Resistance and suppression

[Serensius]

I was looking for some information on the best way to reduce resistance inHoI 4, and I came across this:

http://t-a-w.blogspot.no/2016/08/analysis-and-critique-of-hearts-of-iron.html

It's a long analysis of the ideal way to reduce resistance, but the conclusion is basically this:


tl;dr is: spam divisions with 1 cavalry battalion and nothing else; or just turn resistance off.

and

Now that we established the numbers and various possible strategies, let's talk about the most important issue here. This is absolutely atrocious game design! It's 100% meaningless micromanagement with zero strategic depth.

Can someone confirm that this is correct? Or has the issue been addressed in any patches since release? The author also mentions that the AI does not make use of any suppression, and so basically gets no benefit from occupied territories. Is that correct?

 

[Alex_brunius]

Yes. Most of it is correct as far as I can see even if the AI has become better at dealing with suppression. The AI won't switch occupation policy to make full use of occupation.

Only needing to set up once is still much better then having the partisans spawn as physical units on the map which you have to chase down though.



It would probably make more sense if most states with anything of value required 1 division to suppress and if cavalry wasn't so much better then infantry at suppression.

 

[Praetori]

I would prefer if it was handled on-map but still off-map (as in security divisions etc are not represented as physical divisions on the map but visible on state/country level when zoomed out as special HQs or similar). Much how like air-zones works.

 

[Alex_brunius]

I would prefer if it was handled on-map but still off-map (as in security divisions etc are not represented as physical divisions on the map but visible on state/country level when zoomed out as special HQs or similar). Much how like air-zones works.

I like being able to have my security divisions available for invasion defense still in a pinch, for example as Germany occupying France or as Japan occupying India, so I'd prefer it as currently but with re-balanced values.

 

[Serensius]

Yes. Most of it is correct as far as I can see even if the AI has become better at dealing with suppression. The AI won't switch occupation policy to make full use of occupation.

Only needing to set up once is still much better then having the partisans spawn as physical units on the map which you have to chase down though.

Agreed. Playing whack-a-mole with partisans in HoI 3 was incredibly tedious.

Does anyone know how good the AI is at allocating suppression resources though? Let's say I create a field marshal and give him 50 1 CAV divisions, then use the garrison + suppress resistance command across a large area containing many states. Will it place more units in states that require more suppression, and spread the units out ideally?

I would prefer if it was handled on-map but still off-map (as in security divisions etc are not represented as physical divisions on the map but visible on state/country level when zoomed out as special HQs or similar). Much how like air-zones works.

This would definitely be the most convenient way to do it. It also sounds like it would be easier for the AI to handle. Obviously occupation should have a cost, so this should cost manpower and equipment, but if the ideal strategy is 1cav spam then it might as well be handled this way.

Maybe there could be a way to "deploy" the manpower and equipment used for suppressions as on-map divisions in case of invasion, when they're needed in a pinch?

 

[Alex_brunius]

Does anyone know how good the AI is at allocating suppression resources though? Let's say I create a field marshal and give him 50 1 CAV divisions, then use the garrison + suppress resistance command across a large area containing many states. Will it place more units in states that require more suppression, and spread the units out ideally?

I've seen the 1.3.3 AI work in a mostly reactive mode, sending divisions around to deal with the highest resistance states as resistance grows. But that might just have been it not having enough divisions to suppress all of them as well.

 

[Serensius]

I've seen the 1.3.3 AI work in a mostly reactive mode, sending divisions around to deal with the highest resistance states as resistance grows. But that might just have been it not having enough divisions to suppress all of them as well.

Would be interesting to know if the AI considers the suppression stat or just goes by the sheer number of divisions. Will experiment on my next playthrough.

Either way I suppose it's a mechanic with a lot of room for expansion with things like espionage, raids, scouting out important enemy buildings/troop movements etc.

 

[HaruhiFollower]

The current system is just unfunny micromanagement for the player and a handicap for the AI (which still has a lot of problems with occupation). I would be perfectly content with the whole system taken off the map and incorporated into state-level and occupation policy effects. Security divisions were often composed of soldiers unfit for front-line duty, armed with legacy equipment and had little to no artillery - I doubt being able to deploy them as combat troops would serve any reason other then flavour - and there are many other places where it can be added.
In the PDXCON stream this was noted as one (of the many) areas they want to improve.

 

[Praetori]

I like being able to have my security divisions available for invasion defense still in a pinch, for example as Germany occupying France or as Japan occupying India, so I'd prefer it as currently but with re-balanced values.

I agree but they could still be deployable. Much like divisions in the training-queue which are de-facto populated with manpower and equipment but just not deployed on the map.

I would actually favor both units in training and security forces being handled in a similar manner (to also free up on CPU and not put load on battleplanner AI). Units are off-map assigned to states instead of provinces but not "deployed" until you decide to do so.
A future partisan/uprising system could work in the same way.

I imagine I could pull an infantry-division from the line. Change the template and send it to France as a "garrison/security" force at which point it disperses in that state (goes off-map and back into something similar to the "deployment queue") but it's still visible on higher zoomed out levels (for interaction and intel, friendly and hostile).

The forces arrayed as such could use less supplies or attrition or whatever (they're dispersed in the entire state) but can be re-deployed just like other units coming out of the training-queue.

I can even imagine such forces to be able to "defend" state provinces under attack but then with much less efficiency as it's only part of the force present at combat start.