How about replacing "partisans" with a chance that an occupied province will revert to its owner, unless you leave a sufficiently large garrison somewhere in the state.
-
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.
Sorry - by "home" I meant national provinces i.e not colonies or conquered provinces.
about the game engine considering the USA-CSA-Mexican wars =
- i've seen insurgents REGULAR troops pop up in occupied territories!
- the ware exhaustion calculation is totally crazy! I've ransacked 80% of the Union - including the capital - and put down rebellions for many years. Still their war exhaustion is the same as mine = 20%.
- the USA AI only wants to give colonies. In the end they'll fight until hell freezes over,
- when the war is raging long enough, you'll have plenty of insurgents (different divisions) in occupied states,
I agree that you need to garrison those states you've taken. But when the uprisings have no effect the amount of revolts should die out after some monts (perhaps 2 years). And the war exhaustion should increase much more when the enemy is into a deadlock =
my example = 7 years of war with the USA (I'm Mexico) = war exhaustion for both parties is 20%. War score is 78% in my favour, the big Union states have been occupied for 5 years and all they offer are empty colonies?????
What do i have to do to get Empire city, Seatlle and ?Portland? = conquer the moon?
- i've seen insurgents REGULAR troops pop up in occupied territories!
- the ware exhaustion calculation is totally crazy! I've ransacked 80% of the Union - including the capital - and put down rebellions for many years. Still their war exhaustion is the same as mine = 20%.
- the USA AI only wants to give colonies. In the end they'll fight until hell freezes over,
- when the war is raging long enough, you'll have plenty of insurgents (different divisions) in occupied states,
I agree that you need to garrison those states you've taken. But when the uprisings have no effect the amount of revolts should die out after some monts (perhaps 2 years). And the war exhaustion should increase much more when the enemy is into a deadlock =
my example = 7 years of war with the USA (I'm Mexico) = war exhaustion for both parties is 20%. War score is 78% in my favour, the big Union states have been occupied for 5 years and all they offer are empty colonies?????
What do i have to do to get Empire city, Seatlle and ?Portland? = conquer the moon?
Judging the peace ai on USA or CSA is a bad move. They are both coded to be incredibly stubborn. Check the ai files out if you don't believe me. If you want them to accept a partial peace just change the peace factor in the ai file for 2 to 1.
Warning - do this in the ACW and it will end in a wimper in 6 months with a white peace
Warning - do this in the ACW and it will end in a wimper in 6 months with a white peace
Yes, though again this doesn't address the major problem; frontline retreating partisans.
One's that spring up behind the lines aren't the problem, it's partisans who suddenly appear in my trenches, then run off home and become a brand new division.
In extreme (and you'll only notice this in extreme circumstances) wars, partisans will outnumber any army being built by the AI.
I strongly suggest a war against Mexico, China or Russia. Advance slowly and garrison everywhere. Keep an eye on the ledger and reload occasionally to see what the AI is (or more likely is not) building.
I've fought against Russia and China and I must say the handful of partisans divisions is normally of no consequence to me when the 20+ divisions stack is bearing down on my main force
It is very annoying though in low unit density situations.
It is very annoying though in low unit density situations.
Originally posted by Derek Pullem
I've fought against Russia and China and I must say the handful of partisans divisions is normally of no consequence to me when the 20+ divisions stack is bearing down on my main force
It is very annoying though in low unit density situations.
Again that's not the problem.
China's army will expand without any recruitment.
Now when you really get into occupying a front from India to Shanghai then you are giving China their 100 divisions.
The AI is quite clever with these units, it doesn't just march them to their death, it moves them, sometimes to another front, all the while swelling their army size and thus; their stubbornness.
When taking fewer provinces results in a better peace deal then something is wrong. The link between relative army size to peace means these partisan divisions become very important indeed if they grow to extreme lenghts.
I fought the opium war several times before noticing this. China caught me by surprise for revenge once, I couldn't defend India and China marched through. Unfortunately, rather than that being to their benefit, all they did was give me free divisions to eventually defeat them with.
That's the reason I'm quite passionate about this, it rewards failure.
Originally posted by Derek Pullem
Judging the peace ai on USA or CSA is a bad move. They are both coded to be incredibly stubborn. Check the ai files out if you don't believe me. If you want them to accept a partial peace just change the peace factor in the ai file for 2 to 1.
Warning - do this in the ACW and it will end in a wimper in 6 months with a white peace
stubborn-not stubborn? What country was defeated in war, was occupied for 5 years and every rebellion was put down into bloodshed and still the "exhaustion" for both parties is the same? The result is that the AI is giving unrealistic peace offers.
I guess such a country will never exist.
why does Russia break in Victoria and USA not?
China wars in general and the opium wars in particular are being tweaked. But they are still a beast. The best way to defeat China is to march on Beijing and ask for one province. Which incidently is what happened in real life. With naval superiority you can choose where to land and it is possible. Never fight WW1 with China in Vicky
Originally posted by Derek Pullem
China wars in general and the opium wars in particular are being tweaked. But they are still a beast. The best way to defeat China is to march on Beijing and ask for one province. Which incidently is what happened in real life. With naval superiority you can choose where to land and it is possible. Never fight WW1 with China in Vicky
Yes it's simple to win a war, and humiliate China; hardly fight.
Now while that might coincedentally lead to an historic result in that war, the underlying mechanism is still a problem for all nations with lots of provinces, or wide front wars.
Add Austria to the list, and Ottoman Empire.
There is a way around the issue; never wait to capture territory, simply drop off a division and keep the front moving, but this again makes it ludicrous. It's encouraging to ignore supply, or the logical occupation of territory before moving on.
Partisans are flawed and lead to flawed gameplay. I would hope this will be addressed, otherwise tweaking economies is not going to prevent 200 division armies.
I guess this game needs hippie social group & Peacenicks Party. Opium production would also benefit - now it's just needlessly piling up in the world market.
War exhaustion is very dependent on relative pops. Try fighting China and you'll see what I mean. You have to kill a lot of Yankees for minimal loss to get ahead of the game.
Errrrr......Russia breaks because it does not have
ferocity = 2.0 # Reluctance to end a war no matter what. Ferocious nations will fight to the bitter end.
in its ai file
In battle ui make use of 3 sorts of troops: Large army's to defeat an enemy's army's ,small army's to take control of province's after an army has cleaned it ,so the army can move on ,and cavalery troops behind the lines to defeat partisans.The key is to go fast ,the longer a war drag's on the more partisans you will get ,wich is realistic.While conquering the most of Russian Azia in 6 to 12 month's i barely had to kill partisans ,but in my 18year war with China logicly lots of Partisans joined the Chinese cause.In a sense ,for China ,i thought that devisions of ONLY 10.000 men as partisans of China was a bit unrealistic ,i would have thought such a sizable country would field partisan composision's of 30 to 50.000 .
Anyway ,the partisans are relativly low in number's and easy to kill of with cavalery troops.The only thing that anoyes me is that they capture territory so fast (5 to 10 times faster than normal troops) ,should they take longer time to take control of a province ,the it would be easier to destroy them before the have control (afterall by norm they are out of supply ,mere shock of less numerical troops can kill a whole 10 devision army if it's out of supply) ,it that would be changed to rebels wouldn't join main army's fast because they first would have to take control of a prov ,wich should take a long time normally.
Hence my conclusion: Partisans should simply take longer t ake control of a prov.Further than that they are easy to destroy.
Speak for yourself, buddy. Some of us get a kick out of pummeling the racist and ignorant traitors as soon as they pop up.
Frankly, it reminds me of everything that was wrong w/ humanity in the timeperiod.
Exactly. Serves him right for playing such a beastly and disgusting excuse for a "nation."
R.III
Mine eyes have seen the glory
Of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage
Where the grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning
Of His terrible swift sword;
His truth is marching on.
This:
Speak for yourself, buddy. Some of us get a kick out of pummeling the racist and ignorant traitors as soon as they pop up.
is fine. But This:
Exactly. Serves him right for playing such a beastly and disgusting excuse for a "nation."
neither follows nor is fine. In fact, it "reminds me of everything that is wrong w/simulations now".
If you want to stomp the Confederacy, more power to you. If you want to use your animosity towards a particular faction or nation to justify inaccuracies in that faction/nation's model, you need to make an integrity check.
Speak for yourself, buddy. Some of us get a kick out of pummeling the racist and ignorant traitors as soon as they pop up.
is fine. But This:
Exactly. Serves him right for playing such a beastly and disgusting excuse for a "nation."
neither follows nor is fine. In fact, it "reminds me of everything that is wrong w/simulations now".
If you want to stomp the Confederacy, more power to you. If you want to use your animosity towards a particular faction or nation to justify inaccuracies in that faction/nation's model, you need to make an integrity check.
I guess I put you down for not playing most of the majors in HOI, and heck, every country in EU2 then.
How about just unreinforcable? 250 soldier INF units aren't much of a problem usually.
Or alternately - allow exactly 1 irregular unit per province. If the irregular unit retreats to go somewhere else - no more revolts from that province until the unit is destroyed/disbanded...
Last edited:
May I remind everyone to observe the board rules - no inflammatory remarks, no name calling, country bashing, trolling, etc. Take it back a few notches. Thanks.