Should there be a 'captured equipment' system?

[Swordline]

I have been reading the developer's blogs of HOI4 for a while, the new system of production and equipment is, of course, fantastic! But I wonder would the team put a small extension on this system to make it being more 'realistic' and to make the gameplay of minor nations more interesting.

---------Down below is the idea-------

What do you think of adding a system in combat, that, if an unit gets defeated or scattered, the opponent would get a proportion of the equipment carried by the defeated unit.

For example:

If a soviet armor coprs with 100 T-34 tanks gets ambushed and destroyed by the Finnish forces, we can let Finland get, for example, 50 T-34 tanks in its national stockpile, and this would allow Finland to organise one brigade of T-34 for their own nation.

--------The reason why I have this idea------

I love to play as regional powers in HOI3, and I believe there is quite a lot of other players like to play as regional powers. One problem I notice is that it is almost impossible to get a even 'fairly' equiped army for a small nation even if I only use infantry.

What happens to a small nation a lot is

low ic>few units constructed>low practical experience>higher ic requirement for each unit>few units constructed

low ls and poor technology>Poor combat performance>need more units to be effective...

I believe adding this system would be able to make the gamplay for minor nations more interesting and to add more possibilities to the game

 

[Marximus1]

Podcat said there will be a system of captured equipment somewhere

 

[Mannstien]

Maybe a trickle of info will show up in this weeks DD or at least the part where we can use said equipment to build our divisions.

 

[Ciaphas Cain]

low ls and poor technology>Poor combat performance>need more units to be effective...

And with low combat efficiency you won't capture too much equipment. The whole system will still benefit mostly the majors.

 

[aphrochine]

To me, this is lower priority DLC/Expansion material. I feel there is just so much else the game needs to deliver on day 1 of vanilla release. I like the idea, but I'm leary of extra features development time/resources being diverted away from spinal aspects of gameplay like air war, naval, detection, supply, AI, etc.

 

[Marximus1]

To me, this is lower priority DLC/Expansion material. I feel there is just so much else the game needs to deliver on day 1 of vanilla release. I like the idea, but I'm leary of extra features development time/resources being diverted away from spinal aspects of gameplay like air war, naval, detection, supply, AI, etc.

Podcat said it was already planned for the main game. The system is already ment to handle the captured Equipment. It just needs to be "implemented"

 

[Dalwin]

How much of this really happened during the war? For generic items like supply trucks I am sure a lot did, but how about other items?

The German use of Shermans during Battle of the Bulge was mainly one of misdirection and not actually fielding them as a combat unit. The use of the Czech tanks was more than simply capturing existing ones, they also kept the factories for the 38t running for a while.

I am sure there are instances of individual or small groups of captured tanks being used, but I doubt it was often (if ever) to the point of fielding whole battalions consisting solely of the captured equipment. So you have a few T34s running side by side with your Pz4, but not whole battalions of them in separate units. This is where I presume the historians among us will start listing specific instances that prove me wrong (if such exist).

 

[Gamer_1745]

Whole German Panzer Divisions had French & Soviet tanks. 16. Panzergrenadier-Division had 227 T-34s just to name one.

 

[Mannstien]

Whole German Panzer Divisions had French & Soviet tanks. 16. Panzergrenadier-Division had 227 T-34s just to name one.

Yep. this was a big contributor and always has been, when they can get their hands on your equipment and they are lacking it will be put to use. If the countries that had turned into the countries that had not don't think for a minute they would leave perfectly good weapons on the ground just because it was the other sides.

 

[Porkman]

I just want this for small arms so you can actually arm soldiers with enemy stockpiles.

 

[Dalwin]

Whole German Panzer Divisions had French & Soviet tanks. 16. Panzergrenadier-Division had 227 T-34s just to name one.

Thanks. I knew if there was a good specific example, someone would come up with it.

So captured tanks would go into their own stockpile from which you could start creating battalions once you have enough.

Other things like small arms or trucks should just get added to your existing stockpile instead of keeping several of them for various nationalities. There is not that much difference to be worth keeping some things separate.

 

[battlemac007]

Germans used tons of captured Soviet equipment, such as the 76.2 mm field guns, which were mounted in at least one version of the Marder. Both the British and Germans used captured equipment in the desert. The Germans also used captured French tanks.

 

[Ciaphas Cain]

So captured tanks would go into their own stockpile

Why? If you capture a 1941 medium tank you can stockpile them with all your other 1941 medium tanks you produce yourself. Everything else would just end in a micromanagement hell, where you have to continually check your captured equipment brigades if they still have enough stuff to reinforce.

 

[Dalwin]

Why? If you capture a 1941 medium tank you can stockpile them with all your other 1941 medium tanks you produce yourself. Everything else would just end in a micromanagement hell, where you have to continually check your captured equipment brigades if they still have enough stuff to reinforce.

Except they are not quite as generic as that. There will be a variety of models under the new system. I may well have a version of '41 medium tanks which have put an upgraded gun onto the existing chassis. That gives me two separate stockpiles just from stuff I produce myself. Adding the foreign stuff to its own stockpile would also add flavor which is what I think folks want in this particular instance.

 

[Joppos]

Why? If you capture a 1941 medium tank you can stockpile them with all your other 1941 medium tanks you produce yourself. Everything else would just end in a micromanagement hell, where you have to continually check your captured equipment brigades if they still have enough stuff to reinforce.

Now why would this need to be micromanagement hell™? Even if having all captured equipment sent to its own stockpile there wouldn't be any need for noticeable micromanagement, this is just becoming a tiresome buzzword. And for one, the upgrades each nation makes on their corresponding models may differ to a significant degree even if they are based on the same class. This means that you probably want some types of captured material in only a few special divisions, and not dilute your fine forces with an inferior model of something.

If you do capture a certain kind of tank that you seem fit to replace main losses, then you would presumably only have to designate that in the same way you designate your produced tanks; which is once.

And with stockpiling the tanks together i assume you mean transforming captured material into your own type. That is just scary to think about, capturing panthers from france of buying type 89 tanks from germany.

 

[NilsS]

Whole German Panzer Divisions had French & Soviet tanks. 16. Panzergrenadier-Division had 227 T-34s just to name one.

While it is correct that the Germans used a lot of captured tanks, the 16. Panzergrenadier-Division did not have 227 T-34s. I wanted to look that up, because 227 medium tanks sounded like a huge amount of tanks for a division, especially a Panzergrenadier-Division. I found this: http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Panzergrenadierdivisionen/16PGD.htm (german link). I think the number of T-34s was from this list:

- 2 Flugzeuge Il. 2
- 251 Feindpanzer, davon
2 KW I
12 Sturmpanzer 12,2 cm
227 T-34
1 General Lee
1 T-60
1 T-70
- 245 Geschütze, davon
12 Geschütze 12,2 cm
40 Geschütze 7,62 cm
147 Pak 7,62 cm
43 Pak 4,5 cm
10 Flak-Geschütze 7,62 cm
- 87 Granatwerfer
- 164 Panzerbüchsen
- 34 LKW
- 4.680 Feindtote
- 435 Gefangene

The problem with this list is that it doesn't show equipment strength of the division, but is a excerpt from the combat report of the Panzer-Abteilung 116, the tank bataillon of the 16.PzG, for the time between the 1st July 1943 to 31st January 1944 and is a list of claimed kills. But the report also lists the strength of the bataillon during this time:

Diese Erfolge wurden mit einer durchschnittlichen täglichen Kampfstärke von 8 Pz. III und 5 Pz. IV - 14 Panzern erzielt.

"an average daily combat strength of 8 Pz III and 5 Pz IV"



edit: I found some examples of T-34s in the Wehrmacht:

On July 4th of 1943, 2nd SS Panzer Division "Das Reich" had 18 operational T-34 tanks and 9 in repair.

On December 30th of 1944, some 29 Panzerkampfwagen T-34 747(r) were in service with Geb.Jäg.Rgt.100.

source: http://www.achtungpanzer.com/panzerkampfwagen-t-34r-soviet-t-34-in-german-service.htm

 

[Dalwin]

For a minute I thought that the lone General Lee was out of place but then I remembered that we gave several of those to the Soviets.

An actual strength of 13 vehicles for a German tank battalion sounds very low since the full strength of a single company would have been 17, 3x5 platoons plus a two vehicle Company element. A Bn should have had, IIRC, 54; 3x17 + a 3 vehicle Bn element.

How many panzer Bns did a PzGrdr division usually have? I want to say it was one per infantry regiment plus one at the divisional level, but I might not be remembering the TOE right. That would make the full strength (not actual strength) for such a division at about 220 tanks.

 

[EmperorTojo]

Podcat said it was already planned for the main game. The system is already ment to handle the captured Equipment. It just needs to be "implemented"

In the stream he seemed bit unsure about it, but he said that it is possible to do it and they probably will.

 

[NilsS]

An actual strength of 13 vehicles for a German tank battalion sounds very low since the full strength of a single company would have been 17, 3x5 platoons plus a two vehicle Company element. A Bn should have had, IIRC, 54; 3x17 + a 3 vehicle Bn element.

I think this particular bataillon had 4 companies. 13 vehicles is pretty low, but the report was speaking about how many vehicles were combat ready on an average day. The overall strength of the bataillon should have been about 30 tanks I guess, which sounds about right for a late 1943 tank bataillon in a PzG-Division. The report also lists their losses during the time:

37 Panzer, davon
1 Panzer II
26 Panzer III
7 Panzer IV
2 Befehls-Panzer III
1 Panzer III, 7,5-cm kurze KwK

How many panzer Bns did a PzGrdr division usually have? I want to say it was one per infantry regiment plus one at the divisional level, but I might not be remembering the TOE right. That would make the full strength (not actual strength) for such a division at about 220 tanks.

I'm not really sure if they had one per Panzergrenadier Regiment, I think they only had the bataillon on the divisional level, but that could vary from division to division I guess. I also can't find a source about this so take it with a grain of salt.

But 220 tanks would be huge for a mechanised division. If you look at the tank strengths of regular german tank divisions at the eve of Barbarossa (http://de.wikipedia.or/wiki/Schematische_Kriegsgliederung_der_Wehrmacht_am_22._Juni_1941 german link, again)

1. Panzer-Division 145 Panzerkampfwagen (43 P II, 71 P III, 20 P IV, 11 Panzerbefehlswagen)
6. Panzer-Division 258 Panzerkampfwagen (53 P II, 167 P 38t, 30 P IV, 15 Panzerbefehlswagen)
8. Panzer-Division 212 Panzerkampfwagen (49 P II, 118 P 38t, 30 P IV, 15 Panzerbefehlswagen)
10. Panzer-Division 182 Panzerkampfwagen (45 P II, 105 P III, 20 P IV, 12 Panzerbefehlswagen)
17. Panzer-Division 202 Panzerkampfwagen (12 P I, 44 P II, 106 P III, 30 P IV, 10 Panzerbefehlswagen)
18. Panzer-Division 218 Panzerkampfwagen (6 P I, 50 P II, 114 P III, 36 P IV, 12 Panzerbefehlswagen)
3. Panzer-Division 215 Panzerkampfwagen (58 P II, 110 P III, 32 P IV, 15 Panzerbefehlswagen)
4. Panzer-Division 177 Panzerkampfwagen (44 P II, 105 P III, 20 P IV, 8 Panzerbefehlswagen)

[etc.]

220 Tanks would put them on a level bigger than most tank divisions and even if they only had half of their authorised strength that would make them almost as big as a smaller tank division.

 

[Dalwin]

Maybe the TOE I am remembering with 4 Pz Bns in a division is from a Pz Division after the fall fo France. Prior to fall of France they had 3 regiments each with 2 pz and 1 mot inf Bns plus some at division level. Those regiments changed to be 1 PZ and 2 mot. Some of the mot was eventually replaced by Pzgrdr.

So a panzer grenadier division probably only had one pz bn, but maybe it was an overstrength one with 4 companies. This would give it a full strength of between 54 and 71 with an actual stregth of much less. Then again it might have been 1 Co for each Regiment plus 1 Bn at Div level for a paper strength of 108.

The only nation that ran with a company strength of 10 vehicles per company were the Soviets who had 3 to a platoon vs everyone else's 5.