While playing DH lately, i began to ponder upon certain things.
Different players exist, as there should in any game, and im not here to point that out directly. I am here, however, to point out the difference between a truly calculating player, a man who calculates the IC days of every unit, sets an objective, micros his forces meticulously and individually, sets objectives for individual forces, balances his builds well, manages his resources with care, trades manually, spies and counterspies, etc., and a more casual player, who follows the same doctrines as the 'mathematical' player, yet does so loosely and with much less efficiency. The differences can definitely influence much inside the game.
For example, a more casual player or even a player who doesnt micro and crunch numbers to calculate results might start a typical Germany '33 or '36 campaign by building as much IC as possible in any of his provinces. A more calculating player will, however, know that in order for IC to be efficient if built he would have to build 1 IC for 5 years for the cost of building it to pay itself back, and might set instead a smaller number of provinces as his main building areas since they are not only far away from the range of enemy strategic bombers, but they are also high in infrastructure, allowing for a faster buildup of industry once this is finished, and this is not adding to the faster IC building that comes from IC stacked provinces (a province in a mountain with 40% infra will 'rebuild' IC much slower than an urban 100% infra terrain that has 20 IC already inside of it).
Casual players might want to go with a fleet for future naval actions and order many different types of ships, such as light cruisers, heavy ones for raiding, DD's for submarine destruction or fleet variety and the like. Number Crunchers however set themselves a realistic objective ("If i want to invade Britain, i will need a fleet), plan many years beforehand ("I have 3 years to build a fleet, ill build it now"), and they will more than likely specialize their fleet with two types of ships: carriers and destroyers; one for destroying ships, the other for defense versus submarines.
A more basic player will build units based on their damage numbers and IC cost ("Wow! tanks are super powerful and they cost a lot! Ill build 10 of them!") and try to compliment them with many different types of units, such as Mountaineers, Marines, Paratroopers with their corresponding air transports, infantry and tanks and motorized and mechanized and cavalry with lots of brigades. A Meticulous Man will not only consider whom he is fighting against, he will take into account his own manpower, the oil costs of said force, the TC strain, the terrain he is expected to fight in, the doctrine of his army, the IC days of the units being built, the numbers, the disposition, the number of HQ's and their respective leaders, different corps sizes, how he will manage the conquered territory best, will he puppet or will he occupy, is he seeking to do a quick seizure of objectives, an encirclement or maybe drain their manpower? All of this goes on and on in the head of a mathematical player.
Relaxed players might build an airforce of interceptors for air cover and tacticals for ground missions. Deep Thinkers will consider, once again, the high IC costs of building a multilateral force and will focus both on air defense with his interceptors, setting them to scramble missions so they receive their bonus for such a mission, fighters being microed as soon as they spot enemy bombers, radars to support his airforce's fighting ability, avoid night missions with fighters and use interceptors instead. He will use TAC's in compact 2 wing sized air fleets to reduce the stacking penalty, and he will always order the airstrike exactly one hour after they are made and built.
There are indeed many more elements that strike a heavy difference between a less hardcore player and a number cruncher player, so much so that the difference by '39, assuming a '33 start, can be tremendous.
Different players exist, as there should in any game, and im not here to point that out directly. I am here, however, to point out the difference between a truly calculating player, a man who calculates the IC days of every unit, sets an objective, micros his forces meticulously and individually, sets objectives for individual forces, balances his builds well, manages his resources with care, trades manually, spies and counterspies, etc., and a more casual player, who follows the same doctrines as the 'mathematical' player, yet does so loosely and with much less efficiency. The differences can definitely influence much inside the game.
For example, a more casual player or even a player who doesnt micro and crunch numbers to calculate results might start a typical Germany '33 or '36 campaign by building as much IC as possible in any of his provinces. A more calculating player will, however, know that in order for IC to be efficient if built he would have to build 1 IC for 5 years for the cost of building it to pay itself back, and might set instead a smaller number of provinces as his main building areas since they are not only far away from the range of enemy strategic bombers, but they are also high in infrastructure, allowing for a faster buildup of industry once this is finished, and this is not adding to the faster IC building that comes from IC stacked provinces (a province in a mountain with 40% infra will 'rebuild' IC much slower than an urban 100% infra terrain that has 20 IC already inside of it).
Casual players might want to go with a fleet for future naval actions and order many different types of ships, such as light cruisers, heavy ones for raiding, DD's for submarine destruction or fleet variety and the like. Number Crunchers however set themselves a realistic objective ("If i want to invade Britain, i will need a fleet), plan many years beforehand ("I have 3 years to build a fleet, ill build it now"), and they will more than likely specialize their fleet with two types of ships: carriers and destroyers; one for destroying ships, the other for defense versus submarines.
A more basic player will build units based on their damage numbers and IC cost ("Wow! tanks are super powerful and they cost a lot! Ill build 10 of them!") and try to compliment them with many different types of units, such as Mountaineers, Marines, Paratroopers with their corresponding air transports, infantry and tanks and motorized and mechanized and cavalry with lots of brigades. A Meticulous Man will not only consider whom he is fighting against, he will take into account his own manpower, the oil costs of said force, the TC strain, the terrain he is expected to fight in, the doctrine of his army, the IC days of the units being built, the numbers, the disposition, the number of HQ's and their respective leaders, different corps sizes, how he will manage the conquered territory best, will he puppet or will he occupy, is he seeking to do a quick seizure of objectives, an encirclement or maybe drain their manpower? All of this goes on and on in the head of a mathematical player.
Relaxed players might build an airforce of interceptors for air cover and tacticals for ground missions. Deep Thinkers will consider, once again, the high IC costs of building a multilateral force and will focus both on air defense with his interceptors, setting them to scramble missions so they receive their bonus for such a mission, fighters being microed as soon as they spot enemy bombers, radars to support his airforce's fighting ability, avoid night missions with fighters and use interceptors instead. He will use TAC's in compact 2 wing sized air fleets to reduce the stacking penalty, and he will always order the airstrike exactly one hour after they are made and built.
There are indeed many more elements that strike a heavy difference between a less hardcore player and a number cruncher player, so much so that the difference by '39, assuming a '33 start, can be tremendous.
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
. Just playing it like a calculator feels a little like cheating to me sometimes.
