The true size of countries
- Thread starter Nasr
- Start date
-
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.
yes because the fighting in burma china and the pacific is just a sideshow compared to the grand european stage. seriously get over yourselves the war in china and burma was just as important if not more and possibly in the future extremely important for doctrinal purposes. so there is no reason why the rest of the world shouldn't get more attention.
- 22
- 6
i never claimed anywhere that the fighting in europe would be more important. I only said that the bulk of the fighting in ww2 takes place in europe. Basicly all european nations were more or less involved in the conflict. Besides that, that is exactly what dan 'podcat' lindt said at the old pdxcon livestream about the map
- 10
Except that once you get 100 miles in from the coast the only things left to conquer are kangaroos
- 7
hey kangaroos are dangerous don't underestimate them.Except that once you get 100 miles in from the coast the only things left to conquer are kangaroos
- 4
- 1
Emus > Kangaroos
EMUS WON AGAINST AUSTRALIA!!!
BTW I am not joking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emu_War
Emus + Nukes too op for Australian troops.
- 9
- 1
Haha that's awesome, so I guess the real question then is, can emus mount a successful defense against the invading Japanese?
- 6
- 1
Fighting in Burma and China was irrelevant because the outcome of pacific war was decided in the ocean around islands. Get over yourself and recognise the truth.
- 6
- 3
Doesn't the Supreme Commander series use a map derived from satellite data? Couldn't Paradox develop something similar?
- 3
I think originally the reason why the continents are not accurately sized or positioned was performance. I had read that having all those extra sea and land provinces in HoI2's engine would have caused a lot of extra calculations.
However, hopefully that's an issue that has been overcome, because there's no reason that I can see not have correct landmass sizes in the game.
However, hopefully that's an issue that has been overcome, because there's no reason that I can see not have correct landmass sizes in the game.
- 2
That being said, in HoI3 the important thing was amount of provinces since to my knowledge that's the only metric of distance the supply system used. The Tripoli-Suez coastal route was quite long in terms of provinces.
In comparison, the distance between Shanghai and Sichuan was downplayed far more significantly, as I recall there were like half as many provinces there (it's a comparable distance to the ones you mentioned).
Last edited:
- 1
The Battle for the Philippines would more easily go on longer. Same with Burma. Both countries are huge.
- 3
Lets be rational about it
Say Japan was doing an invasion of China. If Japan didn't have enough manpower and supplies to make it through China's "actual size", then they probably didn't even have enough to make it through China's "projected size" anyways.
Furthermore, the areas most heavily impacted by distortion are the poles. It's not like you're sending massive regiments all the way up to the northernmost parts of Greenland...
I understand that the Nazis sent teams to Antarctica, but I'm sure those men were well prepared, and aware that maps are distorted at the poles. (As it turns out, Antarctica isn't really a white strip that wraps around horizontally)
In conclusion, there are no major strategic implications involved, even for sending troops to the Siberian arctic circle, or anywhere on the Russian front. If troops need more supplies during Barbarossa (the distance didn't look as far on the map...) they will simply request reinforcements.
Although mildly interesting, this thread has used up its relevance to strategy.
Say Japan was doing an invasion of China. If Japan didn't have enough manpower and supplies to make it through China's "actual size", then they probably didn't even have enough to make it through China's "projected size" anyways.
Furthermore, the areas most heavily impacted by distortion are the poles. It's not like you're sending massive regiments all the way up to the northernmost parts of Greenland...
I understand that the Nazis sent teams to Antarctica, but I'm sure those men were well prepared, and aware that maps are distorted at the poles. (As it turns out, Antarctica isn't really a white strip that wraps around horizontally
)In conclusion, there are no major strategic implications involved, even for sending troops to the Siberian arctic circle, or anywhere on the Russian front. If troops need more supplies during Barbarossa (the distance didn't look as far on the map...
) they will simply request reinforcements. Although mildly interesting, this thread has used up its relevance to strategy.
- 4
- 2
Representing the years long relative deadlock in China has always been problematic in HoI series, so it's very relevant as the relatively small in-game China is part of the problem. In latest version of TFH AI Japan is often in Sichuan in year or so.
- 3
- 1
Lets be rational about it
Say Japan was doing an invasion of China. If Japan didn't have enough manpower and supplies to make it through China's "actual size", then they probably didn't even have enough to make it through China's "projected size" anyways.
Furthermore, the areas most heavily impacted by distortion are the poles. It's not like you're sending massive regiments all the way up to the northernmost parts of Greenland...
I understand that the Nazis sent teams to Antarctica, but I'm sure those men were well prepared, and aware that maps are distorted at the poles. (As it turns out, Antarctica isn't really a white strip that wraps around horizontally
In conclusion, there are no major strategic implications involved, even for sending troops to the Siberian arctic circle, or anywhere on the Russian front. If troops need more supplies during Barbarossa (the distance didn't look as far on the map...
Although mildly interesting, this thread has used up its relevance to strategy.
It's not that Europe is a problem... it's that the Pacific theater is too small. There's a reason China could suck up so many Japanese troops, it was huge, actually larger than the Eastern Front.
Similarly, the Philippines and Burma are also huge.
Germany, at its farthest extent, had 3.6 million square miles of land territory.
Japan, at its largest extent had 7.4 million square miles of land territory.
The distances are also further. This has consequences. I remember on another thread, someone asked why the British didn't just send some Singaporean boats to disrupt the Japanese landings at the top of the Malay peninsula. They thought they were very close because mercator projections mess things up. That distance is actually 640 km. The same distance from Frankfurt to London. It just looks shorter and is represented by fewer provinces.
But Europe has 2 to 3 times more provinces than the Pacific areas.
- 4
- 2
I think this is a balance thing to give Japan a fighting chance against USA.
- 1
In darkest hour, the Chinese theater was always represented perfectly: Japan would charge in headfirst and make large gains, then stagnate after a month or two and not make any more major advances.
- 1
- 1
Sharp163,
Repeat Rule #1 of HOI4...
"If something was a good mechanic or idea in Darkest Hour or Arsenal of Democracy， it will not be in HOI4."
DH's amazing map with a focus on accuracy and precision? Let's just devolve things to the state level.
AOD had a wonderful 4 hour delay for initiating and breaking off attacks... it worked wonders for realism.... That's not in HOI4.
- 2
- 2
I thought rule #1 was "every time someone asks about the release date, Johan pushes it back a month"
- 2
