn't get either . Germany took Crimea and Baku turned into a puppet.

Perhaps these are programmed results, in which case my efforts securing certain pieces of land don't matter. Or are there hidden modifiers that dictate peace results?

My last complaint is that the war doesn't feel like a long, drawn out effort. Maybe this is just because of my country choice?

In HOI3 two years at war is a considerable amount of time where your armed forces change dramatically.

 

[IGGEL]

On the thing about peace deals, did you right-click a province in Crimea and claim the area? Usually this gets you that place in the peace deal.

 

[jdavis86]

Oh no I sure didn't. I'll try going back to an old save and doing that, thanks!

 

[Epaminondas]

When I first encountered DH I thought this was one of the most player-friendly features it offered, and I'd still rank it in my top five. In order to raise a claim as part of your peace offer you just do what IGGEL outlined. How easy is that!

 

[jdavis86]

So I'm trying to figure out what ESE is...anyone?