Please consider making sure Norway is woth capturing in HOI4

[redflag]

One of the things that I disliked in HOI3 was the fact that Norway was on balance not worth capturing as Germany in HOI3. Germany needed Norway's port at Narvick to import iron ore from Sweden. Given the fact that on balance Norway itself does not justify the cost of being occupied unless the Axis has at least Naval parity with the allies (UK/France) there should be a reason for Germany to control Norway without controlling Sweden in HOI4.

 

[Big Nev]

Yeah...

It's difficult though. I mean, it's not actually Norway's iron that everybody wanted to control yet Sweden (and I can't remember why) sent all this ore, by rail, through Norway.

Didn't Sweden have deep water ports of her own?

 

[BlitzWarfare]

I guess it was a political issue.
They probably wanted to keep German ships out of their ports so the allies wouldn't attack the ports.

They should also make northern Africa more interesting to capture.

 

[Bluestreak2k5]

The simple solution to this is they need to add in British events to land forces and occupy Norway, as actually happened in real life. The British planned to land and occupy Norway, while attacking and destroying Swedish Iron mines. This gives the british very close bases to German main industries and all of German Naval ports.

 

[podcat]

Didn't Sweden have deep water ports of her own?

The main swedish ports close to the mines freeze in winter and it was apparently not on the table to build a stronger railway down towards big enough ports to the south, so to norway it went.

 

[Baltasar]

Since they said it'd be more of a sandbox game, I doubt strict scripts are the way to go here. In any case, such an occupation shouldn't come for free, neither for the Allies nor for the Axis.

 

[debozewolf]

The main swedish ports close to the mines freeze in winter and it was apparently not on the table to build a stronger railway down towards big enough ports to the south, so to norway it went.

So will you be able to replicate this in some way in the game?

 

[podcat]

So will you be able to replicate this in some way in the game?

we'll see

 

[Mannstien]

we'll see

That usually either means that they've already got a brilliant system in place/planned or bugger we forgot about this but as an optimist I'd say they have a plan.

 

[redflag]

Can I suggest a strategic effect (or its equivalent) penalizing German industrial production if they don't control Norway in wartime. I am assuming that Sweeden's iron exports are above and beyond what they would send to Germany through Norway (its not like Sweden would refuse to send iron to Germany given the fact that Norway was invaded by Germany)

 

[scroggin]

Can I suggest a strategic effect (or its equivalent) penalizing German industrial production if they don't control Norway in wartime. I am assuming that Sweeden's iron exports are above and beyond what they would send to Germany through Norway (its not like Sweden would refuse to send iron to Germany given the fact that Norway was invaded by Germany)

That's fine as long as the AI Germany is scripted to invade Norway and can realistically expect to capture it. Perhaps an event giving Germany metal and Sweden money as long as Germany holds Narvik would work.

 

[might]

Can I suggest a strategic effect (or its equivalent) penalizing German industrial production if they don't control Norway in wartime. I am assuming that Sweeden's iron exports are above and beyond what they would send to Germany through Norway (its not like Sweden would refuse to send iron to Germany given the fact that Norway was invaded by Germany)

Please no, strategic effects were just a oversimplistic way of representing things.
How about just making the Swedish AI less eager to trade with Germany when Norway is not axis controlled.

 

[aruon]

How about just making the Swedish AI less eager to trade with Germany when Norway is not axis controlled.

or even better yet, have the trade AI give a bonus chance to trading to "quickly expanding" countries who aren't outright hostile to them.

 

[mursolini]

This touches a much more complicated topic of What is supposed to happen if Allies invade pre-maturely.

Will they countinue and invade Sweden? Would they just buy up the Swedish ore to deny it to Germany?

Will there be a way to "perswade" Sweden to build rails&south ports in peace-time to avoid the the nececety of invasion altogather?

The real issue is that resources in HOI3 were transported in infinite quantity by sea, and there was no frozing of ports, so yes, it was pointless to invade Norway, since Allies wouldn`t invade Norway or Sweden themselves.

As such, Germany should be happy to not invade Norway if Allies wouldn`t threaten to do that.

 

[redflag]

http://ww2-weapons.com/History/Production/strategic-raw-materials.htm

I am not saying this chart is 100% accurate but Sweden produced more than twice as much iron ore as Germany in 1937. Without iron ore you can't make steel and that would have crippled the German war machine.

http://ww2-weapons.com/History/Production/Germany/influences.htm
Assuming this chart is accurate Sweden provided Germany with more than 8 times as much iron ore as it produced.

 

[Art1985]

Make sure German AI can capture Norway and don't send all army to do it.

 

[Mannstien]

Make sure German AI can capture Norway and don't send all army to do it.

Those were definitly face palm moments when you see the AI sending in an entire panzer army into Norway while its mountaineer divisions were guarding ports :rofl:

 

[Beagá]

Controlling Norway isn´t just about swedish ore but also stopping the Lend Lease route to Murmansk, BTW.

 

[Secret Master]

Controlling Norway isn´t just about swedish ore but also stopping the Lend Lease route to Murmansk, BTW.

Yes, there is that dimension to the problem. Fiddling with the way the Soviets can receive Lend-Lease would require some real thought, though.

 

[mursolini]

http://ww2-weapons.com/History/Production/strategic-raw-materials.htm

I am not saying this chart is 100% accurate but Sweden produced more than twice as much iron ore as Germany in 1937. Without iron ore you can't make steel and that would have crippled the German war machine.

http://ww2-weapons.com/History/Production/Germany/influences.htm
Assuming this chart is accurate Sweden provided Germany with more than 8 times as much iron ore as it produced.

Swedish ore was of better quality than German, hencewhy it was prioritised.
Germany could`ve mined more ore domestically. But Iron was never a problem for Germany, it`s the rare metals that improve steel alloys that always were problems.
Hell, Germany produced ~4 times as much coal and iron as USSR, while having far less military viechles due to fuel being a bottleneck.

Controlling Norway isn´t just about swedish ore but also stopping the Lend Lease route to Murmansk, BTW.

Not at the time of invasion, though.