Baltasar, if you didn't notice the plan is to get the Guangxi Clique into our alliance
I did, I just don't like it
-
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 did, I just don't like it
Thanks for this map Surt (from this thread)
As I mentioned above, it looks ambitious compared to the historical invasion with the extra southern landings. I guess the situation in the south with the Guangxi Clique is the key and provides a strategic opportunity. If you can pocket and destroy those 20 divisions only supply limits can stop your progress here.
As I mentioned above, it looks ambitious compared to the historical invasion with the extra southern landings. I guess the situation in the south with the Guangxi Clique is the key and provides a strategic opportunity. If you can pocket and destroy those 20 divisions only supply limits can stop your progress here.
Just wanted to say I'm still following this. It's difficult to comment on an interactive AAR when 90% of the gameplay comments are arguing over plans... I see that changing soon though, due to the upcoming conflict with China.
The original historical invasion was only the northern and eastern campaigns, but was then extended later to all harbours and then further to defeat GaungXi to cut China off Vietnam and close the Burma road.
Last edited:
That may be true. The bickering part is the whole point of interactive AARs, though
.True. After the Japanese realised that China wouldn't fold so easily and that harsh terrain and poor infrastructure meant that the campaign wouldn't be so fast, they tried to strangle the Chinese while trying to get more resources themselves by capturing the colonies.
What I was trying to say in the game thread about resources is that in HPP we get a penalty on resource production after we get a sufficient large store of them, and the more we have stored the more penalty, so the trade AI will not adjust for this penalty in its need calculation and will happily buy more resources even when we have a penalty of -15%, for example with 43K energy we get a large penalty on the energy production (can't remember how big, but its significant) you can see it if you mouse over one of our energy resources on the map.
The same happens with metal and soon with rare materials, the first limit seems to be 12K:6K:3K for energy, metal and rare (again I haven't looked at the code for the exact numbers) and then for each multiple or doubling of that amount.
The same happens with metal and soon with rare materials, the first limit seems to be 12K:6K:3K for energy, metal and rare (again I haven't looked at the code for the exact numbers) and then for each multiple or doubling of that amount.
The AI seems to take it into account... and even if it doesn't, it has never imported energy in our case. It's mostly importing rare materials (which are at a critically low level), some metal and supplies. Also, storage problems are based on total IC, so they don't start at so low levels for high-IC countries.
Regarding the lack of army leaders, I suspect that will ease with each new year. If we need to, we have to shift leaders around so that all front line units have a leader.
I assume that this is not an issue for the navy?
I assume that this is not an issue for the navy?
No, the navy and the air force are fine.
Yeah, new leaders become available each year, but I don't know how big we want the army to get. In China we are naturally constrained by the local infrastructure, but considering the sheer size of the area we hope to cover one day - China, SE Asia, eastern Russia, India, the Pacific islands - it will need to be sizeable.
Still, it's a rather distant future, considering the fact that we have just begun the war with China
Yeah, new leaders become available each year, but I don't know how big we want the army to get. In China we are naturally constrained by the local infrastructure, but considering the sheer size of the area we hope to cover one day - China, SE Asia, eastern Russia, India, the Pacific islands - it will need to be sizeable.
Still, it's a rather distant future, considering the fact that we have just begun the war with China
So far we are doing worse with more troops than my test game but it can yet change.
The southern pocket yielded 20-30 enemy divisions but the Qingdao one only 1, but I wasn't able to advance fast despite this devastating defeat due to fewer troops.
The difference might be I didn't set the goal on the VP north of Guangxi before the defeat of the pocket, this could have led to the bad performance of the Guangxi in the AAR.
We wont be able to build much more army this year that needs leaders so it wont be a problem this year I think.
The southern pocket yielded 20-30 enemy divisions but the Qingdao one only 1, but I wasn't able to advance fast despite this devastating defeat due to fewer troops.
The difference might be I didn't set the goal on the VP north of Guangxi before the defeat of the pocket, this could have led to the bad performance of the Guangxi in the AAR.
We wont be able to build much more army this year that needs leaders so it wont be a problem this year I think.
You could instead consider investing in mountaineers or adding more brigades to the divisions.
I assure you that it is just the beginning. When you start crying like little babies that the game is too hard, this will be a sign for me that I need to raise the difficulty even higher and you will finally understand what "superhard" difficulty means in my book
This game is supposed to be a challenge.
This game is supposed to be a challenge.
Last edited:
I haven't even considered building mountain units as they would require around 5 more techs to keep up ... some are the same as the marines but they are not being researched either.
Which techs are you referring to?
In one of the previous updates I mentioned that several techs connected with marines were researched, as most of the IJN's naval techs were up to date and the Navy requested more investment into CAGs and marines. It may be possible that some of the techs you have in mind are already researched.
Personally, I think we are doing well research-wise.
Ah I see in last tech update that all the light weapons are done, which leaves only mountain(once), special forces, mountain/amphibious warfare.
I'd rather invest in Bridging and maybe assault weapons, which also helps both special forces and our inf.
Regarding us being up to date I see I have totally forgotten the critical De-/En-cryption machines and radio detection now we got radars.
Not to mention single engine plane techs which are '39 start and benefit both navy and army.
I also see loads of navy techs that need to be researched still which are much more important that mountains and marines, this includes the CV doctrines, fire control, target, radar, basing, scout planes, small warship radar, ASW(or is it from '40?) just to mention a few. Underway replacement is optional I think and expensive in upgrades but the limited range might bite us later. These including the common techs would use all navy research for the rest of the year.
Mind I'm not trying to be negative, but I think we are only just holding us above water tech wise, and that only because we skipped all the fluff
Also to win the war we need more navy and less marines in my experience, the earlier build the better. Of course if we don't attack the US we don't need more navy! :unsure:
I'd rather invest in Bridging and maybe assault weapons, which also helps both special forces and our inf.
Regarding us being up to date I see I have totally forgotten the critical De-/En-cryption machines
and radio detection now we got radars.Not to mention single engine plane techs which are '39 start and benefit both navy and army.
I also see loads of navy techs that need to be researched still which are much more important that mountains and marines, this includes the CV doctrines, fire control, target, radar, basing, scout planes, small warship radar, ASW(or is it from '40?) just to mention a few. Underway replacement is optional I think and expensive in upgrades but the limited range might bite us later. These including the common techs would use all navy research for the rest of the year.
Mind I'm not trying to be negative, but I think we are only just holding us above water tech wise, and that only because we skipped all the fluff
Also to win the war we need more navy and less marines in my experience, the earlier build the better. Of course if we don't attack the US we don't need more navy! :unsure:
There is no way to avoid a war with the Allies/USA if we want to expand beyond China/Russia.
Also, some years are more "busy" tech-wise than other ones, due to historical years restrictions and your reluctance to research techs ahead. In HPP it is pretty much impossible to research everything at the same pace. The nature of this AAR makes this even harder.
Moreover, as long as we are at war with China and are doing sth more than just defending our positions, our IC situation will be a bit difficult. IC expansion is good for the future, but it prevents us from building more now. It might or might not be a good strategy. ATM it makes our resource situation even more troubling. Also, it might be hard to build IC-heavy stuff like ships, aircraft, armour, radars etc. in great numbers while most of the IC will be needed for supplies, upgrades and reinforcements.
Also, some years are more "busy" tech-wise than other ones, due to historical years restrictions and your reluctance to research techs ahead. In HPP it is pretty much impossible to research everything at the same pace. The nature of this AAR makes this even harder.
Moreover, as long as we are at war with China and are doing sth more than just defending our positions, our IC situation will be a bit difficult. IC expansion is good for the future, but it prevents us from building more now. It might or might not be a good strategy. ATM it makes our resource situation even more troubling. Also, it might be hard to build IC-heavy stuff like ships, aircraft, armour, radars etc. in great numbers while most of the IC will be needed for supplies, upgrades and reinforcements.
Last edited:
Very heavy losses for the Nationalist Chinese in the opening shots.
If only the pocket it the south had held out everything would have worked out nicely. Perhaps the Guangxi Clique deliberately gave ground.
If only the pocket it the south had held out everything would have worked out nicely. Perhaps the Guangxi Clique deliberately gave ground.