Suggestions for war support

[stl3l9n]

The upcoming update will bring war support, and with that allot of possibilities. I've thought of a few ideas that could be added to make it more interesting (Paradox might actually be adding some of these, although I haven't looked at the dev diaries enough to know). Anyway:

• Battles: If you are attacking an important state, or fighting a battle where a huge amount of divisions are massed, you would get events asking you to choose how to report the battle. You could put little emphasis on it and gain only small amounts of war support for a victory/lose only a small amount for a loss or put huge emphasis on it, and suffer heavy war support losses if you lose the battle. I understand this is probually quite hard to code though.
  
• Press: You could choose between 4 press types (State run completely closed, semi-closed, restricted and free) and they would give you certain different buffs/debuffs during battles and free press/restricted should give you +0.05 democracy support etc
• If your war is fairly static, but you are reporting that you are winning it then you should lose war support as the population gets agitated.
• Stability should affect war support and vice versa.
• Country specific events could be added such as a low war support Italy at over 20% surrender progress asking for peace, triggering an Italian civil war, of which the player could take sides (and the allies might not accept it).
• Germany would have high war support at the start of the war (WW2), but lose it if the the front is static, or they lose battles. (each of these examples assumes a somewhat historical game)
  
• Britain would have low war support at the start of WW2, but after the Churchill and a possible Sealion, they would get huge war support.
• The USSR would have high war support if attacked, then start to lose it after the loss of Ukraine and Belerus, but regain it if they manage to make a stand for Moscow/ Stalingrad/ Leningrad. If they manage to push the enemy back somewhat, they would get a huge amount of war support.
• If America joine the war by joining allies at 100 WT, then they wouldn't have high war support, but if attacked by Japan or someone else, then they would have huge war support (there could be incentives such as a pearl habour decision) to make Japan want to do that).

 

[Micky Luv]

Heavy casualties should dramatically decrease your War Support (and National Stability). Exact effects related to government type.

War duration should also decrease your War Support over time.

Conscription laws should impact both War Support and National Stability, especially for countries that do not normally operate with conscripted armies, e.g. UK.

 

[jpapple]

Press: You could choose between 4 press types (State run completely closed, semi-closed, restricted and free) and they would give you certain different buffs/debuffs during battles and free press/restricted should give you +0.05 democracy support etc

I think press should give an ideology defence buff for restricted and up, free should give a -...% modifier for ideology drift defence.. Restrictred and up should give you more warsupport and free should give more stability and less war support. Restricted and up should also cost more PP per month, while free is free because your government doesn't need to spend political capital or money and energy to run it's own newspapers and news institutions.

 

[JerkyJerry]

I put my money on Podcat and the team. They have my full support in what they are doing and the direction(s) they are taking. Maybe some of this can be incorporated into a mod. (Modders might actually be adding some of these, although I haven't looked at the steam page enough to know)

 

[bERt0r]

The upcoming update will bring war support, and with that allot of possibilities. I've thought of a few ideas that could be added to make it more interesting (Paradox might actually be adding some of these, although I haven't looked at the dev diaries enough to know). Anyway:

• Battles: If you are attacking an important state, or fighting a battle where a huge amount of divisions are massed, you would get events asking you to choose how to report the battle. You could put little emphasis on it and gain only small amounts of war support for a victory/lose only a small amount for a loss or put huge emphasis on it, and suffer heavy war support losses if you lose the battle. I understand this is probually quite hard to code though.
  
• Press: You could choose between 4 press types (State run completely closed, semi-closed, restricted and free) and they would give you certain different buffs/debuffs during battles and free press/restricted should give you +0.05 democracy support etc
• If your war is fairly static, but you are reporting that you are winning it then you should lose war support as the population gets agitated.
• Stability should affect war support and vice versa.
• Country specific events could be added such as a low war support Italy at over 20% surrender progress asking for peace, triggering an Italian civil war, of which the player could take sides (and the allies might not accept it).
• Germany would have high war support at the start of the war (WW2), but lose it if the the front is static, or they lose battles. (each of these examples assumes a somewhat historical game)
  
• Britain would have low war support at the start of WW2, but after the Churchill and a possible Sealion, they would get huge war support.
• The USSR would have high war support if attacked, then start to lose it after the loss of Ukraine and Belerus, but regain it if they manage to make a stand for Moscow/ Stalingrad/ Leningrad. If they manage to push the enemy back somewhat, they would get a huge amount of war support.
• If America joine the war by joining allies at 100 WT, then they wouldn't have high war support, but if attacked by Japan or someone else, then they would have huge war support (there could be incentives such as a pearl habour decision) to make Japan want to do that).

I think you are too dewy-eyed in regards to free press in a war environment. If let's say D-Day would have failed there is no chance in hell that the allied press would have printed an article framing it as a grand failure, at most a delay in operations. Look at how Operation Market Garden was officially regarded as a success. Imho it makes much more sense to base war support on the amount of manpower in a relation of (casualties + in service) / civilian manpower.

The Germans were able to lie about the setbacks on the eastern front for quite a while but when casualties amass and every person knows a few soldiers who died the home front starts to tremble.

 

[Meglok]

The upcoming update will bring war support, and with that allot of possibilities. I've thought of a few ideas that could be added to make it more interesting (Paradox might actually be adding some of these, although I haven't looked at the dev diaries enough to know). Anyway:

• Battles: If you are attacking an important state, or fighting a battle where a huge amount of divisions are massed, you would get events asking you to choose how to report the battle. You could put little emphasis on it and gain only small amounts of war support for a victory/lose only a small amount for a loss or put huge emphasis on it, and suffer heavy war support losses if you lose the battle. I understand this is probually quite hard to code though.
  
• Press: You could choose between 4 press types (State run completely closed, semi-closed, restricted and free) and they would give you certain different buffs/debuffs during battles and free press/restricted should give you +0.05 democracy support etc
• If your war is fairly static, but you are reporting that you are winning it then you should lose war support as the population gets agitated.
• Stability should affect war support and vice versa.
• Country specific events could be added such as a low war support Italy at over 20% surrender progress asking for peace, triggering an Italian civil war, of which the player could take sides (and the allies might not accept it).
• Germany would have high war support at the start of the war (WW2), but lose it if the the front is static, or they lose battles. (each of these examples assumes a somewhat historical game)
  
• Britain would have low war support at the start of WW2, but after the Churchill and a possible Sealion, they would get huge war support.
• The USSR would have high war support if attacked, then start to lose it after the loss of Ukraine and Belerus, but regain it if they manage to make a stand for Moscow/ Stalingrad/ Leningrad. If they manage to push the enemy back somewhat, they would get a huge amount of war support.
• If America joine the war by joining allies at 100 WT, then they wouldn't have high war support, but if attacked by Japan or someone else, then they would have huge war support (there could be incentives such as a pearl habour decision) to make Japan want to do that).

Wait, so you are saying you want to make suggestions about how war support ahould be done, but you haven't bothered to read the diaries about the topic you are making suggestions about?

I stopped reading your post at that point.

 

[stl3l9n]

Wait, so you are saying you want to make suggestions about how war support ahould be done, but you haven't bothered to read the diaries about the topic you are making suggestions about?

I stopped reading your post at that point.

I had read it, just I couldn't remember if any of my suggestions were in their. I looked again, and they aren't.

I think you are too dewy-eyed in regards to free press in a war environment. If let's say D-Day would have failed there is no chance in hell that the allied press would have printed an article framing it as a grand failure, at most a delay in operations. Look at how Operation Market Garden was officially regarded as a success. Imho it makes much more sense to base war support on the amount of manpower in a relation of (casualties + in service) / civilian manpower.

The Germans were able to lie about the setbacks on the eastern front for quite a while but when casualties amass and every person knows a few soldiers who died the home front starts to tremble.

The allies certainly didn't have free press during WW2 though, (atleast the war effort) was completly government controlled. One war which they certainly did have free press was Vietnam, and reporters could go to NV during the war.

 

[Secret Master]

We should keep in mind that war support isn't just about civilians.

If the political elites start to think the war is a lost cause, you have problems (July Plot). Conversely, if the political elite think you should stick it out, you have problems as well (Kuyujo incident).