I was just taking your reference point and showing an example of it during WW2... i never said it must have an artillery bde....
-
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.
I was just taking your reference point and showing an example of it during WW2... i never said it must have an artillery bde....
Your position is logically untenable, because a mechanism for deploying 1-brigade divisions exists, and historically brigades (and similarly sized units) were used independently quite frequently, especially in Asia. So the only argument you could produce is game balance, and we have no insight of that as of yet. In fact, it seems grossly inappropriate that brigades are not allowed on a map with 10,000 provinces.
Coreymas, we know you didn't argue about the historical accuracy of Independent Brigades and neither did we argue against the existence of "very light" divs such as the reinforced garrison regiment you presented.
It just doesn't make sense,logically, as to why "Divisions" cannot contain one single manouver brigade period and why it HAS to be accompanied with a 2nd brigade,whatever it is.
An "exploit" has already been presented, namely attaching a militia brigade (since militia already has such low values,costs and build times). Why force the players to go for this exploit when the mechanism to allow Independent Brigades exists already?
It just doesn't make sense,logically, as to why "Divisions" cannot contain one single manouver brigade period and why it HAS to be accompanied with a 2nd brigade,whatever it is.
An "exploit" has already been presented, namely attaching a militia brigade (since militia already has such low values,costs and build times). Why force the players to go for this exploit when the mechanism to allow Independent Brigades exists already?
Can you name me a significant amount of Divisions in WW2 that were composed of one Bde only?
There has to be something to the new combat engine that ties the Primary brigades to the Support ones... and i am sure we will find out soon enough. In my mind the new combat engine is about divisions and how they fought in WW2 not about brigades and how they fought.
Plus Johan has said dont rely on the numbers shown in the screenshot... Militia units are not useless, they definately have a cost (at least in manpower, and in HOI2 a decent IC cost) and they have a purpose.... and i do not see there being any exploit about putting a Super Heavy Arm Bde together with a Mil Bde.... to each his own.
I think that the distinction between Primary Bde's and Support Bde's has not been clearly defined.... It is my interpretation that Divisions have to have at least 1 Primary and 1 Support Bde.... if this is true then i do not see anything wrong with having a Static division of one Inf and one Art bdes...
Last edited:
Unless you haven't heard, Brigades are the building blocks of Divisions (meaning "1 or more"). Why get so hung up on taxonomies?
This means that the game engine itself supports single brigades which is perfectly historical and also requires zero effort to implement simply because X*Brigades=Division, X=1,..,4/5. I can scarcely believe you are a modder if you cannot get your head around the fact that if 2-brigade divs exist, 1-brigade divs should exist just as well. It is simple mathematical induction, 9th grade stuff.
EDIT : And just what is it so scary about Independent Brigades anyway? Do they require special treatment? I don't think so,especially since Support Brigades does not refer to Logistics, but Extra Firepower,which a Division is not obligated to have.
Well Im guessing that leaders and HQs still somehow might limit how many "divisions" that can effectivelly work together. And you would possibly have alot more micromanagement on your hands if you use 1Bde divs instead of 4Bde divs.
The largest argument to why not use it is because division leaders WILL affect combat bonus. And 5 times the divisions will mean that at the most extreem situation only 20% of your army will be able to afford as good leaders as your otherwise worst led 5 Bde div would have.
There are also some hints that leadership might tie into the officer corps and such an 1 Bde div army might even cost up too 5 times the ammount of leadership points to sustain.
In short: 1-3 Bde divisions would be best for low intensity combat and 3-5 Bde divs for high intensity.
If it helps, coreymas, when I say division I mean container. Not an actual real life division. No, no real life division consisted of a single brigade. Also, no real life division was ever a container in HoI3. To put it simply, we're talking about two different objects.
Well, if the fear here is that the players will use it to pile generals into combat with 1-brigade divisions, why couldn't players do that with 2-brigade militia divisions?
Well, if the fear here is that the players will use it to pile generals into combat with 1-brigade divisions, why couldn't players do that with 2-brigade militia divisions?
Lets take the personal attacks offline shall we......
I am just voicing my opinion and speculating just like everyone else here.
And i have yet to hear an answer to my question... name me a significant amount of divisions in WW2 that were just 1 Bde (no support elements).
If you name me any corps that were just 1 divison. There were none because such a corps would be called a divison.
The same is said about army group. Name me an army group made of a single corps...
None. How many divisions consisting of militia and Maus brigades can you name?
Look man,you can ask me that 1000 times, I'm still not gonna answer an irrelevant question. Why don't you ask me what my shoe size is while you're at it?
You have entities that contain two blocks.How in the hell are one-block entities going to do anything to spoil the game?
Take this Scenario :
I take HOI3, edit Militia (Or Engineer or whatever works) to be a Placeholder Brigade, empty values all around. Militia becomes a Void Brigade.
I create a new "Division" composed of an Inf Brigade and a Void Brigade. Tell me the part where the HOI3 engine breaks. Tell me where Independent Brigades break HOI3.
Because,you,my friend, are hung up on mere labels when everybody else is already digging deep in concepts.
You have entities that contain two blocks.How in the hell are one-block entities going to do anything to spoil the game?
Take this Scenario :
I take HOI3, edit Militia (Or Engineer or whatever works) to be a Placeholder Brigade, empty values all around. Militia becomes a Void Brigade.
I create a new "Division" composed of an Inf Brigade and a Void Brigade. Tell me the part where the HOI3 engine breaks. Tell me where Independent Brigades break HOI3.
Because,you,my friend, are hung up on mere labels when everybody else is already digging deep in concepts.
This whole problem would be resolved if minimum strength, or number of elements with positive frontage was *moddable*.
EDIT: On a different note, let's cool this down a bit before Tracid strikes us all down and closes my precious thread.
EDIT: On a different note, let's cool this down a bit before Tracid strikes us all down and closes my precious thread.
If the Paradox top brass has read this thread at least once,I'm sure we got through them. What the hell,they're programmers. 
If a formula (or implementation) works for member BrigadesNumber=2,it works for BrigadesNumber=1. Not worried.
If a formula (or implementation) works for member BrigadesNumber=2,it works for BrigadesNumber=1. Not worried.
I'd be worried. But I hope that beta-testers will change their mind, as I doubt majority of people seriously supports the position that having to tack on militia brigades all the time is justifiable.
Many underdeveloped countries had "small" 1 brigade sized divisions (some still has), and there are many reasons for that; when you have a small army and a big country to defend, it just makes more sense to have 6 1-brigade sized divisions than 2 or 3 full sized ones, it is also cheaper to build and maintain, while still giving some credible deterrent.
I think that China used 1-brigade sized divisions but I a not 100% sure.
Anyway, I am completely sure than many Latin American countries did. One example, during the short Peru-Ecuador war of 1941, Peruvian 1st Light Infantry Division was composed of:
1st, 5th, 19th Infantry Battalions
1st Artillery Group (8 guns)
1st Engineer Company
1st Antiaircraft Section
This should be a 1-brigade division in HOI3 terms
Finally, if the game is capable of handling a 1-brigade size division, and I want to play a minor country, I don't see any reason why I have to be forced to build 2-brigade sized divisions
I think that China used 1-brigade sized divisions but I a not 100% sure.
Anyway, I am completely sure than many Latin American countries did. One example, during the short Peru-Ecuador war of 1941, Peruvian 1st Light Infantry Division was composed of:
1st, 5th, 19th Infantry Battalions
1st Artillery Group (8 guns)
1st Engineer Company
1st Antiaircraft Section
This should be a 1-brigade division in HOI3 terms
Finally, if the game is capable of handling a 1-brigade size division, and I want to play a minor country, I don't see any reason why I have to be forced to build 2-brigade sized divisions
Eh,I'm sure the Paradox team will hit its first snag when dealing with Independent Brigades in the starting OOB ( especially when talking about starting dates later than 1936 wether campaign or battlescenario).
Let's take the '36 starting OOB for USSR. You have some Armored and Cavalry candidates for Independent Brigades. What are they going to do? Lump them all in fictional divisions called "Corps"? (BTW, that was actually the case for pre-war Mechanized Corps, they were an assortment of independent brigades)
They'll realize the futility of messing with reality.
P.S. : Kstanb, excellent example btw. And yes,Nationalist China's OOB was quite a mess in the HOI time period. Off the top of my head I can't remember,but 1-brigade "Divisions" existed in the warlord armies which constituted the majority of the Unified Front forces. The forces directly under Chiang were a bit better having been formed under Falkenhausen's supervision.
Let's take the '36 starting OOB for USSR. You have some Armored and Cavalry candidates for Independent Brigades. What are they going to do? Lump them all in fictional divisions called "Corps"? (BTW, that was actually the case for pre-war Mechanized Corps, they were an assortment of independent brigades)
They'll realize the futility of messing with reality.
P.S. : Kstanb, excellent example btw. And yes,Nationalist China's OOB was quite a mess in the HOI time period. Off the top of my head I can't remember,but 1-brigade "Divisions" existed in the warlord armies which constituted the majority of the Unified Front forces. The forces directly under Chiang were a bit better having been formed under Falkenhausen's supervision.
They actually included some "brigades" in HoI2 by having understrength divisions deployed at start.
On the other hand, Paradox doesn't really do the OOBs, I think. It's mostly for the beta-testers to do. At least, I imagine that's how most of the content (officers, ministers, OOBs) gets filled out.
On the other hand, Paradox doesn't really do the OOBs, I think. It's mostly for the beta-testers to do. At least, I imagine that's how most of the content (officers, ministers, OOBs) gets filled out.
Yup, I remember those "50 strength cap" in the Japanese HOI2 '36 starting OOB. Mixed Brigades.
In any case,we'll just need to keep making a ruckus to drive the message home. Actually I have it in my mind to "ambush" Johan with the "1-brigade div" question in the next Dev Diary
Meh. Wait for the beta-test. This is the kind of thing that we won't have any feedback on until the final release. If it makes it there, chances are it will be changed in the first couple of patches.