Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Is there too much manpower?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Hearts of Iron IV 45491 Bug Reports 15181 After Action Reports (AAR)
billcorr said:
Yes.

And I most heartily endorse your use of an exclamation point.

MOO!

Such a statement deserves nothing less than at least 1 exclamation point.

Some enthusiasts would suggest that 2 or 3 would be more appropriate.

That's from MOO!!!

:D
Click to expand...

billcorr said:
Yes.

And I most heartily endorse your use of an exclamation point.

MOO!

Such a statement deserves nothing less than at least 1 exclamation point.

Some enthusiasts would suggest that 2 or 3 would be more appropriate.

That's from MOO!!!

:D
Click to expand...
MOO 2 was great too. :)
 
I try to limit myself in SP using conscription laws. So, my last game as USA was played with limited conscription, which gave me a number of divisions (100+/-) that was fairly realistic compared to real life, although I had a huge surplus of equipment.
 
Too much manpower, divisions are too cheap, logistics are too easy. It's a game.
Maybe at some point with the new addition of game rules we will see a more historically balanced set of settings, but I wouldn't expect those earlier than four or five years from now.
 
Zwireq said:
Screenshot is from MoO 2.
Click to expand...
It has been a LONG time since I played either!
halvorni said:
I try to limit myself in SP using conscription laws. So, my last game as USA was played with limited conscription, which gave me a number of divisions (100+/-) that was fairly realistic compared to real life, although I had a huge surplus of equipment.
Click to expand...
I was at volunteer in my China game, and still had more manpower than I could use. But it was China...
 
Wow. I've never had that kind of casualty count happen before in a game. Every game for me, consistently, is Britain, America, and the USSR each losing 4 million men each, Germany losing 6-8 million men, Japan losing around 2-3 million men, and myself a few hundred thousand.

Personally, I think there are too many DIVISIONS in the game, but that's just me complaining about walls of infantry spanning the longest borders without seeing any real unit diversity on the enemy's side. I know that in-game divisions are significantly smaller than IRL divisions that operate over multiple in-game provinces.
 
The_Meme_Man said:
Wow. I've never had that kind of casualty count happen before in a game. Every game for me, consistently, is Britain, America, and the USSR each losing 4 million men each, Germany losing 6-8 million men, Japan losing around 2-3 million men, and myself a few hundred thousand.

Personally, I think there are too many DIVISIONS in the game, but that's just me complaining about walls of infantry spanning the longest borders without seeing any real unit diversity on the enemy's side. I know that in-game divisions are significantly smaller than IRL divisions that operate over multiple in-game provinces.
Click to expand...
The UK, Italy, and Germany were all on "scraping the bottom of the barrel" in manpower laws.
 
Speaking about manpower problems in HoIIV.
gSYeZOj.jpg
 
ltccone said:
The Allies and I defeated Germany in July of 1948. At the time of Germany's surrender, she still had 150 divisions in the field.

I agree with you. I saw pretty much what you have. The AI can't do pockets so most manpower was lost due to under equiped divisions.

And playing China was weird. I had united China, and literally had more manpower than I knew what to do with. I ended up fielding more than 800 divisions (I ended the war with 24 modern armor divsions, and they sucked. They had no designer and bad doctrines; I had to outnumber panzer divisons at least 4-1 to beat them), more than I could use. And I still had over 10 million manpower in my pool as volunteers.
Click to expand...

In Victoria II, the mobilization size is affected by industry tech (railway, etc) and political ideologies (nationalism, etc). However, in HOI4, only conscription laws. Besides, in Victoria, only the pops from primary or accepted cultures can be mobilized.

China, by that time, had neither the infrastructure nor the economy to support an European style mobilization. The conscription efficiency of many third world countries should be seriously nerfed.
 
Zwireq said:
80 'divisions' of 1 INF look powerful on paper... But in reality it ain't that much.
Click to expand...
1 inf divisions is a 100000 soldiers on lowest estimates. Luxembourg had a 300000 population in HoIIV. Scraping the Barrel is 25% recruitment bonuse here and there and you have about 30% for said result of 100000.
This is the problem of HoIIV - devs wanteв to make minors able to field enough divisions to make a stand gagainst majors and this resulted in situation when smallest country in the world could field 100000 soldiers. Yugoslavia with 12 millions of core pop could field 650 20-width divisions (1000 manpower each brigade). By the late game world is swarming with minor armies.
 
Technoincubus said:
1 inf divisions is a 100000 soldiers on lowest estimates. Luxembourg had a 300000 population in HoIIV. Scraping the Barrel is 25% recruitment bonuse here and there and you have about 30% for said result of 100000.
This is the problem of HoIIV - devs wanteв to make minors able to field enough divisions to make a stand gagainst majors and this resulted in situation when smallest country in the world could field 100000 soldiers. Yugoslavia with 12 millions of core pop could field 650 20-width divisions (1000 manpower each brigade). By the late game world is swarming with minor armies.
Click to expand...

Then again I understand perfectly why they did it: if you're locked behind abysmal manpower, you really cannot do much. They wanted that you can do interesting stuff with nations such as Greece, New Zealand and Finland. I think it should always be possible to theoretically do a world conquest with any nation in any Paradox game.

If attrition caused some manpower losses I'd imagine manpower would work better.
 
James Hale said:
Yes, because support and logistics roles aren't represented, and convoys don't use manpower.
Click to expand...

Exactly this, for everyman on the front lines there was many times that in the rear supporting him one way or another. HOI has never represented the people in the rear.

I'm sure there manpower numbers are pretty close but they don't take into account the millions in the rear in C&C and Logistics
 
tazaaron said:
Exactly this, for everyman on the front lines there was many times that in the rear supporting him one way or another. HOI has never represented the people in the rear.

I'm sure there manpower numbers are pretty close but they don't take into account the millions in the rear in C&C and Logistics
Click to expand...
Tbh I wish they added a pool that required both manpower and equipment the larger your military, territory and the longer your supply lines are. The pool would represent all the things you mentioned as well as garrison forces too small to represent on-map (i.e. province control), etc. You could then have a few tiers of bonuses or maluses, based on how well manned and supplied that pool would be.

Might be easier said than done though, especially without making it into yet another "gotta micro this once in a while" minigame like they did with MEFO bills.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Matoro_TBS said:
Then again I understand perfectly why they did it: if you're locked behind abysmal manpower, you really cannot do much. They wanted that you can do interesting stuff with nations such as Greece, New Zealand and Finland. I think it should always be possible to theoretically do a world conquest with any nation in any Paradox game.
Click to expand...

I'd like to find some way to enable "Finland world conquest" without screwing up the mainline historical game too much. Maybe make it a bit easier to for small minors to gain cores on conquered territory? Like you can core something for a political power cost proportional to the value of your current cores. That way it's an unlikely but possible political evolution rather free manpower for everyone?, and doesn't derail the majors much.
 
@podcat

Have you seen this thread?
 
billcorr said:
  • 4 population to farming
  • 1 population to mining
  • 5 population to research
  • (4 population to military in lower left corner...not quite "allocating". I think those are builds. But the idea is there. )
Click to expand...

As much as i love MOO (more version 1 than 2 though) it is so insane that half of the population is doing research. In real life only a handful of people doing that. I can easily imagine a hundred times or more people doing farming and food related activities than doing research activities, including food related research.
 
@kettyo When it is abstracted that far, the chef and janitor at the lab count as research, so does the security guard at the base perimeter. As does all the guys working in the fab shop that makes the bespoke parts, the teamster who transports it, and of course the scientists who conduct tests on it and engineers who apply it to the real world.

That said, 50% on research is bonkers compared to real life labor divisions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back