Why is German industry so much more powerful than allied industry?

[Noctoras]

"World Conquest" should frankly be inconceivable for Germany - a complete impossibility. At no point was Germany capable of 'conquering the world' or even all of Europe.

So basically I should play a game I cannot win ... why should I bother starting the game anyway then? Granted, a German victory should be more difficult than a combined Russian-US victory for instance. Yes. But impossible? There would be no point in playing, if you cannot influence anything, really

 

[Secret Master]

Paradox has removed all the costs of those supply lines. It's no more expensive to put American troops in Paris or Alexandria then it is to put them in Havanna. So as a result, the US gets a big old whack with the nerf bat so Germany doesn't get crushed. The game is balanced around the assumption that they are fighting in Europe so German supply lines aren't represented while American ones are.

I gave your post a lot of thought, and I have decided that you are right to a certain extent.

Nobody in HOI3 has to place infrastructure all over the world to fight a global war. You need ports and airfields and a minimal number of convoys. If you take a port, it's ready to go fairly quickly for invasions and whatnot. This is, ironically, what makes it possible for Japan and Germany and Italy to be world-spanning powers. Occupations of Pearl Harbor, capturing South Africa, and so on are all possible because of this abstraction of logistical tails.

The cost should be in convoys + supply + tech, but convoys and supply are cheap for the Axis powers even when they really shouldn't be. Also, the cost in convoys isn't that much. You don't need a huge merchant marine to plan an invasion on the size of Overlord, even though you really should.

But I disagree with thinking that this is a nerf to the US. On the contrary, the US can abuse the Hell out of these rules to do ridiculous things. The US can reach historical production goals in HOI3 (and that is using sub optimum historical OOBs that don't lend themselves to optimizing practicals), so she has the production capability. But thanks to the lack of logistics tail, the US can more or less ninja all over the entire globe. Ending the war against Japan in 12 months is not unrealistic for an experienced player. You just blitz Iwo Jima, then blitz Tokyo, and use Tokyo to launch 5 separate invasions of various VPs around the islands and repeat until Japan surrenders. The lack of a logistical tail in HOI3 makes it possible to do things within 12 months of the war starting that would have been impossible in 1946 (had the war gone on that long).

It's even weirder in Europe. Seizing 100% of Italy's coastal cities/VPs via amphibious assaults by using British bases is feasible. We don't do it very often, because it's silly. But you and I know that we can make Italy surrender within a week of getting the proper assets into Europe. (It would take less time, but military access does not allow troops to be supplied, so you can't effectively preposition forces in Europe for Day 1 invasions.) You will no doubt counter that it is the poor AI at work, but in fact, even the US should not be able to launch 17 separate amphibious invasions of Axis held territory within a week of hostilities commencing. The AI's inability to repel these invasions conceptually does not change the fact that launching multiple multi-division invasions across the Med shouldn't be feasible, at least without years of build up. And even then it's bizarre.

The only reason I think it looks like a nerf to the US is because most players do not feel like taking their US game up to 11 when playing, because it feels ridiculous. Who needs nukes or the Eastern Front when I can drop 50 3xMAR/ARM divisions on key areas and drop PARA on Berlin when the AI reacts? Worst case scenario, I'll back up the USMC with HARM/MECH/whatever divisions in great numbers and grind the Germans into a fine pulp. I only need to seize seven different invasion sites in Germany proper to bring the whole system crashing down.

 

[Secret Master]

So basically I should play a game I cannot win ... why should I bother starting the game anyway then? Granted, a German victory should be more difficult than a combined Russian-US victory for instance. Yes. But impossible? There would be no point in playing, if you cannot influence anything, really

World conquest is not the same thing as winning WWII.

German hegemony in Europe, coupled with occupation of the Soviet Union up to the Urals, would be victory.

 

[sandman2575]

World conquest is not the same thing as winning WWII.

German hegemony in Europe, coupled with occupation of the Soviet Union up to the Urals, would be victory.

Agree. I'm not sure Hitler or his inner circle ever truly envisioned anything beyond this. Yes, there might have been some fantasies about North Africa or Persia, although even there more in a sense of possessing colonies and exerting diplomatic influence.

The Nazis would probably have been content to have Western and Central Europe under direct control, coupled with territories in the Baltics and Ukraine, a subdued or neutralized UK and USSR, and an expanded sphere of influence, bringing Turkey into its alliances fold and diminishing France and UK's imperial possessions in Africa and the Middle East. Even that would have been an enormous (and deeply improbable) outcome -- if that's not "victory," what is?

The idea of Hitler invading North America may make for great science fiction, per Philip K. Dick, but it is a complete fantasy from a historical standpoint.

 

[Noctoras]

World conquest is not the same thing as winning WWII.

German hegemony in Europe, coupled with occupation of the Soviet Union up to the Urals, would be victory.

and now we imagine a different scenario - Germany is going for "the bomb" ... later war will have a different face. We can imagine a lot of options - this is nthe sandbox concept. I like to start a game I don't know the end result of.

 

[elmalvad0]

Da9l mentioned in WWW they had recently increased the cost of making civilian factories by quite a lot, which would be a boon to the us as they probably won't need to build any more of them.

 

[Secret Master]

and now we imagine a different scenario - Germany is going for "the bomb" ... later war will have a different face. We can imagine a lot of options - this is nthe sandbox concept. I like to start a game I don't know the end result of.

Your initial post made it sound like you have two options in the game: conquer the entire world, or have no influence on events at all. That is simply not true. You also don't need the Bomb to make a difference, either. Given aircraft ranges, if the US has no allied air fields in range of German cities, she can't drop nukes on Germany. So, if Germany defeats the French, British, and Soviets, she is in a position to tell the US to go play in their backyard and leave Europe alone. That is victory by any conceivable definition of the term.

There are plenty of ways of influence things without conquering the entire planet. Hell, even the most aggressive of war aims planned by the German leadership for WWII only included conquering the Soviets up to the A-A Line. While Hitler's Second Book outlines a coming conflict with the USA, let's not pretend that Hitler had a broad outline of world conquest in 1936 that included invasions of Washington D.C. and crushing the Soviets. This is a guy who had an outline for German hegemony that might take decades to sort out (or even beyond his own lifetime).

 

[sandman2575]

and now we imagine a different scenario - Germany is going for "the bomb" ... later war will have a different face. We can imagine a lot of options - this is nthe sandbox concept. I like to start a game I don't know the end result of.

I think all too often people underestimate the extraordinary technical and industrial challenges of what it took to create the Bomb. I do think there's this idea that, if only Heisenberg and the Germans had pursued their research a little more vigorously, they would have solved the key to the atom bomb and, voila, Germany wins the war.

The reality is, there is only one country that could have developed the atom bomb by 1945: the United States. It alone had the industrial capacity and infrastructure, access to rare natural resources, the scientific establishment (many of whom were helpfully kicked out of Germany thanks to the Nazis' poisonous and idiotic racial ideology), the airpower, to develop and deliver an atomic weapon.

Germany never got close, and never had the technical / industrial capacity *even if* it had solved the daunting theoretical challenges of figuring out how to make a fission bomb.

 

[wundte]

Yep.

Do I need to link to historical OOB production tests in HOI3 for the USA? The USA could barely reach her historical production targets in HOI3 with me trying a bunch of tricks. I don't think the USA was exaggerated, and I doubt it will be in HOI4.

Could you link or pm this video. Really interested in watching it.

 

[Secret Master]

Could you link or pm this video. Really interested in watching it.

This is the actual test I ran in 2013.

A Build Plan for the USA III: The Practicals Strike Back

As stated above, my goal was to hit the most realistic production targets, under the most realistic laws, based on suggestions from my more knowledgeable colleagues.

The Production Targets by 15 August 1945 (as set by misterbean, Cybvep and TheBromgrev):

Army (from Cybvep and misterbean):

12 MAR
90 ENG
100 MOT
35 ARM
35 TD
50 SPART
20 GAR
10 ART
16 PARA
4 Ranger
10 MP

The navy (from TheBromgrev's data):

9CVE
23CV
9BB
17CA
41CL
88DD
27 SS

The airforce (misterbean's conversion of the historical OOB)

97 strat
16 tac
8 cas
68 M/R
1 int
29 transports

Misc:
1500 convoys will be built.
500 escorts will be built. (Both based on numbers pulled out of a very dark place by Cybvep)
All ports in the continental US should have level 10 airfields, ports, and RADAR (simplification of US constructions during the war per Cybvep)
I should have at least 2 nuclear bombs available in time for V-J Day (my and Cybvep's goals)
The Allies will receive 25 LL/day until I enter the war. I will then give them 50 IC/day. (Cybvep's interpretation of historical LL values).


Notes about the plan:

Before entering the war, the USA will utilize Specialist Training. After entering the war, the USA will downshift to Advanced Training. 24 months after joining the war, the USA will downshift again to Basic Training.


The results:













I got damn close to achieving success, but alas, I did not quite make it.

First, I included that map of the USA so you could see the RADAR impact off the coast. I obviously built plenty of infrastructure.

The production screen shows that I did not make the nuclear bomb quota; however, this requires an explanation later because it's not my fault. I could have built 20 reactors and I would never have hit the quota because of how civil nuclear research and nuclear bomb making interacted with the composition of the Allies this time.

The convoys and escorts do not reflect the number I produced; Japan and Germany sank every single escort I made and sank several hundred convoys, since I just based the entire USN at Washington DC and just watched the production screen while watching Best of the Worst on Red Letter Media because I didn't feel like hunting submarines, and I wasn't about to let the AI do it.

I missed the battleship quota by less than 90 days.

I overshot the STR and MR quota substantially.

I hit all army targets.

I hit all other naval targets, including tons of CAGs.

Thoughts:

Let's talk about nuclear bombs for a moment.

Under the current rules, it is almost impossible to get 2 nuclear bombs in place in time for the historical bombing of Japan because of how research works right now. The USA can't borrow Uranium or Heavy Water from the Allies until they join. If they do it on the historical date, they spend years researching nuclear physics and nuclear techs very slowly. This has a huge impact on getting bombs for two reasons. First, you can't even build a reactor until you hit Civil Nuclear Research 1. Second, bomb making practicals only speed up nuclear bomb making. It doesn't speed up Civil Nuclear Research, which must be at level 4 before you can research nuclear bomb making. So, while I had built 4 nuclear reactors (2 in DC and 2 in Chicago because why the hell not), they didn't help me research nukes until the middle of 1945. And by then, it was too late. I literally had both Nuke Theory and the unlocked nuclear techs always in the active portion of the research queue, no matter how ahead of time they were, and I was still unable to get bomb making started in a reasonable amount of time. Regardless, the lack of bombs had nothing to do with insufficient IC invested in the Manhattan Project.

Now, as for the build plan in general, I built 100 base IC before the war. I also built all the convoys and escorts before the war, along with ports, airfields, and RADAR. The ships that are in the queue at game start got delayed until the IC and infrastructure was completed.

Most units were completed in batches of 5, 10, 15, or 20. I built the TRA first to generate heavy aircraft practicals. I only built STR starting in 1942. The MRs were started in 1941, but I had already gained practicals from CAGs, so it wasn't as hard as I thought to get that quota done. I upgraded several INF to MAR and PARA, while adding some Rangers to generate infantry practical. That infantry practical was needed to help build all those ENG brigades. The armor, TDs, MOT, and SPART weren't that hard to build once the first runs were finished.

The battleships were a disappointment. I honestly think that if I had shuffled around some units in the queue, I could have hit that quota. The catch with battleships is their long build times. You have to put enough into the queue sooner rather than later. That means either doing more at one time, or starting them at an early point in time. Note that once I started on them in late 41, I never stopped working on them.

The downshift to Basic Training in 43 was absolutely vital to making it as far as I did. I also think that researching IC production and IC efficiency techs the entire time was a good move. Since I had such nice construction practicals, I was almost 4 years ahead of time in these techs, letting me squeeze just a bit more IC out of my industry. Furthermore, researching supply production ahead of time helped keep the supply impact on IC down. I was still hitting close to 100 IC/day in supply costs close to the end.

I spent around half the game with a consumer goods cost reduction minister, and the other half with a supply production minister. The USA does not have an IC minister, although when you have tons of IC, consumer goods costs can creep up, making the consumer good cost reduction minister useful at key times.

Am I missing anything in my discussion? Did I leave something out you need to know?

For those interested, I do have some save games from a couple of points in the game.

For context and how everyone arrived at those production numbers, you need to read prior posts.

Because HOI3 is a bit odd in how it tallies things, all units produced are approximations of what historical production levels look like. The excessive number of STR is a great example of this.

 

[wundte]

This is the actual test I ran in 2013.



For context and how everyone arrived at those production numbers, you need to read prior posts.

Because HOI3 is a bit odd in how it tallies things, all units produced are approximations of what historical production levels look like. The excessive number of STR is a great example of this.

thanx!

 

[Secret Master]

thanx!

You are quite welcome.

 

[Denkt]

USA start with something like 150 civilian factories which is the most expensive factory type to build, twice as expensive to build as military factories, nobody don't even start with half as many civilian factories as USA. Civilian factories are what you use to build other factories. It also produce over 1000 of most resources and start with free trade law which both increase its factories efficiency as well allow for good trade opportunities.

In the older wednesday streams civilian factories was much cheaper then they are in the latest version, and I don't need to explain what that mean for the game.

USA is powerful enough in my opinion, the only weakness is some poor starting laws. In multiplayer it may be an instant win because that is how powerful USA is in HOI4. Germany have to pay alot to get less then what USA get for free.

You do need convoys to support troops and USA soldiers far from home will need alot of them and a long convoy route need many convoys and is vulnerable to attacks, naturally it is up to your enemy to take advantage of the second part and if they don't I have nothing to complain about.

In the recent wednesday stream, USA could sell up to 1000 oil (80% of what they produce), with free trade law they still have significant more resources left then Japan who close all exports. For USA, Japan is just a minor power, not even competing in the same league. Japan start with 25 civilian factories, USA start with 150 and have no need for trades. Sure Japan have a significant manpower pool but it is likely forced to produce cheap infantry equipment to make use of it will USA can go with the expensive tools and still field as large army, but you get what pay for and the army USA field is much much more powerful.

For Germany and Soviet union, it looks somewhat better but they are at best just regional powers, still outside USA league.

 

[sandman2575]

History isn't 'gameplay balanced.' The USA should far outstrip other nations in industrial capacity because... the USA far outsripped other nations in industrial capacity.

 

[Denkt]

Im pretty sure a good player can with USA defeat (Brachet is how powerful the nation is compared to USA (Major power)):

• United Kingdom (Regional power)
• Soviet Union (Regional power)
• Germany (Regional power)
• Italy (Micro power)
• Japan (Minor power)
• China (Minor power)

All at same time, all controlled by the ai.

 

[keynes2.0]

But I disagree with thinking that this is a nerf to the US.

I would disagree as well. It's a massive buff to the US. The nerf to the US is that it doesn't have as much industrial capacity as it should. The missing industrial capacity is compensating for it being more difficult for the US to supply an infantry division in Europe then for Germany to do the same.

 

[Denkt]

Im not sure that USA industry is nerfed, 150 civilian factories to start with is huge, and they are expensive now as well. If USA invest its industry into more industry (its horrible law is not that bad at building civilian industry) it will have a massive amount of industry which it then can convert into military factories later.

Even with free trade law (80% of resources are exported) it still have more resources over then most other nations. Its secure postion also allow it to get concentrated industry with little risk.

It huge population allow it to field a large army without going for conscription laws that effects productivity and the modifiers are huge.

Basically USA have several advantages:

• Start with most civilian industry by far, don't think anybody even have half the civilian industry of USA.
• Likely have many very well developed states so it can support a massive industry.
• Produce enormous amount of most strategic resources.
• Little need for conscription, and can hold it off for longer.
• Low risk that USA industry get bombed.
• Likely to get into the war late.

It is not just about the factory number but also about how efficient each factory is and Im pretty sure USA can beat Germany in both regards.

It is definitely worth mentioning that civilian factories was much cheaper at the start of the Wednesday stream, maybe 4 times cheaper then they are in the newest version. Building military factories at the start is more encouraged now for the dictatorships as these cost only half as much as civilian factories, and early military factories allow a head start on amassing equipment. Also most dicatorships start with economy laws that make it easier to build military factories.

USA however will build civilian factories and thus get a massive industry in the late game.

 

[lwarmonger]

So it sounds like the overriding issue, that everyone could build civilian factories at unrealistically high rates, has been resolved. Now the US has more civilian factories that will take time once in the war to turn into military production, and an overwhelming advantage in resources. Military production is only limited by the speed at which the US can turn its civilian industrial capacity into military industrial capacity... sounds pretty realistic to me.

And if Germany is simultaneously challenged at building sufficient stockpiles of equipment and civilian factories and has its production impaired by mobilization and resource shortages... I think that the stream was probably less accurate then the game is turning into with a few small tweaks.

 

[Axe99]

I think we might be getting a bit 'cart before the horse' at this stage - we haven't seen the final balanced game yet, so it's a bit hard to say exactly how 'OP' one nation's industry is vis-a-vis anothers, particularly as it'll take some familiarity with how some systems have been abstracted or removed (eg; logistics) to understand the impact on the relative capacity of each nation.

That said, it's worth noting Germany has been buffed in every version of HoI so far, because people like to play Germany, and people like to win, and it's not easy to make interesting gameplay out of the early allied mistakes during the war (so a stronger-than-historical Germany can make for a more historical game until other mechanisms can be found to work that out).

I think all too often people underestimate the extraordinary technical and industrial challenges of what it took to create the Bomb. I do think there's this idea that, if only Heisenberg and the Germans had pursued their research a little more vigorously, they would have solved the key to the atom bomb and, voila, Germany wins the war.

The reality is, there is only one country that could have developed the atom bomb by 1945: the United States. It alone had the industrial capacity and infrastructure, access to rare natural resources, the scientific establishment (many of whom were helpfully kicked out of Germany thanks to the Nazis' poisonous and idiotic racial ideology), the airpower, to develop and deliver an atomic weapon.

Germany never got close, and never had the technical / industrial capacity *even if* it had solved the daunting theoretical challenges of figuring out how to make a fission bomb.

Even then, the US only got as far as it did as quick as it did with support from the British Empire nuclear project which had, in turn, received help from the French research done up to that point. Had the US been without Commonwealth assistance, then it would have taken them longer. How much longer is unknown, but I doubt it would have been 1945. Agree the Germans were a long way off from something operational.

 

[sandman2575]

Even then, the US only got as far as it did as quick as it did with support from the British Empire nuclear project which had, in turn, received help from the French research done up to that point. Had the US been without Commonwealth assistance, then it would have taken them longer. How much longer is unknown, but I doubt it would have been 1945. Agree the Germans were a long way off from something operational.

Yes, agree. Nuclear physics was always a very international, and of course, heavily European affair (Bohr, Fermi, Meitner, Rutherford, Thomson, Einstein -- although Americans like Oppenheimer were no slouches) -- the USA was uniquely situated to 'sponsor' the Manhattan Project because of its scientific and industrial resources, but the theoretical component was a highly international effort -- which again, is why the Nazis, with their pernicious racial ideology and fantasies of Aryan exclusivity, were crippled in their efforts from the start.