US National Unity; why is it so low?

[hkrommel]

If resistance to occupation was more difficult to deal with, it might matter more.

Occupying the Soviet Union just to the Urals should be an immense drain on the German army. Occupying New England, New York, and a strip of land to Ohio should also be a significant drain on any Axis power.

And occupations themselves are very profitable, further making it a pointless pain to drag out surrender in the case of either the Soviet Union or America.

Washington DC to New Orleans is 1554.792 km as the crow flies. Brest to Moscow is 994.701 km as the crow flies. Washington DC to Los Angeles is 3940.157 km, over two mountain ranges that dwarf the Urals.

It should be incredibly difficult, to the highest factor, for an Axis player to capitulate the US, particularly with an overseas supply line.

 

[sterrius]

Washington DC to New Orleans is 1554.792 km as the crow flies. Brest to Moscow is 994.701 km as the crow flies. Washington DC to Los Angeles is 3940.157 km, over two mountain ranges that dwarf the Urals.

It should be incredibly difficult, to the highest factor, for an Axis player to capitulate the US, particularly with an overseas supply line.

maybe 1 day pdx will fix the convoy system and actually increase the need for convoys both for imports and for supply.
Right now i admit its a joke as you can supply 500k troops with less than 100 convoys. (I will be surprised if you need 50).

 

[ltccone]

Washington DC to New Orleans is 1554.792 km as the crow flies. Brest to Moscow is 994.701 km as the crow flies. Washington DC to Los Angeles is 3940.157 km, over two mountain ranges that dwarf the Urals.

It should be incredibly difficult, to the highest factor, for an Axis player to capitulate the US, particularly with an overseas supply line.

You are correct. An invaded US would have fought hard.

maybe 1 day pdx will fix the convoy system and actually increase the need for convoys both for imports and for supply.
Right now i admit its a joke as you can supply 500k troops with less than 100 convoys. (I will be surprised if you need 50).

Large scale invasions of any type are too easy to do in this game. I watched the UK launch at least 50 large scale invasions against my Axis allies in Europe, the last dozen or more with 24 divisions. In the actual war you count the number of large scale invasions on one hand.

There is just no logistics in this game.

 

[petertel123]

Also, why is Italy's NU so high? Didnt they surrender before the allies even took Rome?

 

[henzington]

Also, why is Italy's NU so high? Didnt they surrender before the allies even took Rome?

Once Sicily was captured

 

[RisingSun]

It is part of Great Depression and Economy Crisis.

 

[Opanashc]

Also, why is Italy's NU so high? Didnt they surrender before the allies even took Rome?

Gamplay purposes. Italian AI is so unable to prevent landings, that it needs that buff.

 

[supraman2turbo]

Because electing FDR a second time lowers NU. FDR IRL won in electoral landslides but the popular vote was much closer. http://imgur.com/gallery/Ggp52

 

[Secret Master]

Because electing FDR a second time lowers NU. FDR IRL won in electoral landslides but the popular vote was much closer. http://imgur.com/gallery/Ggp52

I knew that one of the election events messed with unity. Couldn't remember which one.

I've spent too much time electing Landon just to get Standard Oil.

 

[sterrius]

I knew that one of the election events messed with unity. Couldn't remember which one.

I've spent too much time electing Landon just to get Standard Oil.

me too. I kind don´t see much the point of choosing FDR over landon.

 

[ltccone]

me too. I kind don´t see much the point of choosing FDR over landon.

The one time I played the US, I chose Landon too. I can't see any advantage in picking FDR.

 

[bradles0]

The one time I played the US, I chose Landon too. I can't see any advantage in picking FDR.

Because landon only won Maine and Vermont, so the country should get a huge NU nerf for picking him.

 

[ltccone]

Because landon only won Maine and Vermont, so the country should get a huge NU nerf for picking him.

It doesn't work that way in the game though.

 

[Secret Master]

The one time I played the US, I chose Landon too. I can't see any advantage in picking FDR.

Hidden achievement in HOI4 for picking FDR:

 

[ltccone]

Hidden achievement in HOI4 for picking FDR:

Sorry; I don't play iron man.

 

[Secret Master]

Sorry; I don't play iron man.

If that was a joke involving Mavel's iron man, a mecha FDR, and the game's achievement mechanics, then all I have to say is....

 

[sterrius]

Maybe FDR should also give a free manufacturer plus his infrastructure bonus. That should make him better in a way that it becomes historical.

It makes no sense the ahistorical choice being 100% superior.

 

[Secret Master]

a free manufacturer

So Landon gets Standard Oil. What would FDR give?

Or should Landon lose Standard Oil, FDR gets that one, and Landon gets something else?

 

[sterrius]

also a idea. But something must be done to make the FDR vs Lando choice at least more difficulty.

@Secret Master

 

[ltccone]

If that was a joke involving Mavel's iron man, a mecha FDR, and the game's achievement mechanics, then all I have to say is....

It was, but I didn't think anyone else would get it!