First of all many thanks to PI for listening to the fans of the game. Not all game developers are brave enough to do this.
Below I have compiled a list of suggestions. Some have already been mentioned, while others I think are new, but they all represent what I believe could be interesting additions to the game.
N.B.: This post has also been added to the long running "So what do you all want to see in HOI3 -(no death camps, terror bombings, or purges)" thread. So if you have braved the approx 24 pages that it covers, then you very well may have read this already. The reason I also post it separately is that I was afraid it might drown in those 24 pages
This is a long post so please bear with me. Here it goes:
1. Introduce tactical combat choices:
When the little screen for initiating an attack comes up, you should also be able to choose the appropriate tactics. For example, you could choose frontal attack, or armoured wedge, or encirclement, or flank attack, or infiltration etc. All of these would be dependent on the type of unit which is attacking and which land doctrines have been developed. So blitzkrieg may give you the armoured wedge, whereas human wave limits your choices to frontal attack.
Similarly, the defense should also be able to chose its tactics. Initially I was thinking there might be two ways of doing this. When attacked, a window would pop up asking which tactic you would want to use. However, I was thinking that this might become somewhat arduous if the computer is continuously attacking you on several fronts with windows constantly popping up and demanding your attention... Instead, a unit might be instructed in advance to take a particular defensive stance whenever it is idle, just like all land units currently automatically start digging in. Again the various defensive tactics available would depend on land doctrine development, but these could for example be elastic defense, static defense, to the last man, rear-guard, even counter attack.
Another thing which comes to mind is that intelligence gathering could come in and play a role here. Using the various intelligence gathering possibilities mentioned in later in 7., you may be able to discern which tactics your enemy is using. This will allow you to chose the most appropriate tactic to counter the enemy. So in this case certain attacks will be more effective against certain defences and vice versa. As an example, if you find out that enemy units in a neighbouring province are using a static defense, you could instruct you tanks to conduct an encirclement and thereby gain an attack bonus. However, if you do not have access to such info, then you would have to base your tactics on the strengths of your units and hope for the best!
2. Mines:
Mines played an important role in WWII but are so far absent from the game.
In terms of maritime warfare you could introduce minelaying ships, which would have the ability to mine a specific sea province. This would then impart damage to any enemy ship entering this province proportionate to the number and density of mines. Conversely you would also need minesweepers which could operate independently or accompany larger ships and thus reduce or eliminate any damage incurred. Mines in a sea province would be represented be a suitable symbol, equivalent to fortifications in land provinces.
As for land mines, these could be introduced as province improvements, separate from land fortifications. Once again the mine would damage attacking enemy units unless they dispose over engineer regiments which could in turn clear the minefield. This damage could be represented by real losses in manpower/equipment or be represented by a combat penalty.
3. Diversify manpower pool and training:
Instead of one large manpower pool, you could divide it into three distinct groups: privates, NCO's and officers (and even divide each of these further into their individual ranks).
Each military unit would require a certain number from each pool to fill its ranks. So an infantry unit would maybe have a relatively low ratio of officers/NCO's vs privates. Wheres an HQ would have a high proportion of officers.
Combat losses would in turn be reflected by which land doctrine you adopt so that blitzkrieg, which encourages officers to lead from the front, would incur relatively high losses in officers, whereas human wave would take a heavier toll on the private manpower pool.
In training these various ranks there would have to be separate sliders for each manpower pool. If you are going to produce a militia army then you could reduce the relatively expensive officer slider. If instead, you have a highly specialised army with tank regiments and HQ's then you would have to incur the higher costs of officer training. Similarly, if you have the blitzkrieg doctrine, and the benefits that it offers in combat, you'll know that you will have to accept extra investment in officer training etc...
Units not at full establishment in either of the three manpower areas will incur penalties.
4. Separate manpower and equipment bar for units:
During combat, movement and general wear and tear all manner of military equipment will be lost. It follows that this will have to be replaced by allocating IC. Parallel to this, manpower will be lost during combat and will also have to be replaced by using IC.
Since many countries in HoI3 will have varying ratios of IC vs manpower, separate reinforcement sliders will oblige a player to make strategic decisions about which to prioritise. Hence Mp rich countries with relatively low IC, like Nat China, can crank up the Mp reinforcement slider. Whereas Germany or Australia may want to emphasise equipment replacement.
In addition, separate Mp and equipment bars would allow for damage to a unit to be reflected more specifically. Say for example you have an infantry division with an attached AC brigade. If attacked by another land unit then damage may be evenly distributed between Mp and equipment. If, on the other hand, this same infantry division is bombed by aircraft then its more conspicuous armoured cars would be hit harder requiring more equipment replacement. Also, some units will be more equipment dependent than others. Armoured divisions will need much more equipment replacement than Mp.
There might be an added twist to this. If aircraft could thus be more effective against equipment heavy units, i.e. mobile units, then it would bring more emphasis upon preliminary air campaigns in an attempt at lowering a target's hardness, which would even the odds for a subsequent infantry assault.
5. Customisable units:
I know this is being discussed elsewhere but I love this idea so much that I thought I should at least add my two cents.
Land and air units would consist of regiments, with a division having 2-4 of these. The IC needed to produce a unit would depend on the number and kind of regiments it possesses which would in turn be reflected in its stats.
As for the regiments themselves, you could design templates for all of these, which would include tank regiments, artillery regiments, engineer regiments etc. Each of these regiments would consist of various researchable and therefore upgradeable components. So for example an infantry regiment would need rifles, submachine guns (and later assault rifles), hand grenades and machine guns. A tank regiment would of course need tanks. These regimental elements would in turn be represented by separate research paths. So for German infantry you could research the 'gewehr 41' and improve on that by introducing the 'gewehr 43'. The 'maschinengewehr 39' would be superseeded by the 'maschinengewehr 42' and so on. Each would in turn add combat bonusses to your regiments.
Tanks could be subject to a high level of customisation. The design basics of every tank depends on balancing maneuverability, protection and firepower. If you expect to fight a defensive war then add extra armour and a more powerful gun to your tank at the expense of speed. If, on the other hand blitzkrieg is your thing then maybe reduce armour in favour of a more powerful gun and higher speed.
This will allow you to tailor your army to specific needs and achieve maximum effectivess. If you know you won't face any enemy tanks then you can forsake adding an anti tank regiment to your infantry division as well as neglect the research path for AT weapons. However, this could of course backfire if you at some point actually do come up against tanks.
The same principles would of course apply to planes (engines, machine guns, radar...) and ships (armour, main gun, AA guns...).
6. Allow for radio/communication equipment:
Introduce a separate research path for radios.
These would become integral parts to any unit and can be added in the unit customisation process so that next to rifles, machine guns etc, a regiment would also have to be issued with radio sets (HQ's would require relatively many radios). These would improve the reaction time and coordination of a unit, which could be reflected in its higher organisation.
Also, without the appropriate radio techs you could not acquire advanced blitzkrieg tactics or coordinate effective interception of bomber raids etc...
Furthermore, radios could have a role to play in intelligence gathering as discussed in the next point.
7. Intelligence gathering:
There should more sources from which to gather intelligence.
With radios you could introduce signals intelligence, i.e. radio intercept. Human intelligence in the shape of trained spies and paid informants. Aircraft reconnaissance returning photographic images. Special forces operating behind enemy lines and information gathered by sympathetic partisans.
All of these could be represented by sliders into which you would have to invest money. The rate at which you gather information would not only depend on the amount invested but also your tech level and government style.
Signals intelligence would get a bonus for each new advancement in radio technology. Human intelligence would be based on the number of spies and amount of money available to bribe informants. Air reconnaissance would depend on aircraft techs. Special forces would be a unit that can be researched and improved over time, just like infantry, and also the number of SF operating behind enemy lines will affect intel gathering. Partisan activity can be increased by funding and equipment supply (provided by equipment IC slider, see 4.).
8. Land convoys and supply depots:
Mirroring maritime convoys you could add trains and truck as the basic units making up land based supply convoys. These would just like transports and escorts need to be produced using IC. Their effectiveness will depend on range, infrastructure and terrain (maybe even weather). Furthermore, it should be possible to enhance convoy effectiveness by allowing for supply depots in provinces designated by the player. These would extend the range of convoys which would always have to start and end at a depot.
As for the supply of troops, this would depend on their distance from such a supply depot. The further away the less efficient supply is. Efficiency could also depend on infrastructure and terrain.
Supply columns are always vulnerable to interception. They could for example be sabotaged by partisans/special forces/guerillas which destroy trains and trucks just like convoy raiding sinks transports and escorts at sea. To mitigate such intrusion you would have to place garrisons along convoy routes.
Depots would in this case be province improvements that require IC to produce and may take for example 2 weeks to complete. Also, these depots could consequently be bombed and reduced by aircraft and even sabotaged by special forces and irregulars.
9. Amphibious assault craft:
Amphibious assaults are highly complex and specialised operations which merit the addition of amphibious assault ships.
These would be more effective than standard transports, but have a reduced range due to their smaller size and shallow draft. In addition, they would speed up any landing, which would make such an operation less vulnerable to enemy arial or naval disruption.
To supplement amphibious assault ships you could also introduce amphibious assault vehicles. They would form distinct regiments which would have to be added to a unit during customisation. Once again operations would be speeded up with the addition of such vehicles and fewer penalties incurred in combat.
10. Food as a resource:
This resource could be terrain related in that each terrain type produces a certain amount of food. Furthermore, it could be climate related so that tropical and subtropical climes are productive year round, while others are not.
Should food become scarce, you could introduce rationing. This would slow manpower growth and even increase dissent by for example 0.01% per day and/or negatively affect combat effectiveness.
11. Adding additional resources:
In addition to food, you could add rubber and aluminum, even uranium, as strategic resources. Each of these would be tied to certain unit types so that you need rubber in order to produce all land units, except for maybe militias. Aluminum would enable air units and of course uranium would be tied to nuclear research. Of course in addition to these resources oil retains its importance for mobile units.
I realise that this would make for example rubber essential to any meaningful military campaign, as indeed it was, but in terms of game dynamics it might hinder the progress of any fighting and therefore fun. Rubber can only be obtained from certain limited places in the world. Access to these may be difficult and so curtail a country's ability to produce a large and effective army. However, to offset this you could add a research patch that allows you to fashion rubber substitutes...
Playing with the idea of additional resources I was thinking that you could maybe add water. This might be a long shot, but it could certainly be important for the North African campaign, the Middle East and parts of Central Asia.
12. Guerillas/partisans:
HoI3 should greatly expand on guerilla/partisan fighting. These should no longer be represented by an abstract number such as a certain percent of partisan activity in a given province, but should be an all together more tangible and versatile force.
Along these lines, I was thinking that it should be a force whose effectiveness you could increase by providing it with equipment and food supplies. When required you should be able to direct partisans to focus their efforts in a certain province/region and damage or even destroy its infrastructure and improvements. Not only that, partisans should also be able to pick off enemy soldiers and vehicles and thereby reduce the manpower and equipment level of those units. They should also be able to raid supply trains and trucks (as mentioned in 8.) and destroy these just as convoy raiding can sink transports and escorts.
13. Unit upgrades and Reserves:
When adding a high level of customisation it follows that upgrades would also become more complex. First of all, when a unit upgrades I think you should have to pull it out of the line. This would represent not only the delivery of new material and refit but also the training necessary to aquaint units to their new kit. A unit would return to the redeployment pool when the upgrade is complete.
For a more comprehensive upgrade you could interchange entire regiments. So its no longer a matter of replacing a few infantry weapons but entire formations. If for example plain infantry divisions suddenly run into tanks you could then start pulling some of those infantry divisions out of the line and reform them with AT regiments. This also means that you won't have to build a large number of specialised units, i.e. mountain troops, marines, mobile infantry, just in case you need them, but can instead make do with a smaller and more flexible core of divisions. I suppose in this case a unit will lose precious experience if it is issued with a new AT regiment.
As for reserves, you should be able to mothball units when they become redundant. This would place a unit in the redeployment pool where they consume a minimum of resources. However, because they are mothballed, reactivating them would take much longer than the instant redeployment of newly created units. Maybe reactivation should take half the time it takes to produce a that unit from scratch.
14. Dockyards:
As has been mentioned, dockyards should be added and tied into naval construction. The size of a dockyard is directly proportional to the size of ship a country can construct. For example size 10 would allow BB and CV, size 8 BC, size 6 CA and CVL ect...
Of course these dockyards could be bombed/reduced by aircraft.
15. Land fortifications:
Let land fortifications face a specific direction. This would force an attacker, not prepared to risk a direct assault, to come up with a plan for maneuver. It would make operational combat more interesting and demanding.
16. Selling obsolete units:
Obsolete units can be a burden. In order to streamline your production and the running of up to date units you should be able to sell obsolete ones to other nations.
When selling a unit, you do not hand over the soldiers of that unit, those are returned to your manpower pool. Instead, the buyer only receives the equipment, reflected in the equipment bar as suggested in 4.. This would mean that the buyer does not have make the large IC investment needed to for example produce from scratch the tanks necessary for an entire armoured division. He would only have to provide the manpower to fill the ranks, which would also shorten the time needed to complete that unit. This could be a viable option for countries with low IC vs manpower, e.g. Nat China.
17. CV's can conduct air superiority missions:
A CAG could conduct air superiority missions in line with its range, which would allow it to reach a considerable distance in land.
Maybe even let CAGs be a separate unit in its own right so that it can be stationed on a CV or based on an airfield.
18. More urban provinces:
I think urban fighting can be a great leveler and make gameply more interesting. You can quite successfully anchor a defense on an urban province and slow down or even stop a superior enemy and gradually grind him down. Particularly in Europe there is scope for more urban provinces.
19. Industry specific sliders:
As has been mentioned before I like the idea of separate industry sliders for naval, land and air units. These could once again be related to individual tech paths giving them distinct production bonuses. Also, with the industries separated out you could instruct your bombers to target naval production or land units related production. I don't mean a specific factory in province x which produces machine guns. Instead, bombing the aircraft industry would reduce available IC for aircraft production.
It might also be worthwhile to consider adding a separate slider for province repair after it has suffered a major assault or extensive bombing raids. This would certainly make strategic bombing a more attractive proposition. Not only do you know out IC in one province, but the enemy now also has to devote more of it to repair the damage.
20. Airstrikes against aircraft on the ground:
When bombing an airfield you should also be able to inflict material damage on enemy aircraft stationed there.
21. Introduce diving for submarines:
With each improvement level, subs would be able to dive progressively deeper thereby increasing their combat abilities and convoy raiding while evading pursuing enemies. Conversely, you should also allow for destroyers that would be able to progressively launch depth chargers to increasingly greater depths.
22. Look at excisting mods for inspiration:
There are numerous mods out there for HoI2 into which people have poured their creative energies in an attempt to refine the game. These are all interpretations/wishes as to how the game could be improved/changed.
23. Please don't make the game any easier:
Please don't dumb down what we have! Grand strategy is PI's trump card and should remain so. It is a steep learning curve but the rewards are well worth it! If ambitions have to be managed, then maybe add some optional automation which can be switched off as you learn how to play. But at least keep the complexity!
24. Automate some diplomacy and spying:
The weekly reissuing of the same diplomacy and spying orders can become infuriating. Add a function which automatically takes care of this.
25. Airtransport:
Allow air transports to move more than paratroopers. Granted that airlifting an armoured division is not possible, but a standard infantry division should be possible.
Also, transport planes could be used to enhance partisan activity by dropping equipment and food.
26. Hotkeys:
To facilitate management. Add an auto-sink for the production sliders.
27. Cooperation on research:
In order to speed up research nations can cooperate on development. Though research under such conditions should not quadruple or anything as drastic as that, you could gain an initial research bonus of 10% when two nations cooperate and for every subsequent nation that joins in gain another 2%.
28. War loot:
After winning a battle your units may capture some enemy equipment which can be added to your equipment pool?
29. Trade embargoes:
Several nations can agree to impose an embargo on another nation, potentially depriving it of essential resources.
30. Improve the AI:
I think this is a pretty universal request and I'm sure it'll be addressed in many ways. As far as I'm concerned, I would particularly like to see an improvement in how the AI handles amphibious landings. They should not be pinpricks but amount to full blown operations with all the strategic emphasis this entails.
Also, there should be a limit to how many units an AI produces. AI controlled nations keep producing units until they can barely maintain their army let alone fight a war. Consequently, when you attack such a nation, its resistance collapses like a house of cards because the ESE is hopelessly ineffecient. With a small concentration of mobile units you can thus bring down a major power by gradually grinding down its army.
31. Ships can attack maritime trade convoys:
There should not only be maritime supply convoys but also trade convoys. The latter could be attacked just as the former can. I know that trade deals currently come with an efficiency rating, but actual convoys would make the whole experience more realistic and tangeable.
It follows that trade conducted over land would be equally vulnerable to partisans/special forces. So when you conduct trade negotiations there should be a button that allows you choose whether a given deal should be carried out by maritime or land convoys.
32. Limit number of divisions per province:
The limit could for example be set at 24 (the maximum a field marhall can command effectively with an HQ. You could add more divivsions but would incur severe penalties on all units during combat.
This would make geopraphic choke points all the more important and allows minor nations to hold off a major power for longer, if not indefinitely, and would oblige the major power to be more strategically adept in order to out maneuver its opponent and not merely steamroll through by sheer weight of numbers.
34: Limit ground attack effeciency:
CAS and Tac only be able to reduce a land unit to 30% of its full strength.
35. Aircraft can attack specific provinces:
This has been mentioned so many times, which only underlines how much it is needed!
If you have made it this far I thank you very much for the trouble (it took me too long to write anyway! :rofl: ).
Below I have compiled a list of suggestions. Some have already been mentioned, while others I think are new, but they all represent what I believe could be interesting additions to the game.
N.B.: This post has also been added to the long running "So what do you all want to see in HOI3 -(no death camps, terror bombings, or purges)" thread. So if you have braved the approx 24 pages that it covers, then you very well may have read this already. The reason I also post it separately is that I was afraid it might drown in those 24 pages
This is a long post so please bear with me. Here it goes:
1. Introduce tactical combat choices:
When the little screen for initiating an attack comes up, you should also be able to choose the appropriate tactics. For example, you could choose frontal attack, or armoured wedge, or encirclement, or flank attack, or infiltration etc. All of these would be dependent on the type of unit which is attacking and which land doctrines have been developed. So blitzkrieg may give you the armoured wedge, whereas human wave limits your choices to frontal attack.
Similarly, the defense should also be able to chose its tactics. Initially I was thinking there might be two ways of doing this. When attacked, a window would pop up asking which tactic you would want to use. However, I was thinking that this might become somewhat arduous if the computer is continuously attacking you on several fronts with windows constantly popping up and demanding your attention... Instead, a unit might be instructed in advance to take a particular defensive stance whenever it is idle, just like all land units currently automatically start digging in. Again the various defensive tactics available would depend on land doctrine development, but these could for example be elastic defense, static defense, to the last man, rear-guard, even counter attack.
Another thing which comes to mind is that intelligence gathering could come in and play a role here. Using the various intelligence gathering possibilities mentioned in later in 7., you may be able to discern which tactics your enemy is using. This will allow you to chose the most appropriate tactic to counter the enemy. So in this case certain attacks will be more effective against certain defences and vice versa. As an example, if you find out that enemy units in a neighbouring province are using a static defense, you could instruct you tanks to conduct an encirclement and thereby gain an attack bonus. However, if you do not have access to such info, then you would have to base your tactics on the strengths of your units and hope for the best!
2. Mines:
Mines played an important role in WWII but are so far absent from the game.
In terms of maritime warfare you could introduce minelaying ships, which would have the ability to mine a specific sea province. This would then impart damage to any enemy ship entering this province proportionate to the number and density of mines. Conversely you would also need minesweepers which could operate independently or accompany larger ships and thus reduce or eliminate any damage incurred. Mines in a sea province would be represented be a suitable symbol, equivalent to fortifications in land provinces.
As for land mines, these could be introduced as province improvements, separate from land fortifications. Once again the mine would damage attacking enemy units unless they dispose over engineer regiments which could in turn clear the minefield. This damage could be represented by real losses in manpower/equipment or be represented by a combat penalty.
3. Diversify manpower pool and training:
Instead of one large manpower pool, you could divide it into three distinct groups: privates, NCO's and officers (and even divide each of these further into their individual ranks).
Each military unit would require a certain number from each pool to fill its ranks. So an infantry unit would maybe have a relatively low ratio of officers/NCO's vs privates. Wheres an HQ would have a high proportion of officers.
Combat losses would in turn be reflected by which land doctrine you adopt so that blitzkrieg, which encourages officers to lead from the front, would incur relatively high losses in officers, whereas human wave would take a heavier toll on the private manpower pool.
In training these various ranks there would have to be separate sliders for each manpower pool. If you are going to produce a militia army then you could reduce the relatively expensive officer slider. If instead, you have a highly specialised army with tank regiments and HQ's then you would have to incur the higher costs of officer training. Similarly, if you have the blitzkrieg doctrine, and the benefits that it offers in combat, you'll know that you will have to accept extra investment in officer training etc...
Units not at full establishment in either of the three manpower areas will incur penalties.
4. Separate manpower and equipment bar for units:
During combat, movement and general wear and tear all manner of military equipment will be lost. It follows that this will have to be replaced by allocating IC. Parallel to this, manpower will be lost during combat and will also have to be replaced by using IC.
Since many countries in HoI3 will have varying ratios of IC vs manpower, separate reinforcement sliders will oblige a player to make strategic decisions about which to prioritise. Hence Mp rich countries with relatively low IC, like Nat China, can crank up the Mp reinforcement slider. Whereas Germany or Australia may want to emphasise equipment replacement.
In addition, separate Mp and equipment bars would allow for damage to a unit to be reflected more specifically. Say for example you have an infantry division with an attached AC brigade. If attacked by another land unit then damage may be evenly distributed between Mp and equipment. If, on the other hand, this same infantry division is bombed by aircraft then its more conspicuous armoured cars would be hit harder requiring more equipment replacement. Also, some units will be more equipment dependent than others. Armoured divisions will need much more equipment replacement than Mp.
There might be an added twist to this. If aircraft could thus be more effective against equipment heavy units, i.e. mobile units, then it would bring more emphasis upon preliminary air campaigns in an attempt at lowering a target's hardness, which would even the odds for a subsequent infantry assault.
5. Customisable units:
I know this is being discussed elsewhere but I love this idea so much that I thought I should at least add my two cents.
Land and air units would consist of regiments, with a division having 2-4 of these. The IC needed to produce a unit would depend on the number and kind of regiments it possesses which would in turn be reflected in its stats.
As for the regiments themselves, you could design templates for all of these, which would include tank regiments, artillery regiments, engineer regiments etc. Each of these regiments would consist of various researchable and therefore upgradeable components. So for example an infantry regiment would need rifles, submachine guns (and later assault rifles), hand grenades and machine guns. A tank regiment would of course need tanks. These regimental elements would in turn be represented by separate research paths. So for German infantry you could research the 'gewehr 41' and improve on that by introducing the 'gewehr 43'. The 'maschinengewehr 39' would be superseeded by the 'maschinengewehr 42' and so on. Each would in turn add combat bonusses to your regiments.
Tanks could be subject to a high level of customisation. The design basics of every tank depends on balancing maneuverability, protection and firepower. If you expect to fight a defensive war then add extra armour and a more powerful gun to your tank at the expense of speed. If, on the other hand blitzkrieg is your thing then maybe reduce armour in favour of a more powerful gun and higher speed.
This will allow you to tailor your army to specific needs and achieve maximum effectivess. If you know you won't face any enemy tanks then you can forsake adding an anti tank regiment to your infantry division as well as neglect the research path for AT weapons. However, this could of course backfire if you at some point actually do come up against tanks.
The same principles would of course apply to planes (engines, machine guns, radar...) and ships (armour, main gun, AA guns...).
6. Allow for radio/communication equipment:
Introduce a separate research path for radios.
These would become integral parts to any unit and can be added in the unit customisation process so that next to rifles, machine guns etc, a regiment would also have to be issued with radio sets (HQ's would require relatively many radios). These would improve the reaction time and coordination of a unit, which could be reflected in its higher organisation.
Also, without the appropriate radio techs you could not acquire advanced blitzkrieg tactics or coordinate effective interception of bomber raids etc...
Furthermore, radios could have a role to play in intelligence gathering as discussed in the next point.
7. Intelligence gathering:
There should more sources from which to gather intelligence.
With radios you could introduce signals intelligence, i.e. radio intercept. Human intelligence in the shape of trained spies and paid informants. Aircraft reconnaissance returning photographic images. Special forces operating behind enemy lines and information gathered by sympathetic partisans.
All of these could be represented by sliders into which you would have to invest money. The rate at which you gather information would not only depend on the amount invested but also your tech level and government style.
Signals intelligence would get a bonus for each new advancement in radio technology. Human intelligence would be based on the number of spies and amount of money available to bribe informants. Air reconnaissance would depend on aircraft techs. Special forces would be a unit that can be researched and improved over time, just like infantry, and also the number of SF operating behind enemy lines will affect intel gathering. Partisan activity can be increased by funding and equipment supply (provided by equipment IC slider, see 4.).
8. Land convoys and supply depots:
Mirroring maritime convoys you could add trains and truck as the basic units making up land based supply convoys. These would just like transports and escorts need to be produced using IC. Their effectiveness will depend on range, infrastructure and terrain (maybe even weather). Furthermore, it should be possible to enhance convoy effectiveness by allowing for supply depots in provinces designated by the player. These would extend the range of convoys which would always have to start and end at a depot.
As for the supply of troops, this would depend on their distance from such a supply depot. The further away the less efficient supply is. Efficiency could also depend on infrastructure and terrain.
Supply columns are always vulnerable to interception. They could for example be sabotaged by partisans/special forces/guerillas which destroy trains and trucks just like convoy raiding sinks transports and escorts at sea. To mitigate such intrusion you would have to place garrisons along convoy routes.
Depots would in this case be province improvements that require IC to produce and may take for example 2 weeks to complete. Also, these depots could consequently be bombed and reduced by aircraft and even sabotaged by special forces and irregulars.
9. Amphibious assault craft:
Amphibious assaults are highly complex and specialised operations which merit the addition of amphibious assault ships.
These would be more effective than standard transports, but have a reduced range due to their smaller size and shallow draft. In addition, they would speed up any landing, which would make such an operation less vulnerable to enemy arial or naval disruption.
To supplement amphibious assault ships you could also introduce amphibious assault vehicles. They would form distinct regiments which would have to be added to a unit during customisation. Once again operations would be speeded up with the addition of such vehicles and fewer penalties incurred in combat.
10. Food as a resource:
This resource could be terrain related in that each terrain type produces a certain amount of food. Furthermore, it could be climate related so that tropical and subtropical climes are productive year round, while others are not.
Should food become scarce, you could introduce rationing. This would slow manpower growth and even increase dissent by for example 0.01% per day and/or negatively affect combat effectiveness.
11. Adding additional resources:
In addition to food, you could add rubber and aluminum, even uranium, as strategic resources. Each of these would be tied to certain unit types so that you need rubber in order to produce all land units, except for maybe militias. Aluminum would enable air units and of course uranium would be tied to nuclear research. Of course in addition to these resources oil retains its importance for mobile units.
I realise that this would make for example rubber essential to any meaningful military campaign, as indeed it was, but in terms of game dynamics it might hinder the progress of any fighting and therefore fun. Rubber can only be obtained from certain limited places in the world. Access to these may be difficult and so curtail a country's ability to produce a large and effective army. However, to offset this you could add a research patch that allows you to fashion rubber substitutes...
Playing with the idea of additional resources I was thinking that you could maybe add water. This might be a long shot, but it could certainly be important for the North African campaign, the Middle East and parts of Central Asia.
12. Guerillas/partisans:
HoI3 should greatly expand on guerilla/partisan fighting. These should no longer be represented by an abstract number such as a certain percent of partisan activity in a given province, but should be an all together more tangible and versatile force.
Along these lines, I was thinking that it should be a force whose effectiveness you could increase by providing it with equipment and food supplies. When required you should be able to direct partisans to focus their efforts in a certain province/region and damage or even destroy its infrastructure and improvements. Not only that, partisans should also be able to pick off enemy soldiers and vehicles and thereby reduce the manpower and equipment level of those units. They should also be able to raid supply trains and trucks (as mentioned in 8.) and destroy these just as convoy raiding can sink transports and escorts.
13. Unit upgrades and Reserves:
When adding a high level of customisation it follows that upgrades would also become more complex. First of all, when a unit upgrades I think you should have to pull it out of the line. This would represent not only the delivery of new material and refit but also the training necessary to aquaint units to their new kit. A unit would return to the redeployment pool when the upgrade is complete.
For a more comprehensive upgrade you could interchange entire regiments. So its no longer a matter of replacing a few infantry weapons but entire formations. If for example plain infantry divisions suddenly run into tanks you could then start pulling some of those infantry divisions out of the line and reform them with AT regiments. This also means that you won't have to build a large number of specialised units, i.e. mountain troops, marines, mobile infantry, just in case you need them, but can instead make do with a smaller and more flexible core of divisions. I suppose in this case a unit will lose precious experience if it is issued with a new AT regiment.
As for reserves, you should be able to mothball units when they become redundant. This would place a unit in the redeployment pool where they consume a minimum of resources. However, because they are mothballed, reactivating them would take much longer than the instant redeployment of newly created units. Maybe reactivation should take half the time it takes to produce a that unit from scratch.
14. Dockyards:
As has been mentioned, dockyards should be added and tied into naval construction. The size of a dockyard is directly proportional to the size of ship a country can construct. For example size 10 would allow BB and CV, size 8 BC, size 6 CA and CVL ect...
Of course these dockyards could be bombed/reduced by aircraft.
15. Land fortifications:
Let land fortifications face a specific direction. This would force an attacker, not prepared to risk a direct assault, to come up with a plan for maneuver. It would make operational combat more interesting and demanding.
16. Selling obsolete units:
Obsolete units can be a burden. In order to streamline your production and the running of up to date units you should be able to sell obsolete ones to other nations.
When selling a unit, you do not hand over the soldiers of that unit, those are returned to your manpower pool. Instead, the buyer only receives the equipment, reflected in the equipment bar as suggested in 4.. This would mean that the buyer does not have make the large IC investment needed to for example produce from scratch the tanks necessary for an entire armoured division. He would only have to provide the manpower to fill the ranks, which would also shorten the time needed to complete that unit. This could be a viable option for countries with low IC vs manpower, e.g. Nat China.
17. CV's can conduct air superiority missions:
A CAG could conduct air superiority missions in line with its range, which would allow it to reach a considerable distance in land.
Maybe even let CAGs be a separate unit in its own right so that it can be stationed on a CV or based on an airfield.
18. More urban provinces:
I think urban fighting can be a great leveler and make gameply more interesting. You can quite successfully anchor a defense on an urban province and slow down or even stop a superior enemy and gradually grind him down. Particularly in Europe there is scope for more urban provinces.
19. Industry specific sliders:
As has been mentioned before I like the idea of separate industry sliders for naval, land and air units. These could once again be related to individual tech paths giving them distinct production bonuses. Also, with the industries separated out you could instruct your bombers to target naval production or land units related production. I don't mean a specific factory in province x which produces machine guns. Instead, bombing the aircraft industry would reduce available IC for aircraft production.
It might also be worthwhile to consider adding a separate slider for province repair after it has suffered a major assault or extensive bombing raids. This would certainly make strategic bombing a more attractive proposition. Not only do you know out IC in one province, but the enemy now also has to devote more of it to repair the damage.
20. Airstrikes against aircraft on the ground:
When bombing an airfield you should also be able to inflict material damage on enemy aircraft stationed there.
21. Introduce diving for submarines:
With each improvement level, subs would be able to dive progressively deeper thereby increasing their combat abilities and convoy raiding while evading pursuing enemies. Conversely, you should also allow for destroyers that would be able to progressively launch depth chargers to increasingly greater depths.
22. Look at excisting mods for inspiration:
There are numerous mods out there for HoI2 into which people have poured their creative energies in an attempt to refine the game. These are all interpretations/wishes as to how the game could be improved/changed.
23. Please don't make the game any easier:
Please don't dumb down what we have! Grand strategy is PI's trump card and should remain so. It is a steep learning curve but the rewards are well worth it! If ambitions have to be managed, then maybe add some optional automation which can be switched off as you learn how to play. But at least keep the complexity!
24. Automate some diplomacy and spying:
The weekly reissuing of the same diplomacy and spying orders can become infuriating. Add a function which automatically takes care of this.
25. Airtransport:
Allow air transports to move more than paratroopers. Granted that airlifting an armoured division is not possible, but a standard infantry division should be possible.
Also, transport planes could be used to enhance partisan activity by dropping equipment and food.
26. Hotkeys:
To facilitate management. Add an auto-sink for the production sliders.
27. Cooperation on research:
In order to speed up research nations can cooperate on development. Though research under such conditions should not quadruple or anything as drastic as that, you could gain an initial research bonus of 10% when two nations cooperate and for every subsequent nation that joins in gain another 2%.
28. War loot:
After winning a battle your units may capture some enemy equipment which can be added to your equipment pool?
29. Trade embargoes:
Several nations can agree to impose an embargo on another nation, potentially depriving it of essential resources.
30. Improve the AI:
I think this is a pretty universal request and I'm sure it'll be addressed in many ways. As far as I'm concerned, I would particularly like to see an improvement in how the AI handles amphibious landings. They should not be pinpricks but amount to full blown operations with all the strategic emphasis this entails.
Also, there should be a limit to how many units an AI produces. AI controlled nations keep producing units until they can barely maintain their army let alone fight a war. Consequently, when you attack such a nation, its resistance collapses like a house of cards because the ESE is hopelessly ineffecient. With a small concentration of mobile units you can thus bring down a major power by gradually grinding down its army.
31. Ships can attack maritime trade convoys:
There should not only be maritime supply convoys but also trade convoys. The latter could be attacked just as the former can. I know that trade deals currently come with an efficiency rating, but actual convoys would make the whole experience more realistic and tangeable.
It follows that trade conducted over land would be equally vulnerable to partisans/special forces. So when you conduct trade negotiations there should be a button that allows you choose whether a given deal should be carried out by maritime or land convoys.
32. Limit number of divisions per province:
The limit could for example be set at 24 (the maximum a field marhall can command effectively with an HQ. You could add more divivsions but would incur severe penalties on all units during combat.
This would make geopraphic choke points all the more important and allows minor nations to hold off a major power for longer, if not indefinitely, and would oblige the major power to be more strategically adept in order to out maneuver its opponent and not merely steamroll through by sheer weight of numbers.
34: Limit ground attack effeciency:
CAS and Tac only be able to reduce a land unit to 30% of its full strength.
35. Aircraft can attack specific provinces:
This has been mentioned so many times, which only underlines how much it is needed!
If you have made it this far I thank you very much for the trouble (it took me too long to write anyway! :rofl: ).
