They really need to add Mobilization to the game

[Riekopo]

It's really bizarre that the Devs made a WW2 grand strategy game and didn't include a realistic Mobilization mechanic. The way they have the game now with huge armies just standing around all over the country all the time is total fantasy. The Maginot Line for example was meant to hold the Germans while the huge French Army was mobilized.

Once the war was going on yes, but not before and not in the beginning stages. Soldiers were at home as civilians doing civilian work. They had to be called up and mobilized. Which could take weeks if not months. And after all the reservists were mobilized new men had to be trained.

Countries that could mobilize faster had an advantage. Countries with large reserves of trained men had an advantage.

 

[Zeeth]

This is meant to be visualized in the national focus trees IMO
For example:

 

[Adolf - Finite War]

This is meant to be visualized in the national focus trees IMO

It should be faster - decision system - where you already handle events concerning conscription (demands to lower it when war support is low and to increase it when there is war in neighbouring countries). When someone attacks you or is about to you want to click that button that says mobilize not wait for a focus to finish then start the mobilization one and then get a timer upon completion to finally get the desired effect. Also foci aren't suitable for moving back and forth.

But both decisions and that tree are not about mobilization even though the names suggest it - they are about manpower. Having millions in the field instead of part of the workforce and the transition between these places is hardly represented. Total Mobilization and women in the workforce are one partial exception another are the production mali attached to higher conscription levels.

That it's financially totally unfeasable and counterproductive to you warpreparation to have a wartime amount of soldiers hanging at the border (not to speak about the diplomatic implications) isn't represented at all.


Mobilization should mean that divisions are only at partial strength (which would also help with equipment for training (army XP) as well as surprise attacks - I hope they include such mechanics in the Barbarossa rework) till they are fully mobilized and unless there are war goals being justified by or against a nation it should only be able to partially mobilize with limits depending on war in neighbouring countries and world tension.

 

[Zeeth]

It should be faster - decision system - where you already handle events concerning conscription (demands to lower it when war support is low and to increase it when there is war in neighbouring countries). When someone attacks you or is about to you want to click that button that says mobilize not wait for a focus to finish then start the mobilization one and then get a timer upon completion to finally get the desired effect. Also foci aren't suitable for moving back and forth.

But both decisions and that tree are not about mobilization even though the names suggest it - they are about manpower. Having millions in the field instead of part of the workforce and the transition between these places is hardly represented. Total Mobilization and women in the workforce are one partial exception another are the production mali attached to higher conscription levels.

That it's financially totally unfeasable and counterproductive to you warpreparation to have a wartime amount of soldiers hanging at the border (not to speak about the diplomatic implications) isn't represented at all.


Mobilization should mean that divisions are only at partial strength (which would also help with equipment for training (army XP) as well as surprise attacks - I hope they include such mechanics in the Barbarossa rework) till they are fully mobilized and unless there are war goals being justified by or against a nation it should only be able to partially mobilize with limits depending on war in neighbouring countries and world tension.

What you explain is already kind of in the game though.
Units have experience.
In the recruit and deploy tab, you train troops. If you need to mobilize in a hurry you can use the force deploy button to instantly field them.
When you do this however your troops start untrained and are left effective.

 

[Adolf - Finite War]

What you explain is already kind of in the game though.
Units have experience.
In the recruit and deploy tab, you train troops. If you need to mobilize in a hurry you can use the force deploy button to instantly field them.
When you do this however your troops start untrained and are left effective.

That's not really an issue though, unless you play Ethiopia you'll have years to build up. And aside from a few divisions and a bit of equipment most armies (French, German, Italian...) will be standing in the field ready for combat a year before the war as they should considering the rules right now. The state you refer to lasts only a little while after rushing recruitment however conscription based army divisions should only have a portion of their manpower in peace at a time and only mobilize the rest if there is a tangible threat.

 

[Xenrek]

i mean, when you change your recruitment laws (basically the government deciding it needs to raise a larger standing army), it can take a month or two *easily* ingame to actually see that manpower enter the pool, which *is* that "delay while the army is mobilized from the populace".

 

[Fulmen]

Judging by some of the replies it seems to me that real-world mobilisation needs to be explained:

During peacetime in countries with conscription, the military consists of a standing force that is much smaller than the force of a mobilised country. Among other things, such as forming the skeleton crew of certain wartime formations, that existing standing force trains conscripts. When these conscripts finish their training, they re-enter the civilian workforce (barring any who pursued and got a military career), with refreshner training every now and then (the more complicated the wartime job, the more frequent the refreshners). These men are trained now, they're not green like a fresh recruit.

In case of national emergency, this pool of trained men can be quickly deployed from within days to a few weeks, the speed of mobilisation depending on a myriad of factors. The in-game equivalent of this would be trained (again, not green) divisions popping up everywhere in the mobilising country, or if you wanted more detail, smaller formations popping up and then automatically assembling into divisions at certain locations. Players of the Victoria series will be familiar with this mechanic, though in Vicky 1 it was actually a bit more detailed.

The OP already covered this, but I'll recap. What we have now in HoI4, is a permanent fully manned standing army free of any upkeep cost and a magic pool of fresh untrained manpower just sitting there waiting to be tapped at a moment's notice. Only once the player goes past "Extensive Conscription", does the game imply with an economic debuff that this magic pool of manpower actually consists of people with jobs in their civilian lives. IRL mobilisation is very taxing on a country.

The way HoI3 handled mobilisation was similar to HoI4, but instead of full-strength units with free upkeep, we had skeleton-crews of units with tiny upkeep, filled to their wartime strengths with the associated costs once mobilisation happened. Mobilisation also cost IC in reinforcement and a huge spike in consumer goods needs to simulate the strain on the economy.

For posterity I might as well also briefly mention the HoI2/DH/AoD system: sliders and other modifiers largely impacted unit build speed, but there was no mobilisation mechanic per se, though some mods emulated it. Like in HoI4 (up to Extensive Conscription), in 2 and DH the MP pool was magical and drawing from it cost nothing. In AoD the MP pool had some interaction with the economy like generating money, so like IRL, it was actually counter-productive to "mobilise" too soon.

The way deploying manpower is done in HoI4 has very little to do with the real-world process of mobilisation, despite its name. If you had to find similarities with it and the real world, it'd have to be the production of divisions when a country is already mobilised and at war, and is out of a trained reserve, being forced to train entirely new recruits.

 

[Metz]

Since mobilization and recruitment policy depends on political power, perhaps a fast way to get political power would be to cash in stability for it. Realistically, for democratic countries this could be reflected as an executive order while for authoritarian countries it would be doable with no excuse. This would only be enabled during war though.

 

[Rashie]

Since mobilization and recruitment policy depends on political power, perhaps a fast way to get political power would be to cash in stability for it. Realistically, for democratic countries this could be reflected as an executive order while for authoritarian countries it would be doable with no excuse. This would only be enabled during war though.

The issue here isn't quite with political power and speed of manpower trickling into your unused pool, so much as HoI4 not having a system for calling upon already trained reserve formations of conscripts that form on the map within weeks, at it's longest. As Fulmen points out above, the way this game depicts mobilization isn't really how things worked for countries that practiced pre-war conscription training in yearly batches, and could not afford to only have that smaller core of professionals alone in peace time.

 

[klinkvon13]

Totally agree.

I understand that for gameplay purpose, it is convenient to have your whole mobilizable country represented with your armies. As if mobilized was standing regular army.

Though, unless you actually mobilize because of a threat, you should not have all these troops around. That's such a big workforce being unused!

What would not be so complicated to create is different templates, some pure regular army working as they do now, most conscription/mobilized based troop with a command skeleton, an amount that match the conscription percentage and the rest being listed as reserve-to be mobilized.

Ability to mobilize fast would be mean this troops would be at full capacity earlier. Not mobilizing would mean much more workforce available for industry. Mobilizing would increase word tension and feeling of threat by nearby countries.

This would be a nice gameplay improvement that is actually requiring only a bit of code, toying with things that are already implemented.

 

[Meglok]

A new mobilization system is really something to suggest for HOI5.

The current system, while not perfect or actually modeling real life in every aspect, does a good job for a game mechanic as a KISS method. The only monetary units are CIC, supplies, and resources in HOI4. Once you start talking about monetary costs for deployed units you are going places the devs don't want to go in HOI4.

The current mobilization of manpower has a standing pool of eligible bodies (consider them a mix of reservists, recruits, and draftees) that have gone thru basic. They either go to deployed units as replacements or to new units being deployed. You can either send time training them in camp or deploy them immediately with just basic training.

The manpower pool is increased by either a monthly trickle as kids age up and by using political power and that can cause increased penalties to the economy and training times if you are changing your law. When the pool is increased it takes time for those new bodies to enter the manpower pool while they "go thru basic".

The system works as a decent game mechanic, and while it isn't perfect I haven't seen a good reason to blow it up. Not perfectly representing reality doesn't qualify imho. I might have missed one while scimming thru the posts, so feel free to correct my impression.

 

[klinkvon13]

The system works as a decent game mechanic, and while it isn't perfect I haven't seen a good reason to blow it up. Not perfectly representing reality doesn't qualify imho. I might have missed one while scimming thru the posts, so feel free to correct my impression.

We are not at "not perfectly representing reality" but completely disregarding reality. This is the reality:

In hoi4, peace or wartime makes no immediate difference, even though wartime allow to increase the manpower pool, which does not even remotely cover half of what this means.

What is written there implies even consequence on the whole country (requisitions of vehicules, animals, etc). And it implies two very different states, with the ability to switch from one to another is an essential matter.

In hoi4, it is as if there was no mobilized army. You just have some laws you can alter to modify how big is your recruitable population. "Recruitable" choice of word says all. As with a professional standing army.

And this is not impossible to implement in hoi4. The way I described it require a few changes much smaller than Man the guns DLC.

(and I did not event went into the detail of "mobilisation partielle" vs "mobilisation générale")

 

[Meglok]

We are not at "not perfectly representing reality" but completely disregarding reality. This is the reality:

View attachment 587592

In hoi4, peace or wartime makes no immediate difference, even though wartime allow to increase the manpower pool, which does not even remotely cover half of what this means.

What is written there implies even consequence on the whole country (requisitions of vehicules, animals, etc). And it implies two very different states, with the ability to switch from one to another is an essential matter.

In hoi4, it is as if there was no mobilized army. You just have some laws you can alter to modify how big is your recruitable population. "Recruitable" choice of word says all. As with a professional standing army.

And this is not impossible to implement in hoi4. The way I described it require a few changes much smaller than Man the guns DLC.

(and I did not event went into the detail of "mobilisation partielle" vs "mobilisation générale")

Well, once again I ask why do this? What benefit does making this change add to game play? What improvement is gained in terms of game mechanics over the current system, other than being historical? Those are the questions that are asked of any suggested change to something like revising the mobilization system by the project manager, ie Podcat.

And it is never just making a few changes. I have done/do code, project management, play testing, and such. Something like revising the mobilization system effects focus trees, game balance, and would require some serious man hours of work and play testing, assuming it would actually be of benefit.

The current system ain't broken, works well as a game mechanic, and there are plenty of other areas in the game that need attention (hello front system).

 

[BeauNiddle]

In hoi4, peace or wartime makes no immediate difference, even though wartime allow to increase the manpower pool, which does not even remotely cover half of what this means.

What peace time? There is only preparing for WW2 and fighting WW2. Preparing for WW2 is covered by the different mobilisation laws having world tension limits. Try playing the UK and see how quickly you can build your army as a democracy following the historical route.

People keep talking about peace time laws like it's covered by the game. It's the same with improvements to the peace process - for 80%+ of the players the game is over as soon as the peace conference pops (baring exceptions where they will just annex / puppet the whole country they invaded)

The current cost for mobilising are: Longer training times as the less fit members of society are recruited & economic cost once you start recruiting every able body. Within the context of WW2 those are valid limits. Yes I fully understand outside WW2 there are much more complications for recruiting / mobilising (Vietnam war for example) but HOI4 is not designed to cover those.

Now a manpower pool for trained units (and for airmen) would be a nice improvement so the democracies can field slightly better units earlier and so you can simulate the length of the war as the trained reserves deplete. But that's not mobilisation (to my mind)

 

[klinkvon13]

To reply to both comment without redundancy:

- regarding gameplay benefits: historicity matters in gameplay (atmosphere etc: what is actually the main item on today twitter video from hoi4

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270745620979101697

); taking into account ability of countries to mobilize fast (or not); ability for the playing to either mobilize early or not, with benefits (readiness, increase world tension, making intentions obvious) or malus (production decrease and... increase world tension, making intentions obvious) - this is more credible and dynamic

- it is a serious misrepresentation of the 19-39 period to see it as a period where there would be either war or war preparation; in many countries, actually trying to avoid the war served as policy; and if Germany actually had mobilized all its country on the borders as early as 1936, Munich Agreement would probably had been much less likely.


("Preparing for WW2 is covered by the different mobilisation laws having world tension limits."; not, mobilizing before attacking cannot be represented by a change of mobilization law possibly only after the war started, to state the most obvious flaw
"for 80%+ of the players the game is over as soon as the peace conference pops": source?)

 

[tsfu]

Well, once again I ask why do this? What benefit does making this change add to game play? What improvement is gained in terms of game mechanics over the current system, other than being historical? Those are the questions that are asked of any suggested change to something like revising the mobilization system by the project manager, ie Podcat.

And it is never just making a few changes. I have done/do code, project management, play testing, and such. Something like revising the mobilization system effects focus trees, game balance, and would require some serious man hours of work and play testing, assuming it would actually be of benefit.

The current system ain't broken, works well as a game mechanic, and there are plenty of other areas in the game that need attention (hello front system).

The biggest game breaking issue with not having this mechanic is that a player USSR can easily halt Barbarossa dead in its tracks. Historically, Germany, having already mobilized, swept through Soviet divisions in the process of mobilizing.

I also want to clarify what I, and I think the OP too, really mean by mobilization. If you have 100 divisions in war time, you would still have 100 divisions in peace time, but they would not be mobilized. Which means, they should not have their full strength and organization in peace time. This has got nothing to do with conscription laws, or training of new divisions.

Mobilizing your divisions means waiting for some time for your divisions to come up to full strength. And peace time mobilization should come with diplomatic headaches that should not be worth it.

Without this mechanic, a player SU is ready on day 1 to meet the German onslaught. You can probably give buffs to Germany through national focii, which is what the game does currently, but this is essentially railroading the ai into being effective against the player.

An ideal situation should be that the player cannot mobilize in peace time unless they want to be DoW'ed, or spend all their civs on keeping their army alive. And this peace time army must still have all divisions on map but without their full strength or organization. And once you change your laws to full mobilization, they should take some time to come up to full strength, based on your stockpile, infrastructure, manpower laws, etc. IRL, this was the window Germany chose to nearly obliterate the Red Army during Barbarossa. The Red Army was not mobilized, and couldn't mount an effective defense. The player shouldn't have a fully equipped army on day 1 without mobilizing their divisions, or it breaks Barbarossa which is the MVP campaign of the entire game.

Another game breaking issue is that nothing costs any upkeep. It should be prohibitively expensive to maintain a fully mobilized army in peacetime on civilian economy. And the navy should cost something, civs, dock yards, something. So that the only limiting factor in the size of your army or navy is not time or manpower.

 

[SchwarzKatze]

The thing is, this was in HoI3: you can train reserve divisions that only have a fraction of its full combat power but cost less to maintain in peace time, which can be mobilized to full strength over time when you're at war. So for the same cost you can have a smaller but ready army or a larger one that takes time to get ready.

Edit: and it was possible to cap a division's maximum strength % in HoI2.

 

[Riekopo]

I would like to add something to my point. Not only does the game lack a realistic Mobilization system. The way it models the economic effects of recruitment seems goofy to me. Currently, you have Recruitment Laws and the instant you pick one/change one it instantly changes your economy. Which is really weird and goofy in my opinion.

The way it should be I think is a dynamic scaling. The more people you pull out of civilian life for the Armed Forces the more it will affect your economy. Instead of just the arbitrary giant jumps we have now. Allowing women into men's jobs would be a Decision or something that could give you back some of your economic output. Could also allow women to be recruited into the Armed Forces as another Decision.

 

[Secret Master]

Judging by some of the replies it seems to me that real-world mobilisation needs to be explained:

In the US, we don't usually think of the term mobilization in this way. We think in terms of the National Guard and Reserves.

But they serve a similar purpose. You have a pool of trained manpower that can be called up for active duty, but they have civilian jobs.

A new mobilization system is really something to suggest for HOI5.

I think you could just do a whole DLC around it.

The way I would implement it would be something like this.

1) Conscription laws would come with two manpower pools (which would total to the current manpower they have). They would have the active duty portion and the reserve portion.

2) While at peace, active duty divisions could only use manpower from the active duty pool.

3) Reserve divisions can be created. They require manpower from the reserve pool. They use equipment like regular divisions, and they only appear on the map with X% of their strength.

4) When mobilizing, reserve divisions quickly get up to full strength and have more XP than they would normally from reinforcing to full strength (otherwise, they will have the worst XP due to replacing 90% of their manpower).

5) While at peace/not mobilized, you pay X% in consumer goods for each conscription law. The higher the law, the more CIC. Those reservists aren't available to work 100% of the time even if they have civilian jobs. This also helps balance the mechanic so that spamming huge reserve armies with massive conscription isn't free. The penalties to conscription we have now do not apply unless mobilized/at war.

6) When mobilizing, there is no more "reserve" manpower. It's all in the same pool.

7) Most free manpower in NFs will have to be abolished and should instead be replaced with a change in the ratio of active to reserve manpower from various conscription laws. This lets authoritarians "cheat" on manpower like they do now (generic focus tree) without actually getting free manpower (which has always bothered me).

8) Mobilization should normally only be done when at war, but I suppose some exceptions can be made. Regardless, mobilizing should add to WT like a DOW (without stacking with a DOW if you mobilize at peace) since mobilizing is usually seen as akin to a DOW anyway.

What's important here is that the manpower pools are only separate in the sense that you can't spend reserve manpower to create active duty divisions. If you want to train that manpower, you have to form reserve divisions and exercise them at peace. We want to avoid trying to have "trained" manpower sitting around in pools, since that would really require HOI5.

 

[master_templar]

HOI3 did this rather well....
The only real problem with HOI3's system was that it was cheap to produce reserve units in peace time and them mobilize them

But the current equipment system in HOI4 would remedy that problem I believe.