Indeed, the possibility of both would be a real treat! That's why I suggested in my air missions thread to be able to select a range of provinces to operate in, so you can choose to eploy your units in anywhere from 1 to a every province in range.
-
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.
The entire french army.
Read Panzer Leader by Heinz Guderian. Air power was used frequently by the germans to ANNIHILATE scattering unit in the exact same way it is used in HOI2. Interdiction bombing would be committed right before a panzer offensive, the units would be scattered by the tanks and then be annihilated by close air support.
Last edited:
Small but important details:
* Names for rivers, mountains and forests ion main map
* Descriptions of techs (HoI1-style)
* Animated AA, radar and fortifications
* More sound effects
* Weather and terrain display on regular map
* Better peace negotiations interface
* Names for rivers, mountains and forests ion main map
* Descriptions of techs (HoI1-style)
* Animated AA, radar and fortifications
* More sound effects
* Weather and terrain display on regular map
* Better peace negotiations interface
None of the divisions of the French, Polish, British, Belgian, Japanese, American, Russian, Finnish, or German armies were completely destroyed by air attack. In all cases the division managed to reform - even those divisions which retreated through the Falaise gap. Air power harries, damages, but it does not destroy because it is incapable of searching an area and rounding up stragglers in the same way that land forces are. Guderian did not claim that they could do this. Half the time bombers did not even find their targets, and were only capable with great difficulty of hitting targets on the move - because they had no way of knowing where they were, particularly if they only moved at night and were heavily camoflaged.
From a gameplay perspective also, this is unsatisfactory. It means that you can destroy enemy units without going to all the trouble of encircling them. There is no skill in forcing enemy units to retreat and unleashing hundred of bombers on them when they do retreat, annihilating them before they can reach the next province. This requires little in the way of planning or skill. I think that the reason why so many people are so adamant that it should be this way is because this is their preferred strategy for winning.
Besides encirclements, how many division in the entire war were completely destroyed?
Having zero combat effectiveness eliminates a unit as a combat force. Once 50-60% casualties are sustained, many units became armed mobs rather than military units.
The definition of 'destroyed' is what needs to be clarified.
My point exactly. Of course, by this definition all units which retreat have been destroyed, as they have lost all combat effectiveness and have become armed mobs. For game purposes, it makes sense that they should only be 'destroyed' through encirclement and surrender, as in game units are assumed to be rallied and re-grouped by re-gaining organisation once they finish their retreat. Rebuilding a unit represents training, arming and fielding a fresh division on home turf, perhaps with retreads who have recovered from wounds making up part of the draft that forms the unit.
Important thing here is experience. If we have a high experience division which is almost destroyed and then we reinforce it the experience should fall down. New fresh troops lower the general experience of a unit.
As has been suggested before on this forum many times, air damage should really suffer from the law of diminishing returns. Meaning that the amount of damage done to any division in in percentages of it's remaing str or org, instead of hard numbers. That way you can only wear units down with airstrikes, but never completely eradicate them.
This is alreayd the case in HoI2
Liked the story about your grandfather, the Finns deserve a lot of respect for standing up to the Soviets for so long, even if in doing so they helped the Nazis. I'm sorry to hear about your grandfather having to be the one to hand over the keys to that cruiser - she looked like a fine ship. 10-inch guns on a 3,900 ton ship? Maybe with the new ship-construction model you will be able to rebuild her?
Yeah, I'm not sure how the 'no retreat' order would work. Obviously, the soldiers of some nations (Germany, Japan) would often fight to the last man and the last round - it therefore seems a bit strange to see the historically fanatical Japanese surrendering as easily as they often do in the game. Still, I don't know how this could be portrayed properly on-map.
Johan said that the unit model will allow us to produce single-brigade divisions, or at least it will allow us to construct divisions with one infantry brigade and a support unit (and hence only a strength of 4,000 men). If this is the case, then the Finnish small-unit tactics should be more easy to reproduce in the game, although to simulate them fully you would have to allow ski-troops with special speed bonuses in winter weather. More importantly, the greater number of provinces should allow more in the way of encirclement and ambush of blundering Soviet armies. In HOI2 this is essentially impossible unless you allow them so far into the country as to risk losing the game.
Last edited:
You must be able to transfer industries and AA-batteries to counter strategic bombing campaigns...
* The cost of improving infrastructure is too high. 1 IC over one year! Let´s make it 0.2 IC. Then I think it could become a viable option to do...
Yes, but also the level of infra in the game was too high.
I cutted all for about 20% and made improving infra cheaper. So the strategically value is much higher.
There're too much 90% and up provinces there
Hope you´re wrong
. Where is the fun otherwise? It IS fun to win Bitter Peace in 2,5 months converting a 2:1 division advantage of the Soviets to a 3:1 own advantage before peace fires. That is easy enough to pull off, abolutely no need to abuse aircraft.Regards,
Thorsten
I think that Paradox should add the islands of Corfu and Pantelleria, both of these islands are incredibly important and strategic. Though sadly, both we left out.
Do we really need ministers which have only negative modifiers? Not that I dislike trade-offs, but why should I ever appoint a -10IC minister if there is another one around which don´t have any negative impacts?
HoI was the best strategy game I have seen and every patch and upgrade since has been an improvement. That said:
I would like to see code that would prevent the vaporisation of units in a province unless said province is actually attacked and taken by an enemy unit. Example: Italian African province is overrun by the British. I liberate it with Germans (it becomes controlled by Germany). I base Italian aircraft in the province to deal with allied bombers and ground units. I bring in an Italian division to guard the beach, the province changes to Italian and the Italian aircraft are vaporised. There are many more examples of unrealistic vaporisation which would be solved if nothing ever disappears unless there is an enemy unit attacking.
Another realism killer (admittedly much easier to avoid) is the vaporisation of units in strategic redeployment if their destination province is captured by the enemy. Yes it is easy to choose a safer province destination, but I should not have to. There are plenty of examples where tanks were brought straight into battle from the traincars. There are few examples of all tanks on a train vaporising because the destination railroad station is captured. It would be better if the stratically redeployed unit ends up in the nearest controlled province, perhaps with an extra organisation loss.
I do not know how the new supply system will work, but it looks very promising. One complaint I have with the old system is the arbitrary changing of supply centres. As the Japanese I must be very careful never to land any troops in Asia except Busan. Landing elsewhere means there is a risk the supply centre will shift to that port. Sometimes it shifts back, sometimes it does not. Sometimes I can restore my old supply centre by landing troops there, sometimes I cannot. It is silly that I should have to ship all Asian resources from India instead of Busan because I happened to land a division in India.
The AI is incapable of dealing with shifts in supply centres. I once landed an Italian division via a port in Africa which was not the supply centre. The centre shifted and the Italian AI could not supply Africa (the supply need calculation broke down). No amount of divisions landed in the old centre restored it and I had to ship the entire army out and leave Libya empty for the British to conquer.
Please make allied army orders save. As it is now it is impossible to conquer Africa with the Italians if I play as Germany. With several different advances taking months each but with different ETAs it is a savegame nightmare. The best way to solve it at the moment is to never turn the computer off. Yes it is easy for the great players out there to conquer the world without using allies but that is no reason to make it impossible via the UI. Sometimes the orders save and sometimes they do not. I am guessing the seemingly arbitrary nature of orders saving comes down to the AI still being active after I assume military control and kicking in when I relaunch a saved game. Better then to kill the AI if military control is assumed.
HoI is a fantastic game.
I would like to see code that would prevent the vaporisation of units in a province unless said province is actually attacked and taken by an enemy unit. Example: Italian African province is overrun by the British. I liberate it with Germans (it becomes controlled by Germany). I base Italian aircraft in the province to deal with allied bombers and ground units. I bring in an Italian division to guard the beach, the province changes to Italian and the Italian aircraft are vaporised. There are many more examples of unrealistic vaporisation which would be solved if nothing ever disappears unless there is an enemy unit attacking.
Another realism killer (admittedly much easier to avoid) is the vaporisation of units in strategic redeployment if their destination province is captured by the enemy. Yes it is easy to choose a safer province destination, but I should not have to. There are plenty of examples where tanks were brought straight into battle from the traincars. There are few examples of all tanks on a train vaporising because the destination railroad station is captured. It would be better if the stratically redeployed unit ends up in the nearest controlled province, perhaps with an extra organisation loss.
I do not know how the new supply system will work, but it looks very promising. One complaint I have with the old system is the arbitrary changing of supply centres. As the Japanese I must be very careful never to land any troops in Asia except Busan. Landing elsewhere means there is a risk the supply centre will shift to that port. Sometimes it shifts back, sometimes it does not. Sometimes I can restore my old supply centre by landing troops there, sometimes I cannot. It is silly that I should have to ship all Asian resources from India instead of Busan because I happened to land a division in India.
The AI is incapable of dealing with shifts in supply centres. I once landed an Italian division via a port in Africa which was not the supply centre. The centre shifted and the Italian AI could not supply Africa (the supply need calculation broke down). No amount of divisions landed in the old centre restored it and I had to ship the entire army out and leave Libya empty for the British to conquer.
Please make allied army orders save. As it is now it is impossible to conquer Africa with the Italians if I play as Germany. With several different advances taking months each but with different ETAs it is a savegame nightmare. The best way to solve it at the moment is to never turn the computer off. Yes it is easy for the great players out there to conquer the world without using allies but that is no reason to make it impossible via the UI. Sometimes the orders save and sometimes they do not. I am guessing the seemingly arbitrary nature of orders saving comes down to the AI still being active after I assume military control and kicking in when I relaunch a saved game. Better then to kill the AI if military control is assumed.
HoI is a fantastic game.
By the Way: How about the Units in HoI3?? Is Paradox going to keep the same system like in HoI2, where Units had different Names but the same Values. Like a german Tank Lvl.3-Tank which was equal to a Soviet/British/... Lvl.3 Tank.
I really would like to see a "real" T-34 ... inferior to a Panther but cheaper to produce for example
I really would like to see a "real" T-34 ... inferior to a Panther but cheaper to produce for example
By the Way: How about the Units in HoI3?? Is Paradox going to keep the same system like in HoI2, where Units had different Names but the same Values. Like a german Tank Lvl.3-Tank which was equal to a Soviet/British/... Lvl.3 Tank.
I really would like to see a "real" T-34 ... inferior to a Panther but cheaper to produce for example
I don't want to repeat the Dev. diaries, but I think the new way was explaned very good. Just read them!!!
Depending on "your" way of improving units, there're no "models" in the old style anymore and every nations tank f.e. could have total different stats.
The more tanks you produce, the cheaper they and their development will get.....
You could make the brigade very vulnerable to air attack. While not being perfect, it's a whole lot better than the way it works today (which is "not at all").
