Definitely not silly for West-Europa. Map from 1899, so long before the start of the game.
Hearts of Iron IV is a world war game and it will be bigger than western Europe. And not all regions in Western Europe had rail.
- 1
Definitely not silly for West-Europa. Map from 1899, so long before the start of the game.
hoi 4 may use a similar method as hoi 3, which had strategic move. units could travel at (i think it was) 20xinfra kphBut HOI4 is not a game that's limited to Europe. Many parts of the world had very limited or no rail lines. While I don't mind the current infrastructure for determining supply capacity, the big difference is in strategic movement. Without rail lines a unit is forced to use its own transport, if any, while where there are rail lines fast movement can be possible even if the overall infrastructure is relatively low.
hoi 4 may use a similar method as hoi 3, which had strategic move. units could travel at (i think it was) 20xinfra kph
i think you won't get what you're after; they're trying to simplify all supply/infrastructure so that it's not as big a cock up as it was in hoi3
To consider - what would a separate rail line look like at the province level? All it would appear like is as a province with a high level of rail infrastructure. How does this end up differing from the current model of infrastructure? At the province level individual rail lines 'disappear'.
Remember this is a grand strategy game - local details will be abstracted.
To consider - what would a separate rail line look like at the province level? All it would appear like is as a province with a high level of rail infrastructure. How does this end up differing from the current model of infrastructure? At the province level individual rail lines 'disappear'.
Remember this is a grand strategy game - local details will be abstracted.
hey, i'm not saying i agree with them!They are going to make a game about the world's most industrialized total war that was won and lost on the basis of shipping capacity, railroad throughput, air transport, and access to fuel, where all logistics are simplified and fuel is not something that units in the field use....
But rocket interceptors and superheavy tanks will get detailed rules...
probably gives an infrastructure boost in some areaNot sure if this was said before, but whatching the www stream of last Wednesday(9/12) I'm pretty sure I saw a russion NF regarding railnetwork expansion or something like it. When they showed the trotsky coup bug it briefly went by it think.
But I don't know what it's implications are, as it didn't have a tooltip or information shown
"All developed areas had railroads" is not the same as "All areas with railroads were developed."
In Europe or America, infrastructure is supposed to represent a gradual buildup from roads to railroads to autobahns. If you have infra 15 you have 4 rail lines and an autobahn, while if you have 4, you just have a few dirt roads
In Asia, Africa, and the middle East, that infrastructure continuum didn't exist. Often, the railroad was built first, before any sort of road. The rails were built for the movement of troops and resources from the colonies. In places like China or Burma, forces had to stick close to the rails and couldn't go off for very long.
See this map...
The original proposal from the first of these threads was very specific. (See here for the thread from 2014)
Railroads help with supply speed, supply capacity, and speed of strategic redeployment.
Roads help a little with those things, but mainly they help with tactical movement speed and partisan suppression a lot.
For rails, make it so there is level 0 to 4. This represents the level of rail infra in the province.
Let's say that each level adds
+100% to supply capacity/throughput (The amount of supplies that can flow over the rails),
+25% to strategic movement speed, (the speed divisions move when strategically redeploying,
+25% to supply speed (the speed that supplies travel over the rails.)
Next, roads. They help a little bit with everything. Give them values from 0 to 6, with 0 representing no development at all (highland Burma, the Sahara) So each level would be
+20% to supply capacity,
+10% to strategic movement speed,
+5% to supply speed,
+15% to tactical movement speed (the speed divisions move and attack at),
+10% to partisan suppression. (representing the difficulty of fighting guerillas when it's hard to get from place to place to place.
I know that sounds complex but it would work very simply in practice and result in a single set of values for each province.
So let's say that Pskov has level 2 rails and and level 3 roads.
So the level 2 railroad gives it
2 x 100% = +200% supply capacity,
2 x 25% = +50% strategic movement speed,
2 x 25% = +50% to supply speed.
It also has level 3 roads, the roads add
3 x 20% = +60% to supply capacity,
3 x 10% = +30% to strategic movement speed,
3 x 5% = +15% to supply speed,
3 x 15% = +45% to tactical movement
3 x 10% = +30% to suppression.
Now both kinds of infra combined result in single set of values like so,
(Effect from rails) + (effect from roads) = (net modifiers for the province)
In this case, Pskov has
200% + 60% = +260% supply capacity,
50% + 30% = +80% strat movement speed,
50% + 15% = +65% supply speed,
0% + 45% = +45% tactical movement speed,
0% + 30% = +30% suppression.
These are all single values according to the game.
The next day it gets muddy. Mud reduces the effect of roads by half and of rails by 10%. (How much could be based on level of the infra as well, representing that Autobahns are less vulnerable to weather than dirt roads. But the important thing is that roads are affected more)
So the new values of the rails under mud which reduces them by 10%.
(.9 from mud) x 2 x 100% = +180% supply capacity,
(.9 from mud) x 2 x 25% = +45% strategic movement speed,
(.9 from mud) x 2 x 25% = +45% to supply speed.
You can see that they are only affected a little.
The roads, on the other hand are reduced by half. So that becomes.
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 20% = 30% supply capacity
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 10% = 15% strategic movement speed.
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 5% = 7.5% supply speed
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 15% = 22.5% tactical movement speed
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 10% = 15% suppression.
Now let's see the combined values again. When it's muddy Pskov would have
180 + 30 = 210% supply capacity
45 + 15 = 60% strategic movement speed.
45 + 7.5 = 52.5% supply speed
0 + 22.5 = 22.5% tactical movement speed.
0 + 15% = 15% suppression
This will allow for weather to slow down tactical operations but without hurting supply too much. It will make it so there are tradeoffs to fighting on terrain and building different kinds of infrastructure. It very clearly shows the difference between a railway in France and one in Vietnam. It's also easy to understand. If rails are shown on the map, then supply bottlenecks will be easy to find.
@ Porkman - a very detailed and thoughtful analysis - good job.
I am not a programmer, so I ask for input from those who are;
How easy is it for Porkman's idea to code??
"All developed areas had railroads" is not the same as "All areas with railroads were developed."
In Europe or America, infrastructure is supposed to represent a gradual buildup from roads to railroads to autobahns. If you have infra 15 you have 4 rail lines and an autobahn, while if you have 4, you just have a few dirt roads
In Asia, Africa, and the middle East, that infrastructure continuum didn't exist. Often, the railroad was built first, before any sort of road. The rails were built for the movement of troops and resources from the colonies. In places like China or Burma, forces had to stick close to the rails and couldn't go off for very long.
See this map...
The original proposal from the first of these threads was very specific. (See here for the thread from 2014)
Railroads help with supply speed, supply capacity, and speed of strategic redeployment.
Roads help a little with those things, but mainly they help with tactical movement speed and partisan suppression a lot.
For rails, make it so there is level 0 to 4. This represents the level of rail infra in the province.
Let's say that each level adds
+100% to supply capacity/throughput (The amount of supplies that can flow over the rails),
+25% to strategic movement speed, (the speed divisions move when strategically redeploying,
+25% to supply speed (the speed that supplies travel over the rails.)
Next, roads. They help a little bit with everything. Give them values from 0 to 6, with 0 representing no development at all (highland Burma, the Sahara) So each level would be
+20% to supply capacity,
+10% to strategic movement speed,
+5% to supply speed,
+15% to tactical movement speed (the speed divisions move and attack at),
+10% to partisan suppression. (representing the difficulty of fighting guerillas when it's hard to get from place to place to place.
I know that sounds complex but it would work very simply in practice and result in a single set of values for each province.
So let's say that Pskov has level 2 rails and and level 3 roads.
So the level 2 railroad gives it
2 x 100% = +200% supply capacity,
2 x 25% = +50% strategic movement speed,
2 x 25% = +50% to supply speed.
It also has level 3 roads, the roads add
3 x 20% = +60% to supply capacity,
3 x 10% = +30% to strategic movement speed,
3 x 5% = +15% to supply speed,
3 x 15% = +45% to tactical movement
3 x 10% = +30% to suppression.
Now both kinds of infra combined result in single set of values like so,
(Effect from rails) + (effect from roads) = (net modifiers for the province)
In this case, Pskov has
200% + 60% = +260% supply capacity,
50% + 30% = +80% strat movement speed,
50% + 15% = +65% supply speed,
0% + 45% = +45% tactical movement speed,
0% + 30% = +30% suppression.
These are all single values according to the game.
The next day it gets muddy. Mud reduces the effect of roads by half and of rails by 10%. (How much could be based on level of the infra as well, representing that Autobahns are less vulnerable to weather than dirt roads. But the important thing is that roads are affected more)
So the new values of the rails under mud which reduces them by 10%.
(.9 from mud) x 2 x 100% = +180% supply capacity,
(.9 from mud) x 2 x 25% = +45% strategic movement speed,
(.9 from mud) x 2 x 25% = +45% to supply speed.
You can see that they are only affected a little.
The roads, on the other hand are reduced by half. So that becomes.
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 20% = 30% supply capacity
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 10% = 15% strategic movement speed.
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 5% = 7.5% supply speed
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 15% = 22.5% tactical movement speed
(.5 from mud) x 3 x 10% = 15% suppression.
Now let's see the combined values again. When it's muddy Pskov would have
180 + 30 = 210% supply capacity
45 + 15 = 60% strategic movement speed.
45 + 7.5 = 52.5% supply speed
0 + 22.5 = 22.5% tactical movement speed.
0 + 15% = 15% suppression
This will allow for weather to slow down tactical operations but without hurting supply too much. It will make it so there are tradeoffs to fighting on terrain and building different kinds of infrastructure. It very clearly shows the difference between a railway in France and one in Vietnam. It's also easy to understand. If rails are shown on the map, then supply bottlenecks will be easy to find.
It's things like this that makes my confidence waver.the devs saying rails are all over EUROPE so they are unnecessary in a WORLD War 2 game.
It's things like this that makes my confidence waver.