More advantages for drafted armies!

[unmerged(41949)]

A drafted army policy has been historically preferred by several countries for several good reasons - drafted armies were often cheaper, larger and more quickly raised than their standing counterparts. But in my own opinion the trade-off between "quality" and "quantity" is not really implemented in the game. The issue is actually a no-brainer: drafted armies have such major disadvantages when compared to standing ones that there's little or reason to move the slider rightwards.

I think that countries favoring a drafting army should be able to recruit at least INF, GAR and MIL at a reduced time, IC and manpower cost (the last one reflecting the facts that more people are to be recruited) comparing to countries favoring a standing army. So that the country has a choice between a skilled, experienced, professional military and a large, cheap, drafted one.

 

[HMS Enterprize]

Some articles on topic such as these I recently read actually seemed to indicate the opposite (at least post-ww2)- that by the time you factor in economics and technology a conscripted force is actually dearer than a volunteer force. (the fact that most states now are at best part-conscript if not full all-volunteer, seems to bear this out)

But in game terms- infantry are certainly recruited cheaper if you follow the appropriate doctrines and time will be factored in in IC days.

And 1 manpower is 1 manpower- so I dont really see how full conscript state should be able to recruit for less manpower- that doesnt really make sense.

 

[unmerged(54933)]

I think beria want to say that there is a small difference between standing army (germany) and conscripted army.
I know that for the russia with concript/central planing is creating a new division at the same cost (or cheaper) as upgrading one. But I think that the way of building only new units is not the right historical way.
I playing as russia was allways moving conscript/standing army to standing as i can and upgraded my units.

But there may be one way i think. Historicaly russian Rifle division was 2/3 of german infantry division in full paper strenght. So making russian division a 60-66pwr limited unit, and make it cheaper, there may be more divisions, weaker but cheaper, not so unupgradable as they are.
Also russians do not used tank divisions, but instead tank brigades and tank corpses (tank corps was a little bit stronger that german panzer division in paper strenght)
Also building of brigades for russians is a waste of IC and time. And Artillery brigade with greater production was war-winning for russians.

 

[unmerged(41949)]

by the time you factor in economics and technology a conscripted force is actually dearer than a volunteer force.

I guess so, since a volunteer force tends to be way smaller in size!

And 1 manpower is 1 manpower- so I dont really see how full conscript state should be able to recruit for less manpower- that doesnt really make sense.

I can see your point. Still, every able-bodied (and even someone not-very-able-bodied ) can be part of a conscript army. In a volunteer army the reqs for enrolling are supposed to be more restrictive, so - while manpower remains the same, of course - there should be actually less people available for the army.

Such modifications would give sense to the Standing/Drafted slider, which actually only means Effective/Uneffective, and virtually nothing else. But drafted armies *had* their purpose in history, and I think this could be reflected in the game.

 

[unmerged(40779)]

Some articles on topic such as these I recently read actually seemed to indicate the opposite (at least post-ww2)- that by the time you factor in economics and technology a conscripted force is actually dearer than a volunteer force. (the fact that most states now are at best part-conscript if not full all-volunteer, seems to bear this out)

Like said, a volunteer/professional army is naturally smaller than a conscripted one. After the cold war ended, the risk of large scale land war - in the Western world at least - has become quite nonexistant. This is the main reason for small professional armies becoming more common than traditional drafted armies.
Also, it's much easier to fight offensive wars overseas if you have your army based on career soldiers who defend their paychecks instead of youngters simply ordered to go there. Population accepts casualties on volunteers much more easily than on kids who weren't asked anything.

 

[Myth]

just from a balance perspective, drafted army just isn't worth it. I think the best way to fix this would be to increase the dail manpower gain the closer you go to fully drafted army (but not begin decreasing it if you go toward standing, though that might be done too) and perhaps also increasing the morale as you go toward drafted.

 

[unmerged(54933)]

professional armies are always smaller and better trained so they will need smaller amount of supplies and have smaller power looses (caouse trained tankers and pilots will oftenly get their plane/tank home). also infantry guys will be better trained so gained smaller casualties

 

[Xantos]

In game the drafted army just doesn't have a chance. And that's not fair when playing with SU.

You getIm not a pro with the HoI2 numbers but..)
around 125% longer uppgrade time and cost.(full drafted and planed economy)
Then you get a 10% organization loss.

and what are the goodies you get??

you get extra gearing bonus and a slight moral bonus..

I just don't think that is fair. The game has this overstacking rule so you won't achive much by attacking with 30 divisions instead of 20 or 25..
And this was the SU major strategy in the war.. staling allways said he was willing to lose a man or a tank if the enemy did... The SU got most of the casulties but they won the war..and thats pretty lame that you can't use that tactic in the game...

So plz release patches with greater benefits for Drafted armies.

And when you do, sit back and enjoy the 30 Million men counter-attack from the SU next time we play

 

[unmerged(65250)]

I just don't think that is fair. The game has this overstacking rule so you won't achive much by attacking with 30 divisions instead of 20 or 25.........
..........The SU got most of the casulties but they won the war ...................... sit back and enjoy the 30 Million men counter-attack from the SU next time we play

True, If you did want massive stacks, you could alter the infra stack limit; like I have done with my air stacks (was originally 4, now 8), but that would make no difference as such as the opposition would also benefit. Upping the stack limts, only makes large groupings more managable to send as one, plus delaying over stack penalties.
Mmmmmm, maybe leave infra stack limit as is, until a better mod/method/representation is devised.

 

[unmerged(73544)]

Personally I feel that their isn't anymore need for a smaller sized or quicker built infantry unit. Yes, when we recall the call up's of the militia's from the threatened cities in Russia when the Whermacht rolled east and even the stories from the Volksturm call ups, we can envision a need for these types of units. However these military formations were nothing more than speed bumps againest a professional army.
If in future game designs they do make a smaller/cheaper unit they will be able to hold a zone and perhaps buy your front a few hours of time, or even a day before it is broke. If this is how your game is turning out though, it is time for you to look to the Diplomacy screen and other options like a "white peace".

 

[Paul_M]

A simple solution to make conscripted armies modeled more realistically is to add a penelty or bonus to manpower.

So a neutral stance gives ±0% manpower.
Each shift towards professional gives you -5% manpower per move.
Each shift towards conscript gives you +10% manpower per move. Any democratic nation moving that slider towards higher levels of conscription should take an immediate +5 disent hit. Conscription is NOT popular.

Professional or volunteer armies are small. The pool of volunteers is limited for any number of reasons. But historically Canada ran into a problem and was forced to adopt conscription, and that caused a government crisis.

Conscripted armies draw on a wider source of manpower than do volunteer professional forces and thus there is more manpower available. Conscripted armies do not take less time to train (though the gearing bonus does make sense), nor do they take less equipment but they do have a larger base of people to draw from.