New FAQ: 1936 Majors Comparison

[unmerged(11149)]

Originally posted by Monty

I am hoping the numbers cited for destroyers and subs represent flotillas and wolfpacks rather than individual ships of they are far too low.

I'm pretty sure I saw somewere that destroyers represent groups of them. Don't know about the subs though.

 

[MacGregor]

Subs and Destroyers are flotillas of 3-5 ships each. If Japan has no subs at the start, we may have to revisit the issue. A lot of people worked real hard to try to get things right, but sometimes mistakes are made. Thanks for pointing it out.

 

[unmerged(5120)]

Originally posted by Monty
I'm curious why Japan has no submarines in 1936. They actually had a quite large sub fleet, over 60 boats if I recall correctly.

53 by my count. Maybe somebody just swapped the German and Japanese numbers?

 

[Zagys]

Originally posted by Greywolf
BTW 370.000.000 population in India 60 years ago ??? are you sure of this number ? doesnt it account for Birmanie and other CW possessionin the area ?

The number is of British India in 1937, which encompasses the modern day countries of India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. What exactly is your problem with it?

Originally posted by Greywolf
Anyway in the french case just think that a huge part of the french army have always been provided by native colonial units: more famous one are Tirailleurs Senegalais and Moroccan and Algerian Goum. Basically the North african soldier where the brunt of the FFL forces in 1943 and they did fight valiently.

I'd imagine the French had trouble raising ethnic French troops when they didn't control France.

 

[Castellon]

NOTICE:

OKAY, I have added an entry to the table in the Economy section that lists the starting manpower pools. I Hope that will shed some light.

 

[IEX Totalview]

Originally posted by Castellon
NOTICE:

OKAY, I have added an entry to the table in the Economy section that lists the starting manpower pools. I Hope that will shed some light.

You da man.

 

[unmerged(11464)]

according to "Compton's Pictured Encyclopedia" (published in 1937)
these are the population figures:

(estimate) China 470,000,000; eighteen provinces of China Proper, about 415,000,000
Germany 66,000,000
Japan Population of Empire 100,000,000 Japan Proper 70,000,000
Britain 37,360,000
France 42,000,000 French Colonies 65,000,000
India(includes Nepal Pakistan and Bangledesh) 350,000,000
United States 137,008,435 (1930 census)
USSR 161,000,000

 

[Zagys]

Originally posted by Vonsson
I may not understand the whoel picture here but from what I see economically, France and Japan are too high and germany and SU too low...

I think perhaps it shoudl be: IC

US 800
Germany 375
Soviet Union 350
Britain 225
Japan 125
France 115
Italy 100

Why is France too high? The fact that France and Italy had a similar sized population does not make them equals. Historically, France was head and shoulders above Italy in terms of industrial production. Germany was higher than France of course, but not 3 times higher like you seem to think.

I think the numbers Paradox went with are fine, except for maybe Japan and Italy are a little too high (but only a little).

 

[Petrarca]

I would just like to say I am disappointed with the quality of the American leaders. If Mitscher and Halsey are the only 4+ leaders, then you people must either think very poorly of Ray Spruance and Ching Chong China Lee or the desire for game-balance is getting out of hand.

 

[State Machine]

Originally posted by Petrarca
I would just like to say I am disappointed with the quality of the American leaders. If Mitscher and Halsey are the only 4+ leaders, then you people must either think very poorly of Ray Spruance and Ching Chong China Lee or the desire for game-balance is getting out of hand.

It is 1936. It's up to the player and the course of the game to see who pops out as a great commander...

 

[Petrarca]

Originally posted by State Machine
It is 1936. It's up to the player and the course of the game to see who pops out as a great commander...

So, in other words, certain Admirals previously mentioned could advance in the level?

*bolt from the heavens*
I'm an idiot. I just now remember the information about promoting your officers. Therefore I assume that Halsey et al. (I think Nimitz is more strategic than tactical) can be promoted to higher ranks?

 

[Castellon]

The first part of the tech comparison is now up (France)
Others will be added soon. Part E of my 1936 Major nations compaison FAQ(link in Sig)

 

[State Machine]

Originally posted by Petrarca
So, in other words, certain Admirals previously mentioned could advance in the level?

*bolt from the heavens*
I'm an idiot. I just now remember the information about promoting your officers. Therefore I assume that Halsey et al. (I think Nimitz is more strategic than tactical) can be promoted to higher ranks?

Exactly...

 

[unmerged(3168)]

Just on the leaders Italy on has 1 air leader but they have the biggest airforce in the world, what gives or is there a missing number in one of those columns?

 

[Ming]

I still want to know why the French Navy is so incompetent.

 

[unmerged(8000)]

Well according to Paul Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, in 1937 World Relative War Potential was thus:

Germany 14.4%
USSR 14%
Britain 10.2%
France 4.2%

So it looks like Germany was more than 3x Frances potential...

 

[Zagys]

Originally posted by Vonsson
Well according to Paul Kennedy's The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, in 1937 World Relative War Potential was thus:

Germany 14.4%
USSR 14%
Britain 10.2%
France 4.2%

So it looks like Germany was more than 3x Frances potential...

What does he mean by "War Potential", and what was the number for Italy?

 

[unmerged(8000)]

It doesn't say but only cites the figures commming from Hillman's Comparative Stregth of Great Power which I don't have. I would assume it is a figure drawn from total output of industries important to the production of war materials etc...

The total figures listed in the book

US 41.7% !!!
Germany 14.4%
USSR 14%
Britain 10.2%
France 4.2%
Japan 3.5% !!!
Italy 2.5% !!!

I don't see how in any way the axis will be able to win any MP game in HOI with these sorts of figures. Being able to look back on history makes anyone who plays as the United States immediately too Strong. The only way I see an axis victory is the Italians, Germans and Japanese all concentrate on land and air tech while shareing any resources to defeat the USSR and then do their best to tackle USA.

As an aside my earlier preferred figures came out like this

US 38%
Germany 18%
Soviet Union 16.5%
Britain 11%
Japan 6%
France 5.5%
Italy 4.8%

 

[Castellon]

German Start Techs are now up!

Sorry guys all for tonight, gotta get some sleeeeep!

Also What are your thoughts on organising the techs.

A) As they are now Complete list by Nation
B) Group them by Tech Group. In other words show each nations Infantry techs together.
C) Both ways
D) Another way I have not thought of.

 

[Norgesvenn]

Originally posted by StJaBa
Did anyone else notice USA's gov't is "Reformed Socialist"... sigh what a European way to describe the New Deal...

Yep, I noticed. Britain is Liberal Conservative, France Centrist and the US "Reformed Socialist". Oh, well. It brought out a healthy gut laugh from me. The biggest capitalist economy in the world - reformed socialist.