Very interesting thing about weapon upgrades...

[I had a bad name 99]

I was looking through the type of weapons my division is holding, so I found out something cool. Your division can be equipped with foreign weapons as long as they are of the same upgrade tier as your own. For example, you can see I have MP43, Infantry Equipment 3 and Kpist m/45.

MP43 is the most advanced German infantry weapon, so you would have expected me to get it. Kpist m/45, on the other hand, is the most advanced Swedish weapon that was captured recently. It will not change to MP43 because they are of same upgrade tier. Whereas Infantry Equipment 3 is just the most advanced infantry upgrade not based on nation customisation.
It also will not change to MP43 -- same reason as Kpist m/45.

Check here: https://hoi4cheats.com/equipment. You can see that the developer actually put in effort to customize the weapons for "unimportant" minors like Sweden and Turkey. Kpist m/45 has a specific code called SWE_infantry_equipment_3. SWE means Sweden in abbreviation.

This applies to artillery and anti-tank as well.

Another interesting fact is some nations have both customised and non-customised weapons. For example, Turkey has a nation-customised infantry weapon (ZB vz.26 (ZB vz.26); code is TUR_infantry_equipment_3) and a standard artillery weapon (Advanced Artillery; code is artillery_equipment_3).

 

[Kryndude]

Your division can be equipped with foreign weapons as long as they are of the same upgrade tier as your own.

They'll equip lower tier captured weapons if there are none of the upper tier remaining, as long as you haven't forbid them from equipping those which you can do in the division template menu.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

They'll equip lower tier captured weapons if there are none of the upper tier remaining, as long as you haven't forbid them from equipping those which you can do in the division template menu.

Yes, I got it. But my point is that they will not "upgrade" from foreign weapon to your weapon if the level is the same. For example, in this part of my campaign, I wanted my divisions to be fully equipped with the most advanced German weapons. Turn out that they happen to have foreign weapons, and for some reason, they are not upgrading to mine. So I checked their upgrade tier, and it is the same as mine.

 

[Emren]

Yes, I got it. But my point is that they will not "upgrade" from foreign weapon to your weapon if the level is the same. For example, in this part of my campaign, I wanted my divisions to be fully equipped with the most advanced German weapons. Turn out that they happen to have foreign weapons, and for some reason, they are not upgrading to mine. So I checked their upgrade tier, and it is the same as mine.

Not sure I fully understand... all weapons are identical, stat-wise, when in the same tier (unless you have specific designers, but I don't think they carry over the bonuses if captured). Why would you want them to have a German gun if it's the same as a captured gun? There is nothing to upgrade.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

Not sure I fully understand... all weapons are identical, stat-wise, when in the same tier (unless you have specific designers, but I don't think they carry over the bonuses if captured). Why would you want them to have a German gun if it's the same as a captured gun? There is nothing to upgrade.

I never claim that i want a unit fully equipped with German weapons only. I am just sharing this post because this is something I found interesting. But I get the point of your initial post.

Edit: i give an example.

This German unit has a tier 2 German rifle and also tier 2 foreign rifle. I initially thought that all tier 2 will be automatically upgraded to German tier 3 rifle once researched and mass produced. But now i see they are also armed with tier 3 foreign rifles. Maybe during the process of capturing tier 3 foreign rifles, they get transferred to existing units. So once my tier 3 rifles get researched and produced, these foreign rifles will not get upgraded to mine since the stats are similar (as you said). This is something I did not know, so I just want to share the hidden "complexity" of this game.

 

[Simon_9732495]

Why would you want them to have a German gun if it's the same as a captured gun?

Because it's ugly, if a division has 23 types of guns, 17 types of atrillery, 11 types of motorized and 13 types of support equipment. I want my elite division to have only 1 type of equipment.


(You are right, it doesnt matter.)

 

[Zauberelefant]

Because it's ugly, if a division has 23 types of guns, 17 types of atrillery, 11 types of motorized and 13 types of support equipment. I want my elite division to have only 1 type of equipment.


(You are right, it doesnt matter.)

That is actually how a lot of "elite" divisions were equipped. Totenkopf used czech artillery, soviet tanks and pretty much any static division in the Atlantic Wall had soviet, french, dutch, italian artillery, machine guns, 21st Panzer Division had SP guns mobilized on french Tank and half track chassis, built from scratch. The RSO was a direct copy of the Stalinets tractor. The list is endless.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

Because it's ugly, if a division has 23 types of guns, 17 types of atrillery, 11 types of motorized and 13 types of support equipment. I want my elite division to have only 1 type of equipment.


(You are right, it doesnt matter.)

I have to agree with that sentiment. It is not really about creating a pure Aryan German division or some nationalist/ racist inclination. But just for the sake of standardisation and convenience in micromanagement. For example, now, before the start of a campaign, i would like to look over quickly all my divisions and their equipment, just to make sure they are equipped with latest tech...

Edit: if not you will end up with large number of outdated equipment destroyed like the Soviets at the start of WW2. I like the British model -- a small professional and fully motorised army.

 

[SophieX]

...all weapons are identical, stat-wise, when in the same tier...

Unfortunately yes

 

[I had a bad name 99]

Unfortunately yes

This is what I pissed me. For example, I was comparing zero fighter with Grumman wildcat. And they have the same stats wtf?? Grumman is more heavily armored while zero fighter is more agile. And I believe there is a huge disparity in power among the major powers especially. US planes are generally on par with German and British (Soviet too), but they definitely own the Japanese and Italian models.

 

[Zauberelefant]

This is what I pissed me. For example, I was comparing zero fighter with Grumman wildcat. And they have the same stats wtf?? Grumman is more heavily armored while zero fighter is more agile. And I believe there is a huge disparity in power among the major powers especially. US planes are generally on par with German and British (Soviet too), but they definitely own the Japanese and Italian models.

That is where the designers come in. Mitsubishi and Supermarine give the highest agility boosts, while German and US fighters are inferior. Then your Air XP comes in. You can actually tailor your fighters to the war you are fighting, so if firepower is needed, you can upgun your zero or Bf 109 til next week.

I think that most important equipment differences are in the fields of tanks and planes. Designers and XP go a long way to represent that.
With artillery and infantry equipment, on the game's scale, I do not see that much of a difference between a Garand, Lee Enfield, Mauser 98 and whatever the soviets used. Same for artillery. Doctrines and division templates matter way more here.

 

[SophieX]

....
I think that most important equipment differences are in the fields of tanks and planes. Designers and XP go a long way to represent that.

I think, that Designers covers only a very few aspects; yes there are; but only a very few, Designer which give different boosts. Otherwise all designer provide the same. ( i.e. a morozov-tank is equal to a henschel-tank when they have the same upgrades. )

With artillery and infantry equipment, on the game's scale, I do not see that much of a difference between a Garand, Lee Enfield, Mauser 98 and whatever the soviets used.

I agree.

Doctrines and division templates matter way more here.

They do, yes.

But in my opinion, the difference should be greater regarding the "focal-points" of each doctrine. ( like: more mobility for mobile-warfare, more artillery buffs for sup.firepower etc or debuff the non-focal-point things ;....what ever)
In condratiction to modern "zeitgeist" ( couldn't find an English term for it ) those games live on difference; not on equality

One thing, which no computer-game really could manage, is leadership. There are many ways trying to abstract it, but sadly they were not very succesfull.

 

[Secret Master]

This is what I pissed me. For example, I was comparing zero fighter with Grumman wildcat. And they have the same stats wtf?? Grumman is more heavily armored while zero fighter is more agile. And I believe there is a huge disparity in power among the major powers especially. US planes are generally on par with German and British (Soviet too), but they definitely own the Japanese and Italian models.

You could always, you know, design them differently so that they have different stats.

There is no reason any ship, tank, or plane in HOI4 should have identical stats to any other one. You can bet my planes don't look a thing like the ones used by other countries in SP.

 

[Zauberelefant]

I beg to differ: I can usually pick from 3 designers as a major. Yes, a Tank can turn out pretty much the same, but only if both players actually choose the same designer and upgrades. Highly unlikely by chance, but even so - a M4 76mm Sherman, a T34-85 and a Panther were remarkably close in mobility, protection and firepower.

And what I can give the current doctrine system is that it gives the most effective tactics at different stages to different doctrines. Backhand blow and Blitz come earlier in MW than anywhere else.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

That is where the designers come in. Mitsubishi and Supermarine give the highest agility boosts, while German and US fighters are inferior. Then your Air XP comes in. You can actually tailor your fighters to the war you are fighting, so if firepower is needed, you can upgun your zero or Bf 109 til next week.

I think that most important equipment differences are in the fields of tanks and planes. Designers and XP go a long way to represent that.
With artillery and infantry equipment, on the game's scale, I do not see that much of a difference between a Garand, Lee Enfield, Mauser 98 and whatever the soviets used. Same for artillery. Doctrines and division templates matter way more here.

For XP upgrades, is it okay to sacrifice reliability for greater firepower? For example, upgrading the guns of a plane. Should i care less about the reliability penalty and just add more, or try to offset it by upgrading reliability as well but at the cost of even more firepower (cos you have more XPs left to do so).

 

[pheonicia]

For XP upgrades, is it okay to sacrifice reliability for greater firepower? For example, upgrading the guns of a plane. Should i care less about the reliability penalty and just add more, or try to offset it by upgrading reliability as well but at the cost of even more firepower (cos you have more XPs left to do so).

If you can produce enough to make up for the extra losses then sure, if you can't then probably not.

 

[I had a bad name 99]

I beg to differ: I can usually pick from 3 designers as a major. Yes, a Tank can turn out pretty much the same, but only if both players actually choose the same designer and upgrades. Highly unlikely by chance, but even so - a M4 76mm Sherman, a T34-85 and a Panther were remarkably close in mobility, protection and firepower.

And what I can give the current doctrine system is that it gives the most effective tactics at different stages to different doctrines. Backhand blow and Blitz come earlier in MW than anywhere else.

I thought you need MW for backhand blow and blitz? Other doctrines have as well?

Also how do you get T-34 85? Upgrading the guns by how much?

 

[marcelo r. r.]

Yes, I got it. But my point is that they will not "upgrade" from foreign weapon to your weapon if the level is the same. For example, in this part of my campaign, I wanted my divisions to be fully equipped with the most advanced German weapons. Turn out that they happen to have foreign weapons, and for some reason, they are not upgrading to mine. So I checked their upgrade tier, and it is the same as mine.

They will wont because status is the same, just different "flag", so for the AI is all the same stuff... but u have the option to disable specific country equipment on template editor, the only problem is too much clicks to disable that tons of flags.

Another long time alternative is send foreign equipment to your allies, so less foreign stuff on your stockpile, in few years or months u will have only national equipment in stockpile. Unfortunately the UI for lend-lease is also not so friendly, lots of overclick.

 

[Zauberelefant]

For XP upgrades, is it okay to sacrifice reliability for greater firepower? For example, upgrading the guns of a plane. Should i care less about the reliability penalty and just add more, or try to offset it by upgrading reliability as well but at the cost of even more firepower (cos you have more XPs left to do so).

In general, fighters need firepower and agility first. Reliability should not drop below 60% or you start losing more planes to accidends than the enemy.

 

[Zauberelefant]

I thought you need MW for backhand blow and blitz? Other doctrines have as well?

Also how do you get T-34 85? Upgrading the guns by how much?

I don't know the soviet tech tree that Well, but we should be talking about 1943 tanks. The t-34 would probably have XP invested in reliability, gun and speed the most. The Panther probably firepower, armour and a little speed.