Link volunteers to width rather than divisions

[Pyramid_Head]

Right now, only limiting factor that matters for volunteers is number of divisions. Also a total number of divisions
Problem is it is extremely exploitable by human players. 1936 starts with war in Ethiopia. 2 Mountaineer divisions could completely crush anything Italy can throw at them or at least stall their advance.
For SWC, China and other wars 40+ width divisions render AI's efforts pointless because AI is extremely bad at dealing with them and min-maxed templates.
The solution I see as optimal is to link volunteers to width. This way, we can prevent Space Marines divisions being sent to fight in every conflict and foreign involvement would be scaled according to conflict's proportions.

 

[Alex_brunius]

How do you get enough Army XP to make an effective 40+ width division in place for the Spanish Civil war which usually starts within the first months of the game?


"foreign involvement would be scaled according to conflict's proportions."

Currently how much you can send depends only on size of your own army, how do you suggest to scale it to the proportions of the conflict instead?

 

[permanently_afk]

Right now, only limiting factor that matters for volunteers is number of divisions. Also a total number of divisions
Problem is it is extremely exploitable by human players. 1936 starts with war in Ethiopia. 2 Mountaineer divisions could completely crush anything Italy can throw at them or at least stall their advance.
For SWC, China and other wars 40+ width divisions render AI's efforts pointless because AI is extremely bad at dealing with them and min-maxed templates.
The solution I see as optimal is to link volunteers to width. This way, we can prevent Space Marines divisions being sent to fight in every conflict and foreign involvement would be scaled according to conflict's proportions.

While I agree with the sentiment and proposition, I'd question how to practically implement it. Hard cap would be out (same problem as with combat width in the 1.0), soft cap idk.

I'd suggest implementing this as part of a "intervention in civil war" overhaul. We'll probably get it with either Spain or China. For concept: Volunteer divisions serve as "teeth" in a conflict which is on its own is pretty low-intensity. Afaik, when states send fighting' volunteers it was most often a stop-gap measure or a prelude. Time-limiting the presence of the divisions and introducing follow-on mechanics (e.g. creates something like military advisors) would a good solution.

 

[HaikuEU]

Expeditionary force template should be fixed (let say 6 INF). Then you just choose if you want to send them (and how many). They will get created drafting from your manpool and your equipement reserve. That's it, problem solved.

Maybe some countries or circumstances (such as tech / Ideology / year) could change expeditionary template to get more variance and flexibility.

 

[permanently_afk]

Expeditionary force template should be fixed (let say 6 INF). Then you just choose if you want to send them (and how many). They will get created drafting from your manpool and your equipement reserve. That's it, problem solved.

And thats adding to the game how? Currently you are intended to play "tipping the scales" - historically many volunteers provided skills not available to the forces (Airforce, tanks, more airforce, training, maintenance and medical). Your suggestion boils down to "more bodies, yay!" which is something the most likely canidates for volunteers in game (Spain, China) have enough of. So no, bad suggestion.

 

[Pyramid_Head]

How do you get enough Army XP to make an effective 40+ width division in place for the Spanish Civil war which usually starts within the first months of the game?

"foreign involvement would be scaled according to conflict's proportions."

Currently how much you can send depends only on size of your own army, how do you suggest to scale it to the proportions of the conflict instead?

2 MTN in Ethiopia provides me with enough army EXP to prepare 40 width for SCW and then it snowball for China-Japan war. Usually I duplicate into separate volunteer division template and then inflate it on the run, adding more and more until 40 width cap.
Amount of troops to be sent could be scaled to receiving party's either width or division number or number of states under control or other parameter determined to be most representative for defining factor.
For example, now China can receive 12 if I am not mistaken, divisions. That's huge. Players overturned Jap-Chi war with four 20 width divs. 12 40 width ones leave Janap no chance for victory.

 

[HaikuEU]

And thats adding to the game how? Currently you are intended to play "tipping the scales" - historically many volunteers provided skills not available to the forces (Airforce, tanks, more airforce, training, maintenance and medical). Your suggestion boils down to "more bodies, yay!" which is something the most likely canidates for volunteers in game (Spain, China) have enough of. So no, bad suggestion.

Good points for sure, but 6 INF was a just an example. Also, don't forget your troops benefit from your equipement and your doctrine that could be way better than your ally.

And that being said, you could allow major, or major fascist (or whatever criteria sound historical and balance to PDX) to have an improved template ? Or could even be a NF.

But anyway I agree with OP that I always feel like a cheater when I send whole army divisions with latetest equipement to fight overseas as expeditionary forces in China (or elsewhere)

 

[Pyramid_Head]

Expeditionary forces is a nice feature, but one aspect makes it a wild and weird mechanic. Division spam. Every minor can spawn legions of divisions without significant effort. So certain countries can end up swarming in exp.forces coming from thin air.

 

[HaruhiFollower]

This can indeed be a problem as everything operates using divisions - you can raise your cap using one-battalion garrison cavalry (which is useful in its own right...) and use it to send full divisions. Switching both cap calculations and size of volunteer forces to battalions (or width, but I would argue seeing width outside of the division designer would not be kosher) could alleviate some of the problems.

 

[Pyramid_Head]

40-width mountaneers division is an overkill, which renders AI completely unable to cope with it. Worst part is that you can inflate your divisions on the run. You can send 3 16-width divisions and then turn them into a 40 width divisions only from exp they'll earn in battles. Japan can, ironically, overwhelm your volunteers with numbers but if they do not Chinese mountains could easily become an impregnable barrier for them.
This should not happen. 4 divisions should not be able to stop 40.

 

[Pyramid_Head]

Ok I tried that with coups and its ridiculous. Send 1-2 divisions and then inflate them into a juggernaut on the run. Slowly turning into a hard counter of what enemy have. Make them hold capital indefinitely and allow rebels to reinforce via land-lease to advance. Even upcoming changes to Sino-japanese wars would not help when two 40-width mountaineers can block entire front from pushing and comchi from collapsing.