The United States should be nearly impossible to conquer

[Axe99]

Two problems with that premise:
1. how do you define "nearly impossible"? If you don't really have a chance to beat the US as Germany, then how much fun can you have? Do you play until the game ends and get your satisfaction from a victory on points???
2. with that set-up you proposed, how can you play the Allies? Wouldn't they be a complete cakewalk? You can't have weak Axis, strong Allies and have a challenge with both sides unless you handicap the player regardless of his chosen nation. That would bring us back to difficulty settings which usually handle handicaps.

1) Winning as Germany doesn't mean the Axis have to conquer the world (indeed, shouldn't!) I would hope that at some stage, the HoI diplomatic model is nuanced enough to recognise that a Germany that's conquered Eurasia would be able to negotiate a compromise peace. I'd personally like a model where the Allies could run out of puff on the way into Germany, and be forced to negotiate a peace as well, but one thing at a time.

2) The allies could and should be a challenge early (the Brits didn't start winning much until late 1942), and then after that they very much should have the advantage if the US is involved. The most challenging gameplay moments I've had playing 'historical' games of HoI3 have been as the Allies, not the Axis (the Allies start hard and get easy, the Axis just start easy). The challenge is to win quicker than was the case historically, but also if the USSR falls to Germany, then getting into Europe at all, should be really, really tough (easier than invading the US, sure, but still really, really difficult), and then there's the hope of a negotiated peace again.

Ideally, I'd like both sides to be more challenging to win with than they were in HoI3, and I reckon there's a fair chance this'll be achievable, just through improvements in both AI, and in game mechanics that should mean the AI has an easier time working with them.

As per my earlier post, I don't mind the vanilla game catering to people that need black-and-white 'win/lose' conditions rather than something more historical and nuanced, but I personally prefer something a bit deeper.

 

[Swinds]

Hey, I did my best to come up with a plausible Sea Lion. There's just not enough steel and Allied incompetence and fuel for the Regia Marina and enough firepower in the IJN to Sea Lion and defeat France.

You did a very good job

 

[Denkt]

USA have 10 military factories, 22 dockyards and 140+ civilian factories at the start of the game. It have one of the largest populations in the world. It produce a immense amount of resources.

It is powerful.

It can probably operate 300 military factories and 150 dockyards at the same time with little or no dependency on import. It can field an army of such size that can not be matched by Germany.

In real life it is debatable if Germany even could pull of a successful invasion of Sweden which should tell us about chances against USA, actually Germany had no chance at all against USA even if it tried to play pure defensively. Axis only really had success early in the war against unprepered enemies. Even a minor country that is well prepered could hold of a major power such as Finland vs Soviet.

 

[ASPGolan]

People think that US should be nearly unbeatable by late game, but that doesn't take into account what actually happens during the game. Any country should be beatable and countries that overstretch more so.

It's not a question of who, it's a question about game mechanics here. Should players (or even the AI) be able to prepare invasions that didn't historically happen? Yes. Should they have the tools to bypass limitations that actual countries experienced in practice? They should, but they need to workaround or fix the issues that they faced starting with that historical start (relative to the abstraction that a 'video game obviously introduces).

As such we shouldn't be discussing individual countries from the perspective of game mechanics. However, I did see in the video livestreams, that the big players received means of production inspired by real life, documented companies and industries and equipment models, with their stats. That's great. Now you have tools as realistic as possible to accomplish the same things as those countries would have in real life, given the parameters of this simulation. So, both the player and the AI (hopefully) will have the necessary means to achieve great victories... that's what I hope for.

 

[Denkt]

Think about how much resources it took to defeat Greece, and that is maybe representative what it takes to defeat a semi prepared minor power. Think how much resources it would then take to defeat a fully prepered USA.

But as said the game is not about real life, if it was you would not really see that many conquest happening, as I said it is really hard to defeat a fully prepered defender, both USA and Soviet could not get everything they wanted in the cold war.

 

[ASPGolan]

I don't think they were that prepared on defending themselves. And their best troops were spread around. As such, It shouldn't be hard to imagine a organised, well supplied army being able to spearhead through their defensive lines and make them fallback several times before actually being able to hold their own.

 

[egslim]

To be honest,

Any invader who can overcome the challenges to
a) Cross the ocean with a large army
b) Keep said army supplied
c) Protect his supply lines against the US Navy
d) Invade the north-east US,

Wins against the US in 1936.

 

[ringhloth]

To be honest,

Any invader who can overcome the challenges to
a) Cross the ocean with a large army
b) Keep said army supplied
c) Protect his supply lines against the US Navy
d) Invade the north-east US,

Wins against the US in 1936.

You know that there's plenty of other US besides the NE? Resource rich, with plenty of population to enlist both an army and an industry? Maybe if the US is taken completely surprise by a sneak attack (unlikely considering the enormous build up that would be necessary) and the enemy manages to land units on American shores before the people even noticed, not a lot of industry would make it out, and the US would struggle for a couple of years. But in that couple of years, the invading army might get to Chicago, and be completely exahausted, out of supplies with their lines stretched out halfway across the world, with barely enough fuel being carried to push along the trucks necessary to ignore the piss-poor rail infrastructure in many parts of the country, with absolutely no fuel left over to drive the tanks forward.

Europe and the US were both heavily industrialized, yes. But the US's rail and road system was terrible. It took 4 months for a friendly convoy to get from one end of the US to the other. Hell, Toledo to Maryland alone took 2 months. The rail system could barely support a friendly army, and was woefully inadequate for an invader.

 

[seattle]

1) Winning as Germany doesn't mean the Axis have to conquer the world (indeed, shouldn't!) I would hope that at some stage, the HoI diplomatic model is nuanced enough to recognise that a Germany that's conquered Eurasia would be able to negotiate a compromise peace. I'd personally like a model where the Allies could run out of puff on the way into Germany, and be forced to negotiate a peace as well, but one thing at a time.

2) The allies could and should be a challenge early (the Brits didn't start winning much until late 1942), and then after that they very much should have the advantage if the US is involved. The most challenging gameplay moments I've had playing 'historical' games of HoI3 have been as the Allies, not the Axis (the Allies start hard and get easy, the Axis just start easy). The challenge is to win quicker than was the case historically, but also if the USSR falls to Germany, then getting into Europe at all, should be really, really tough (easier than invading the US, sure, but still really, really difficult), and then there's the hope of a negotiated peace again.

Ideally, I'd like both sides to be more challenging to win with than they were in HoI3, and I reckon there's a fair chance this'll be achievable, just through improvements in both AI, and in game mechanics that should mean the AI has an easier time working with them.

As per my earlier post, I don't mind the vanilla game catering to people that need black-and-white 'win/lose' conditions rather than something more historical and nuanced, but I personally prefer something a bit deeper.

100% with you on the historical plausibility. Unfortunately we won't see such detailled surrender event chains in vanilla HoI4 (based on previous experience). There are plenty of mods which had Nazi-US Cold War event chains and such. This is definitely the way to go. I for one am hoping that the new casualty counter will be used sensibly. For instance: an aggressive US player who suffers heavy casualties should be forced to the negotiation table due to public dissent. If Sealion succeeds, then there should be a Bitter Peace West chain where the Germans can pick from different peace offers and the Allies accept or not based on the harshness of the terms.
If they would implement anything like that, then Germany doesn't need to invade the US. If they don't though, then in order to achieve Endsieg you pretty much have to occupy the US otherwise leading to a disappointing end via decision on points.

 

[seattle]

To be honest,

Any invader who can overcome the challenges to
a) Cross the ocean with a large army
b) Keep said army supplied
c) Protect his supply lines against the US Navy
d) Invade the north-east US,

Wins against the US in 1936.

Not really. Part of the reason Hitler didn't invade Switzerland was that 100% of the Swiss population was armed with rifles and knew how to use them. Terrible partisan nightmare. In the US at that time you had more people with firearms than Germany's entire population. You think that 1936 Germany would have just kicked in the front door and the whole rotten building would've collapsed? That rarely succeeds and especially not in the US.

 

[ConjurerDragon]

Not really. Part of the reason Hitler didn't invade Switzerland was that 100% of the Swiss population was armed with rifles and knew how to use them. Terrible partisan nightmare. In the US at that time you had more people with firearms than Germany's entire population. You think that 1936 Germany would have just kicked in the front door and the whole rotten building would've collapsed? That rarely succeeds and especially not in the US.

I don´t think that swiss rifles in private hands was even considered. Switzerland was surrounded by Axis territory after the fall of France and with it´s part german, part italian population a far fetched hope was that they would join the Axis peacefully. A more practical reason was that Germany needed someone whom they could trade with (e.g. gold) and Switzerland defined it´s neutrality according to who was winning.

 

[Caesar15]

"The US should be nearly impossible to conquer"...
Oh Jesus, here we go again. Realism should always be more important than gameplay cause fun is way overrated. A game first and foremost should be realistic. Since when shall people have fun playing games? Sales are also overrated...

HoI4 won't let realism get in the way of gameplay. Axis and Allies will be balanced to be of roughly equal strength. Beating and conquering the US will be perfectly possible in the game. Whoever doesn't like it, can write a book about how infeasible this is.

Realism would make the US impossible to conquer. Nearly impossible would make it more gameplay friendly. And of course, why shouldn't it be nearly impossible? At the very least it should be harder than in the past Hoi's.

 

[amalric de g.]

Axis only really had success early in the war against unprepered enemies. Even a minor country that is well prepered could hold of a major power such as Finland vs Soviet.

Really? France was totally unprepared with 120 french Divisions, the BEF Forces, over 4000 tanks and 5000 airplanes?

The performance of the Red Army against the Finns was abismal, you can´t compare the Red Army with Axis troops in 1939.

Think about how much resources it took to defeat Greece, and that is maybe representative what it takes to defeat a semi prepared minor power.

You forgot that the Greeks had help from 3 British Divisions, 100 british planes and the RN, so Greece was not alone.

Germany needed 12 Divisions and 1000 airplanes to steamroll the greeks in 23 days. The Wehrmacht fought most of the time against british and ANZAC troops.
And please spare me with, but the 680.000 italian troops. Before the italians reached their Positions of the first attack on the Albanian-Greek frontier, the Wehrmacht reached Athens.

 

[tommylotto]

You forgot that the Greeks had help from 3 British Divisions, 100 british planes and the RN, so Greece was not alone.

Germany needed 12 Divisions and 1000 airplanes to steamroll the greeks in 23 days. The Wehrmacht fought most of the time against british and ANZAC troops.
And please spare me with, but the 680.000 italian troops. Before the italians reached their Positions of the first attack on the Albanian-Greek frontier, the Wehrmacht reached Athens.

If that was in the NFL, the Germans would have been flagged for an illegal chop block.

 

[Axe99]

100% with you on the historical plausibility. Unfortunately we won't see such detailled surrender event chains in vanilla HoI4 (based on previous experience). There are plenty of mods which had Nazi-US Cold War event chains and such. This is definitely the way to go. I for one am hoping that the new casualty counter will be used sensibly. For instance: an aggressive US player who suffers heavy casualties should be forced to the negotiation table due to public dissent. If Sealion succeeds, then there should be a Bitter Peace West chain where the Germans can pick from different peace offers and the Allies accept or not based on the harshness of the terms.
If they would implement anything like that, then Germany doesn't need to invade the US. If they don't though, then in order to achieve Endsieg you pretty much have to occupy the US otherwise leading to a disappointing end via decision on points.

Aye, I definitely agree that in-game there needs to be a way for the German player to 'win' beyond a 'it's 1948, who's got the most VPs', and if invading the US is the only option at the moment (which it may well be), then that's what'll have to do. Fingers crossed DLC or mods improves it over time .

 

[Sinbuster]

I'm of the opinion it would have been impossible (within the games timeline) but I don't want to ruin the plans of any alternate historians out there. Obviously making sure the game is fun is more important than historical realism (though I'm hoping for a TRP mod for HOI4 so you know my feelings on alternate history scenarios).

Why was it impossible: logistics. North America was not Western Europe with easy connections from Berlin to Brest. One does not simply conquer Canada as a springboard to the US. There was no Trans Canada Highway in 1940 so fanciful notions of blitzkrieging across the Canadian Shield is a farce. Try to wrap your mind around the sheer scale of North American and you'd quickly realize how foolish the idea is. Actually, I'd encourage anybody to drive across the continent: not only is it stunningly beautiful but it is enormous, as in many, many, many times larger than Western Europe. Hell, a number of states are bigger than western Europe - not to mention the colossal provinces of Canada. Without an a-bomb, it ain't going to happen.

 

[naisel]

Regarding the dimensions you're exagerating a bit, the only state bigger than France in the contiguous US is Texas, and relatively not by much. Also, no US state nor Canadian province/territory is bigger than western Europe.

To put things in perspective, the distance between the US west coast to the east coast is comparable to the distance between Normandy and Moscow.

 

[Sinbuster]

I am exaggerating a bit, I admit it. Technically all of Europe is around 4 million square miles. Say we get rid of Russia, which accounts for around half, that's still an impressive 2+ million square miles. The US, alone, is around 3.8 million square miles. I'll be nice and exclude Alaska, so, 3.2 million. I haven't included Canada (or Mexico). You can draw straight lines all you want but armies don't move in straight lines, neither does infrastructure. And to be brutally honest, Western Europe doesn't have terrain anywhere near as imposing as what can be found in North America (especially sixty years ago). When you consider the length and breadth of the Rockies, the Alps look like a holiday excursion. Not to mention the vast stretches of forest, bayou, desert, rivers, etc. It's an absolute logistical nightmare. That's really the point I was trying to make.

I could only imagine the German soldiers, having fought tooth and nail just to reach the Appalachians, staring out over the vast territories in front of them. It would have likely mirrored the soldiers of the East Front that saw nothing but unending Russian steppe. It would have seemed insurmountable, which it was.

 

[Loke]

Germany needed 12 Divisions and 1000 airplanes to steamroll the greeks in 23 days. The Wehrmacht fought most of the time against british and ANZAC troops.
And please spare me with, but the 680.000 italian troops. Before the italians reached their Positions of the first attack on the Albanian-Greek frontier, the Wehrmacht reached Athens.

Where were the majority of the Greek army located when the Germans invaded? I would guess, dug in facing the Italians at the Albanian front.

680 000 that was the number of Germans, the Italians numbered 565 000 in april 1941 according to Wiki.

 

[Loke]

Think about how much resources it took to defeat Greece, and that is maybe representative what it takes to defeat a semi prepared minor power. Think how much resources it would then take to defeat a fully prepered USA.

The Italian invasion wasnt really thought through; attacking with(87 000 men initially) vs a "semi prepared/mobilized" army(260 000 men) in mountainous terrain(in late october), its was destined to fail.