Inevitable Defeat - Slovakia '44

[SgtGranite]

The Allies pushed Ecuador back into it's capital sometime back in July (in game, 2015 in real-time), so Fortress Quito has resisted the enemy for six months. They are a formidable foe.

Can we get more details about the Ecuadorian war? Who knows how many "generals" who were in their teens in reality are among the South American generals leading the epic siege of fortress quito? Or maybe there are some American divisions inexplicably wearing Peruvian uniforms along for the ride?

 

[Jaimie Wolf]

I'll stick with Stilton, Cheddar, Danish Blue and Geitost thanks (always found French cheese over-rated to be honest). But good work on highlighting one of the many advantages of slower-than-real-time.

Now you've gone and done it!
I've always thought of you as a man of fine taste but you english people just won't acknowledge it won't you? You and your icky cheddar... *shudders*

Anyways, great to see the french back! Now nothing stands in the way of the top-secret plan of german high command!

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Can we get more details about the Ecuadorian war? Who knows how many "generals" who were in their teens in reality are among the South American generals leading the epic siege of fortress quito? Or maybe there are some American divisions inexplicably wearing Peruvian uniforms along for the ride?

Oh good point. If the pro axis game can't ve bothered with german accuracy, what on earth did it do to the amercias?

 

[El Pip]

Can we get more details about the Ecuadorian war? Who knows how many "generals" who were in their teens in reality are among the South American generals leading the epic siege of fortress quito? Or maybe there are some American divisions inexplicably wearing Peruvian uniforms along for the ride?

I had a State of the War briefing planned for the next update, I shall include the latest news from South America in int.

Now you've gone and done it!
I've always thought of you as a man of fine taste but you english people just won't acknowledge it won't you? You and your icky cheddar... *shudders*

Anyways, great to see the french back! Now nothing stands in the way of the top-secret plan of german high command!

I can only feel the deepest pity for those who are unable to appreciate a proper cheddar and I hope that one day, with help, you can appreciate what you are missing out on. As 50 Cent once didn't sing;
If you are having cheddar problems I feel bad for you son
I got ninety nine cheeses but a brie ain't one

Oh good point. If the pro axis game can't ve bothered with german accuracy, what on earth did it do to the amercias?

Last time I looked there were some truly horrible things happening down there. I'm sure a closer look will reveal endless seems of failed 'research'.

 

[Wraith11B]

As 50 Cent once didn't sing;
If you are having cheddar problems I feel bad for you son
I got ninety nine cheeses but a brie ain't one

Last time I looked there were some truly horrible things happening down there. I'm sure a closer look will reveal endless seems of failed 'research'.

I mentioned this somewhere else, but there is literally no one who held major fleet nor army commands that is available in the US Army nor US Navy in the 1936 start.

 

[TheButterflyComposer]

Therefore proving that paradox thinks the US military was so shit in 1936 that anything they could make up would be better...

They are of course wrong but it's funny how bare faced the game is, if its true.

 

[Jaimie Wolf]

I believe I must admit that I never, not even once in my live, have been dissed with so much style. Even though I can appreciate the form you bring forth your so called argument, I still have to disagree.

The only place where Cheddar will get somewhat near my tastebuds is on a burger, and only because I can't be bothered to peel it off. (But I'm actually not sure that it is really Chedder and not only named like it.)

 

[El Pip]

I mentioned this somewhere else, but there is literally no one who held major fleet nor army commands that is available in the US Army nor US Navy in the 1936 start.

Wise words from Mr Cube there. You have mentioned this incredible US fact elsewhere, and the worst part is it's not even surprising. It's exactly the sort of thing Paradox would do.

Therefore proving that paradox thinks the US military was so shit in 1936 that anything they could make up would be better...

They are of course wrong but it's funny how bare faced the game is, if its true.

This is the same game that has the famed Saudi commander Brigadier Lethbridge-Stewart and gives Tibet Captain Mainwaring as an option for Chief of Staff (with his 'brother' Robert Mainwaring as Armaments or Intelligence).

Oh yeah and the Saudis can recruit Zombie Lawrence of Arabia as a commander and various military ministers (T E Shaw died in 1935).

But all of that is frankly nothing compared to what I have discovered in South America. It's probably going to get it's own separate post.

I believe I must admit that I never, not even once in my live, have been dissed with so much style. Even though I can appreciate the form you bring forth your so called argument, I still have to disagree.

I've done my best, I will pray for you and your tastebuds.

The only place where Cheddar will get somewhat near my tastebuds is on a burger, and only because I can't be bothered to peel it off. (But I'm actually not sure that it is really Chedder and not only named like it.)

That is 100% not Cheddar. Proper Cheddar cannot be peeled. I believe you are describing American Cheese-effect Plastic. I understand it is made in oil refineries using all the left-over bits the chemical companies don't want.

 

[nuclearslurpee]

Wise words from Mr Cube there. You have mentioned this incredible US fact elsewhere, and the worst part is it's not even surprising. It's exactly the sort of thing Paradox would do.

In Paradox's badly-needed defense, this is one of the relatively few research errors that could actually have a valid reason, which would be to prevent generals and admirals who were in the services in 1936 but retired prior to the war from taking part in said war. That being said, I can't imagine that the entire US military command hierarchy in 1936 contained not one man who later participated in the war, so by all means let us continue to heap scorn on Paradox, all the same!

 

[Wraith11B]

In Paradox's badly-needed defense, this is one of the relatively few research errors that could actually have a valid reason, which would be to prevent generals and admirals who were in the services in 1936 but retired prior to the war from taking part in said war. That being said, I can't imagine that the entire US military command hierarchy in 1936 contained not one man who later participated in the war, so by all means let us continue to heap scorn on Paradox, all the same!

I agree, that's fair. But not having a very simple set of "retirement" criteria that could have been implemented for those who did retire or die prior to the war shouldn't have been that hard. I'm sure that more than a few of the generals who were laying about in the files are those who were around at the time and available for the war, but there are also lots of things like "No General in the US Army was more than a Major General (ie, they were only "temporarily" promoted to various ranks that were held until well into the war) didn't really make much sense.

 

[roverS3]

Merry Christmas, though not so merry for the French. I have to admit. First they get their promised holiday taken away, then they get their cheese insulted.

To weigh in on the whole Cheddar debate, I'm quite a cheese aficionado, I like all kinds: Blue, white, yellow, orange, hard, runny, smelly, young, old, French, British, Swiss, Dutch... But, that said, I have tasted some truly terrible 'cheddar'. This is, of course, no fault of Cheddar in itself, but more the fault of those who produce cheap extra-orange, extra-icky knock offs. I have been to the cheddar gorge, and have eaten some truly great cheddar, but somehow cheddar is quite vulnerable to cheap plasticy versions of it being made for foreign markets. Even here in Belgium, there is one brand of cheddar that is absolutely revolting, but others are decent to excellent. Just saying, not all Cheddar is 'icky'... I'll leave you with this unsolicited advice: When you're outside of Britain, don't buy the cheapest brand of Cheddar in the supermarket, you will most likely regret it, even if you love cheddar.

That said. Brie is great too. All cheeses matter. (except cheap icky knock-offs)

 

[Bullfilter]

Haha, I’m glad I started off a whole cheese correspondence by referencing Python’s Cheeseshop sketch! This is the beauty of slower than real time AAR commentary.

 

[Surt]

Well a river is a mighty general...

 

[El Pip]

In Paradox's badly-needed defense, this is one of the relatively few research errors that could actually have a valid reason, which would be to prevent generals and admirals who were in the services in 1936 but retired prior to the war from taking part in said war. That being said, I can't imagine that the entire US military command hierarchy in 1936 contained not one man who later participated in the war, so by all means let us continue to heap scorn on Paradox, all the same!

I admire your efforts to attempt the impossible and defend Paradox. But alas they have let you down;

The US starting generals in 1936 include Gibbs (retired in 1931, running a postal telegram company), LeJeune (retired 1929), Polin (who was Adjutant-General of the Kentucky Militia, which I gather isn't the same as the US army) and Bash (Quartermaster General, which again isn't quite right, and he retired in early 1936).

I agree, that's fair. But not having a very simple set of "retirement" criteria that could have been implemented for those who did retire or die prior to the war shouldn't have been that hard. I'm sure that more than a few of the generals who were laying about in the files are those who were around at the time and available for the war, but there are also lots of things like "No General in the US Army was more than a Major General (ie, they were only "temporarily" promoted to various ranks that were held until well into the war) didn't really make much sense.

In fairness HOI2 had a "Start" and "End" date for generals which achieved exactly that. Paradox decided to remove that from HOI3 because... Sweden? Genuinely it is a baffling step backwards that I can't really understand, especially given how much "research" (or lack of it) they did carry over.

Merry Christmas, though not so merry for the French. I have to admit. First they get their promised holiday taken away, then they get their cheese insulted.

To weigh in on the whole Cheddar debate, I'm quite a cheese aficionado, I like all kinds: Blue, white, yellow, orange, hard, runny, smelly, young, old, French, British, Swiss, Dutch... But, that said, I have tasted some truly terrible 'cheddar'. This is, of course, no fault of Cheddar in itself, but more the fault of those who produce cheap extra-orange, extra-icky knock offs. I have been to the cheddar gorge, and have eaten some truly great cheddar, but somehow cheddar is quite vulnerable to cheap plasticy versions of it being made for foreign markets. Even here in Belgium, there is one brand of cheddar that is absolutely revolting, but others are decent to excellent. Just saying, not all Cheddar is 'icky'... I'll leave you with this unsolicited advice: When you're outside of Britain, don't buy the cheapest brand of Cheddar in the supermarket, you will most likely regret it, even if you love cheddar.

That said. Brie is great too. All cheeses matter. (except cheap icky knock-offs)

Some excellent Cheese wisdom there.

Haha, I’m glad I started off a whole cheese correspondence by referencing Python’s Cheeseshop sketch! This is the beauty of slower than real time AAR commentary.

Like all El Pip AARs we focus on the important things that others may skim over. There are loads of people who will go into too much detail about Panzers around Smolensk, but where else can you discuss quality cheeses and the Adjutant-General of Kentucky?

Well a river is a mighty general...

I'm missing something here. Probably because I've just wasted prime update writing time looking up how badly wrong Paradox was about US generals and so am not quite 100%. If you could explain this to me I would deem it a service.

 

[Surt]

Rivers gives a penalty to attack, often bigger than the Generals direct bonus to the combat.

 

[El Pip]

Rivers gives a penalty to attack, often bigger than the Generals direct bonus to the combat.

I did wonder if it was a suggestion that Slovakia try to recruit a Vodyanoy or something similar.

But something to do with the game mechanics does make a lot more sense.

 

[nuclearslurpee]

I admire your efforts to attempt the impossible and defend Paradox. But alas they have let you down

I am shocked, I tell you. Simply shocked.

In fairness HOI2 had a "Start" and "End" date for generals which achieved exactly that. Paradox decided to remove that from HOI3 because... Sweden? Genuinely it is a baffling step backwards that I can't really understand, especially given how much "research" (or lack of it) they did carry over.

I believe they may have chosen to take that feature out to avoid the occurrences where a general would evaporate from their command halfway through a major operation, particularly since if I recall correctly HoI2 did not have generals commanding individual divisions but had divisions grouped under the command of a single general with a corps/army level position. In HoI3 with many generals commanding at the division level and so many generals overall I can see perhaps why they took that feature out.

I also believe, but have not confirmed, that the end dates still work in the sense that if you try to load up a later start date, generals with an end date before that will not be present.

I now look forward to the inevitable counterpoint from Lord El Pip in which he digs up a decade-old developer blog post which lays out that all of the above is wrong and they really just took out the generals-dying feature because they were drunk and accidentally deleted the source code or something.

 

[El Pip]

I believe they may have chosen to take that feature out to avoid the occurrences where a general would evaporate from their command halfway through a major operation, particularly since if I recall correctly HoI2 did not have generals commanding individual divisions but had divisions grouped under the command of a single general with a corps/army level position. In HoI3 with many generals commanding at the division level and so many generals overall I can see perhaps why they took that feature out.

I also believe, but have not confirmed, that the end dates still work in the sense that if you try to load up a later start date, generals with an end date before that will not be present.

I now look forward to the inevitable counterpoint from Lord El Pip in which he digs up a decade-old developer blog post which lays out that all of the above is wrong and they really just took out the generals-dying feature because they were drunk and accidentally deleted the source code or something.

Never let it be said I am not willing to admit mistakes. After this I went back and checked and it's a bit of mixture.

In HOI2 every leader had a end date, but it didn't work as you would expect. All it did was dramatically increase that leader's chance of dying in combat if it was later than that date. In theory it was supposed to stop them being loaded up when you started a new game if it was later than that date, but I don't think that ever worked properly. (Also HOI2 did have individual generals controlling divisions and similar total number of generals, so no excuse for Paradox there)

The HOI3 solution was remove all end dates and instead play around with the ranks. The data files now say that when a leader died/retired they achieve rank = 0 . Rank =1 is the lowest the game will recognise, so this effectively removes them from the roster, BUT those data files only get checked when starting a game for the first time and then never again. This means generals no longer disappear, but flip side is that if you start in 1936 (or whenever) and play through, then lots of leaders who should be dead/retired never get cleared out.

So Paradox did change the system because it was causing generals to disappear with no warning. However this was only a problem because generals disappearing with no warning was a deliberate design decision they had made but failed to document properly or integrate into the UI. So while I may have got the details wrong, in essence it was still a baffling series of mistakes that caused all this.

If some kind person(s) could give us a couple of replies that will take us to the top of a new page and in exchange I will post a new update.

 

[SgtGranite]

Solving one problem in just the right way to create a new one? That's Paradox, alright.

 

[Bullfilter]

One more reply to finish this page off? Voila!