Some notes from the TRP game I played

[Araanor]

I played Italy and helped Germany in the war.

I joined the alliance before the invasion of Poland. This seemed to do funny stuff with the Rommel/Afrikacorps event, which triggered really early and I received tanks that weren't supposed to exist yet together with a Mj. General Rommel. The tanks were bad for my TC, too.

Slovakia, Hungary and Romania loaned their forces to Germany. A while into Barbarossa (at least Kiev had been reached), after a reload, the forces were somehow returned to them. (They promptly used them to destroy my TC instead.) Seemed like Germany was weakened by this, and the Soviets started pushing them back in the spring of '42.

Japan got stuck at the border of Beiping. The war moved 1-2 provinces from the beginning of the war to 1943 (when I quit). I once defogged just to see huge armies just staring each other down.

Repairing ships is extremely painful. If I play Italy again, I will probably just let those old things sink beneath the waves.

Org regain for planes is interesting. The AI actually becomes somewhat capable with these rules.

All the resource pop-ups get really annoying after a while. Couldn't they be cut to half or fourth or something?

 

[Mathias Rex]

This is a ridicilous mod. The name could be Total Irealism Project. The game balance is something awsomse bad. I cant defeat 7 units with more than 80 units of my!!!!!

 

[Hallsten]

This is a ridicilous mod. The name could be Total Irealism Project. The game balance is something awsomse bad. I cant defeat 7 units with more than 80 units of my!!!!!

Playing TRP is wholly different to playing regular HOI2. You have to take weather, terrain, rivers, airpower and armour into consideration more in TRP than you would in a regular HOI2 game.

 

[theRedCimmerian]

The one thing about vanilla that bugged me most was the ability of 24 divisions to chase maybe 5 defending divisions off the battlefield in about 2 hours. Thank god that doesn't happen in TRP. I noticed that in the Winter War, my Russian attacks would go on for days before my troops finally got tired and stopped. I needed about a 4 to 1 advantage and attack from 3 directions to get anywhere. Much more realistic.

The second Russo-Finish war was different. We crushed them, of course, my armies were much more advanced the second time around.

 

[unmerged(92480)]

>I needed about a 4 to 1 advantage and attack from 3 directions to get anywhere. Much more realistic.

Really? What have you read about Finnish war? Just short info about main reasons of losing first war:
1. Very poor intelligence, both strategical and tactical - RKKA knew almost nothing about "Mannergeim fortifications line"
2. Contrary to popular opinion there was not so big amount of Russians divisions, huge "human waves" moving under heavy fire and so on.
Here is what Shaposhnikov (Chief of Staff) says:
Finns had 16 divisions, we had 21 infantry division.

He was partially wrong. Lets see what was in Karelian (Viipuri, if I remember correctly, that was the main way of Soviet attack), the exact armies there were:
a. Fins: 6 infantry divisions, 4 infantry brigades, 10 single battallions. Summary - 80 battallions.
b. Soviet: 9 infantry divisions (24, 90, 138, 49, 150, 142, 43, 70, 100), 1 assault machine gun brigade, 6 armor brigades. Summary - 84 batallions.

In general (if we take total amount of infantry) it was 1.6:1

Finns had benefits of defending in forests and forts. Soviets had much better artillery and aviation.

So, your words "with 4:1 I barely can breakthrough their defence" as well as "the battle lasts days and days" hardly can be called "it is much more realistic". Neither Vanilla system can be called such as well, imho. I think the truth is somewhere between

In reality almost all operations (with very few exclusions, like "Operation Mars") which I know, where one side had 4 more troops than another lead to quick breakthrough and moving ahead. Another thing I would to add that finnish troops were worse equipped and supported by aviation than Russian divisions. In terms of the game its like 39 infantry against 36 infantry, something like this.

Later, in February, Soviets gathered more forces, about 243 batallions against 80 finnish; with heavy artillery support to use against forts, and made breakthrough without much problems

I want to underscore, that I do not criticize TRP as a mod. There are people who like it and its good. I just totally disagree about its "realism". It is not.

 

[Lothos]

This is a ridicilous mod. The name could be Total Irealism Project. The game balance is something awsomse bad. I cant defeat 7 units with more than 80 units of my!!!!!

Sounds to me another happy customer. You CAN NOT use Vanilla tactics in TRP. Brute force is on reserved for people who are in capable of planning attacks. Please refer to the TRP website for battle strategies on how to launch offensives etc...

 

[Lothos]

>I want to underscore, that I do not criticize TRP as a mod. There are people who like it and its good. I just totally disagree about its "realism". It is not.

Realism within the confines of the game engine presented by Paradox. Any person can come to this forum and spit out historical facts (including myself) and then claim the mod is not historical. When you tell those same people then mod the game and figure out a better way to do it the first thing that happens is they vanish like a fart in the wind.

Total Realism Project by definition is to make the game as historical as possible within the confines of the game engine! If you think you can do better then by all means make your own mod or show us how.

In TRP Finland does not have 30+ divisions. Please make sure you have played the mod before you make baseless remarks.

One last note please make sure you get your historical facts correct as well as the Soviets did out number the Fins 4 to 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

 

[unmerged(92480)]

Realism within the confines of the game engine presented by Paradox. Any person can come to this forum and spit out historical facts (including myself) and then claim the mod is not historical. When you tell those same people then mod the game and figure out a better way to do it the first thing that happens is they vanish like a fart in the wind.

Total Realism Project by definition is to make the game as historical as possible within the confines of the game engine! If you think you can do better then by all means make your own mod or show us how.

In TRP Finland does not have 30+ divisions. Please make sure you have played the mod before you make baseless remarks.

One last note please make sure you get your historical facts correct as well as the Soviets did out number the Fins 4 to 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winter_War

>Any person can come to this forum and spit out historical facts (including myself) and then claim the mod is not historical. When you tell those same people then mod the game and figure out a better way to do it the first thing that happens is they vanish like a fart in the wind.

Does this phrase mean that noone can criticize your mod in soft words and without insults, just saying its own opinion?
It reminds me often used argument like "if you are not writer/singer, you can not say that you do not like some songs or books"

And does the fact, that they do not have their own mod means that they are wrong just "by definition"?
And as for me I am working in another mod, I just did not want to show this, since it could be interpreted wrongly (and I think it will be).


However, if you do not like such posts, just say openly, I will stop writing and you could think about your mod as "totally realistic" if you wish.

>Total Realism Project by definition is to make the game as historical as possible within the confines of the game engine!
In no way when 80 divisions can not defeat 7 this can be called "realistic". One of the reasons I've answered here was that I've encountered this thing myself. I do not remember exact number of divisions, since I've tried this mod quite long ago, but general feeling was the same: my Soviet divisions could not defeat Japan divisions even very outnumbering them.
And that "historical realism within engine" was simply by:
1. Raising Def of units (which is discussable)
2. Lowering so called GDE parameter for USSR.

Do you really think that Japanese infantry divisions of 37th year were so equipped and effective to defeat USSR's being severely outnumbered?

As for the first point, when I tried TRP the battles seemed tooo long for me, but since I've deinstalled it, I can not check it again and bring exact values, "supporting" their "realism" with historical examples.

>In TRP Finland does not have 30+ divisions. Please make sure you have played the mod before you make baseless remarks.

I've read my post twice but did not find the place, where I'd said that in TRP Finland has 30+ divisions. If you mean "39 infantry against 36 infantry" that was their "version" in HoI2, like the year they were "designed". I've meant that since Soviets divisions has better and more modern artillery and tank support (within their organization, not only as additional brigades) they should be of "higher version".

>One last note please make sure you get your historical facts correct as well as the Soviets did out number the Fins 4 to 1.
That was only at February 1940, my facts were related to November 1939, when Soviets still advanced slowly, using btw frontal attacks (without enveloping and so on) until "met" forts of "Mannergeim line".
And using Wiki as a reference is quite bad style, as for me. Good historical books would be much better. Alas, I can not do the same - English is not my first language and here I am relying more on modern Russian authors.

I've mentioned twice: "the first war" and "later Soviets gathered more troops".

With this example I've tried to say (and show) that (again) it is not realistic when "80 divisions arent able to defeat 7".
Or having "4:1" ratio you still need to envelop to get victory.

>You CAN NOT use Vanilla tactics in TRP.
Forcing player to use "another tactics" does not mean that it is "realistic".

And I repeat again, if you do not like such criticism, say it and I (and maybe others) will leave. Since I feel some harsh intonations in your post like "who are you to criticize?!", "show us" and so on.

 

[Lothos]

Well it just sounds to me you never bothered to learn the combat engine.

Your satement

"Forcing player to use "another tactics" does not mean that it is "realistic"."

I will add to the end of your sentence "by your definition". You clearly never took the time to figure out the mod. Please with hold your critism until you actually played and took the time to understand the mod. There are lots of people who play the mod and make comments and ideas on the TRP forum which we take very seriously and try to make adjustments but it is also very obvious when people are making statements and have really no knowledge how to play the mod.

For example 80 divisions vs 7 divisions does not necesarily mean you are going to get an instant victory (which is what you are expecting.) There are plenty of stories of small groups of troops holding of units 10 times their size. There are lots of things that play factors here. For example

What was the weather at the time of the attack?
What is the terrain?
Where you attacking accross a river?
Where you attacking from multiple directions?
Did you have a combined arms bonus?
Did you use your air force to lower the enemies org as you attacked (Air Force is criticial in TRP to getting rapid advancement)?
Where you over your command limit?
Did you have atleast 1 HQ in the attack?

Allot of the answers to those questions can sway the answer in many different directions. It could be the reason between a 2 hour fight and 30 days of fighting.

 

[unmerged(92480)]

So, after I proved that your "disproofs" of my statements like "Finland never had 30 divisions, play the mod" were just from non-careful reading of my post, you still continue to follow the way "he does not understand", while the truth is opposite.

Up to you.

>For example 80 divisions vs 7 divisions does not necesarily mean you are going to get an instant victory (which is what you are expecting.
First of all, the speaking was (and is) not about instant or not instant victory in that case. It is about any victory. That man said that he "cant defeat". I have same feeling though I do not remember exact numbers of divisions. At in most cases, imho, the victory should be if not instant, but very quick. Another proof that you did not read my post carefully being in a hurry to deny it. I've said that as for me, the realistic combat length should be somewhere between Vanilla's and TRP's.


>There are plenty of stories of small groups of troops holding of units 10 times their size
Yes. But we are talking about not small groups of troops, we are talking about army sized groups. While we can assume that on the some part of front some heroic elite batallion holds the line, the general result will be as quick breakthrough.
This is of course if we are talking about divisions of more or less equal power, or even 80 divisions are more powerful than those 7. Like Soviets vs Japanese or Finnish.

Another thing that it should be based on general results not on exclusions like "once upon a time there was a small but very proud and brave group of troops..."

All that questions are nice, but they have no use in our topic. With 10:1 ratio you do not need good weather, aviation support and so on. You just need some artillery and tank support which you have by definition (they are in any infantry divisions).

As I've mentioned above there are only a few cases when having 4:1 ration in divisions did not lead to breakthrough. And they could be counted as exclusions which where right in "bad weather", without aviation support, without combined arms support

I am out.

 

[theRedCimmerian]

I've not seen a battle in the game where 7 defending divisions defeated an attacking force of 80. That means they were being attacked from at least 4 directions, I can't think of too many places where that could happen without the defenders being surrounded.
The Germans defended Italy with about 15 divisions(IRL).

In the first Russo-Finish war, most of my attacks were 12 divisions, about half 36 and half 39 infantry, very little attached armor or artillery. The Finns defended with 4 36 and 39 infantry and they were able to outlast me. This was fine, because I was trying desperately to train some of my pitiful air commanders. There just weren't enough to go around.

Apparently I built too many infantry divisions because the Germans decided not to attack me in 41. Despite the fact that my spys were climbing over each other looking for state secrets.

So, as an attempt to goad the Germans into attacking me, I attacked the Finns again in May 42, this time all my infantry was 41, many of my infantry had armor and artillery brigades, my mountain troops were all armed with artillery and we attacked in force. The Finnish army was about the same size as in 39/40 and had the same 36 and 39 infantry. We sliced them up in no time, then we rolled into Sweden, although they had 41 infantry.

Still no war with Germany, but the border is loaded with German divisions.
Some numbers from Nov. 39 (IRL):
in Karelian isthmus:
8 Rifle divs + 2 incoming
5 Tank divis

N. of ladoga
6 Rifle divs + 1 Tank incoming

Mid Finland
4 Rifle divs

North Lapland
2 Rifle divs
1 Mtn div

The Finns:
The Isthmus army
5 Inf divs

Rest of border:
2 Inf Divs

Reserve:
2 Inf Divs.

So, your right 21 Infantry divisions + 5 tank is not 4 to 1 better than 9 Infantry divisions.

The Soviets had an abundance of everything, except their supply corps was horrendous and probably had more to do with the length of the campaign than anything else.

The Finns did not have nearly enough aircraft, but they had the best fighter tactics of the time. In fact modern fighter tactics are based on what the Finns were teaching back before WWII. USAF used those tactics with excellent result in WWII and beyond.

Anyway, if you want to claim that 1000 tanks against 98 37mm AT guns is less than 4 - 1 odds, feel free.

The Finns did capture and use 125 Soviet 45mm guns which the Finns thought was a much better weapon.

Oh, and in Italy, on at least one occasion the Allies made a breakthrough, but it was stopped by blizzards. I have family in and from North Dakota, we know what a blizzard is. A good strong blizzard will stop any attack, no matter how big your army is. The Russians were renown as great winter fighters, but again, on at least one occasion, the day broke after a particularly nasty night way up near Petsamo only to find that some 90% of a regiment had frozen to death in the darkness (the 20 hours of darkness).