-
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.
- Status
About the GDE defence chance rolls thing; I've been playing with it at 3.0 and it seems to work reasonably well. the battles tend to last a good bit longer. playing as germany, beating Poland took 2-3 times as long. You guys mite wana playtest it yourselves
Another idea would be to use the unit files from WIF and reduce the GDE thing to 1.5 the battles will last longer and casualities wont get out of control. I have the unit files from WIF gold which with a bit of editing would change the MP requirements back to normal.
Another idea would be to use the unit files from WIF and reduce the GDE thing to 1.5 the battles will last longer and casualities wont get out of control. I have the unit files from WIF gold which with a bit of editing would change the MP requirements back to normal.
That is one way to do it. The other thing is to increase the global manpower modifiers.
About you Poland test, one thing to keep in mind about that is that the Polish army really isn't any good, and you are fighting 36 infantry, I believe and they have no good land doctrine. You would be better doing a comparison between relative equals, to get feel for what you are creating.
I used to do it by doing 1 v 1 tests in the barbarossa scenario, which gives you a wide variety of difference situations.
Personally, I really like the set up we have in EIR now. Games are running well, we could use a fifth and sixth player on for our Tuesday game at 00:00 CET to 04:00 CET (6:00 EST to 10 EST). We have just ended the Polish campaign, so next week might a good day to join as Italy, or France (goes to USA after Vichy) if you want to see how it is working in combat.
About you Poland test, one thing to keep in mind about that is that the Polish army really isn't any good, and you are fighting 36 infantry, I believe and they have no good land doctrine. You would be better doing a comparison between relative equals, to get feel for what you are creating.
I used to do it by doing 1 v 1 tests in the barbarossa scenario, which gives you a wide variety of difference situations.
Personally, I really like the set up we have in EIR now. Games are running well, we could use a fifth and sixth player on for our Tuesday game at 00:00 CET to 04:00 CET (6:00 EST to 10 EST). We have just ended the Polish campaign, so next week might a good day to join as Italy, or France (goes to USA after Vichy) if you want to see how it is working in combat.
This is countered by the fact that the attackers will likely be near 0 org by the time they reach the province giving the defender a huge opportunity to counter-attack.
AFAIK units on reserve move at regular speed. Setting them on reserve is just a way to reduce micromanagement.
That is basically the vanilla system. In order to defend the defender must bring in his reserves, once those are depleted, the breakthrough will occur, as long as the attacker has superior force, because there will be nothing left to counter-attack with, if the defender is feeding troops into the first battle.
The defender could choose not to defend the keypoint province and keep a reserve, but it is hardly likely that the counter-attack will succeed if the attacker synchronizes his forces all to arrive in the province at the same time. The defenders also have the opportunity to rotate forces, but this is one of the primary reasons that "Reserve and Support Defence" should be nerfed in games with long combat systems.
Also, in HOI, the offence is superior to defence in all cases due to the way that attack factors overwhelm defensiveness. The attacker is almost always in the position where he can determine the place of an attack, and create overwhellming odds, and scoring more hits per attack round against "no defences left". The effect is called dogpiling, and essentially means that attacker need do nothing more that have odds of 1.3 attackers to defender (all else being equal) in order win, barring any other factors such as combat bonuses for defenders like terrain and so forth.
A defender with "no defences left" has hits scored at a rate of 0.6, instead of 0.8. This is one of the reasons that shear mass is so effective in vanilla.
"Reserve" forces and forces on "Support Defence" both have substantial speed bonuses. The only real way to modify these factors is to decrease of increase the mission efficiency of them in the Land Doctrine tech files. The best way is to change the base tech for each land doctrine tech tree, so that any malus or bonus is applied at the first tech level.
Last edited:
POSTED 2 DAYS AGO: So these will be the final modifications, so if someone has something to say, do it now or be silenced forever! (Now many have the modded misc, it's been uploaded and I'm focusing on the rules.)
I'm used to watching my stacking and the org. Got well used to that in WiF. We aren't playing WiF, but I don't like the current way where one big unstoppable mass makes a hole in your lines and goes where ever it wants. So that's why aside from the longer battles I support raising the GDE.
As for the support defence missions, they can't probably be modded in the misc file? We could forbit those missions, althrough I was pretty used to it. But in the last game the defender didn't have too much advantage, and if it only changes from 1.8 to 2.0, I doubt if forbitting the mission is really necessary?
This would make military intelligence and bluffing more important though. Place your troops where they are most needed, they don't arrive into battle too easily...
That's a good idea, but means more modding files, more complexity and more mess in multi, but I'm not totally against it.
In the misc you could also mod the MP needed for reinforcements. I was pretty interested by this. Nations would run out of MP more easier and then understrenght units and MP shortages would be more common...
I'm OK with the Infra bombing and Airstacks but all the others should be kept the same. (Except GDE which I believe should be 1.5 or something close.
Guys, the game is tomorrow so your suggestions are pretty late. Unless several ppl are demanding the same thing, the changes will remain. Like here Hebe and DvD want almost the opposite.
Fuck... I just checked players and seems like Im pretty much alone... Nazi is pretty strong player and I dont even have France and minors... It will be tricky to hold lines againt axisrush. :wacko:
1. Get Arma 1.3b 2 patch.
2. Download the custom misc file. Extract it to your db folder.
3. Your checksum should be
4. Read the rules (below)
5. Prepare, the game will be on Saturday at 1600 GMT!
Two New Zealanders MIGHT be coming (3am for them, but nice guys really). Lazuka will be here next week, and the loser of the SCW will probably take an Allied minor. So should be taken care of soon.
...And don't forget that Nazi fears someone in the East who has faced him before.
Last edited:
Two New Zealanders MIGHT be coming (3 am for them, but nice guys really). Lazuka will be here next week, and the loser of the SCW will probably take an Allied minor. So should be taken care of soon.
Well I belive any traditional trick wont work so I really have to make more preparations than usually.
btw can Soviets dow Gerries?
Soviets can dow Germany after -42, not before (unless Romania refuses the claims again )
10.2 : R/M go historical (full pact), USSR can dow germany from jan 42. USSR is free to dow any country after annexing Germany
Japan and USSR have that NA pact anyway that can't be broken. So I can dow after it expires and Germany has been taken care of...
)10.2 : R/M go historical (full pact), USSR can dow germany from jan 42. USSR is free to dow any country after annexing Germany
Japan and USSR have that NA pact anyway that can't be broken. So I can dow after it expires and Germany has been taken care of...
You know I've never actually tried joining the axis with Japan in SP since I usually just annex them, but what would happen if I joined the axis after they go to war with the USSR? Would I be at war with the USSR or would the NAP still be in place?
- Status