• 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.

Developer Diary | Small Features #2

Greetings all,

We’re still well in the middle of Swedish vacation time, but our regular schedule is not entirely interrupted: today’s diary covers a few of the smaller features being added in AAT.


Special Forces Doctrines

For a while now we’ve wanted to give countries a way of specializing their special forces. Numerous militaries relied heavily on these elite troops, and some branches of what HOI4 terms ‘special forces’ really found their identity during and around the second world war.

I believe we’ve reached a good saturation point for equipment designers, and I wanted to tackle special forces in a manner that better befits strategic capability over detailed stat modification. The prolonged global conflict our game portrays led to significant doctrinal development when it comes to how militaries employed elite forces, and this seemed like a good place to start.

In AAT, a fourth doctrine page has been added:

image20.png


While any country can continue to make use of the Mountaineers, Marines and Paratroopers they are familiar with simply by researching the tech, doing so will unlock the ability to choose the corresponding special forces branch specialism.

These doctrines will also cost experience, however unlike the other military doctrines each branch here will use the corresponding experience type: Army XP for mountaineers, Naval XP for Marines, and Air XP for paratroopers.

The number of branch specialisms you can pick is limited however: initially to 1. Some nations earn the early ability to unlock a second (and final) branch specialism in their focus trees, but all nations that reach major status (this condition may be relaxed) will eventually earn the right to pick their second branch during the progress of the war.

Why not all 3? The [Insert Country Here] military used all three of these!

Well, partly for balance reasons, and partly because these specialisms don’t represent the ability to use paras, mountaineers or marines, but the adoption of their capabilities as part of a military’s core doctrinal philosophy.

We also wanted these doctrine choices to do more than give you stat bonuses - although of course these will be present. We wanted the choices you make here to a) change how you consider designing your divisions, and b) potentially change how you actively use your special forces on a strategic level.

Mountaineers

image19.png


Initially, elevating the mountaineers will grant you a mountaineer supply usage reduction (decimal bug noted!), and some general special forces combat bonuses. Importantly, you’ll also unlock the Rangers support company: a more combat oriented alternative to mounted recon, with higher organization, bonuses in adverse terrain types, and which can be further specialized by the mountaineers branch specialism in the following two doctrines:

image18.png

image13.png

Here you are making the choice to train your elite ranger companies in rough+hot or rough+winter terrain. I’ve added a Snow adjuster here (usable by mods, of course - although for performance reasons this does not extend to one adjuster per weather type I’m afraid) which means you can guarantee improved combat performance in your preferred terrain/weather type, and the support company now also exerts a division-wide buff to cold/hot acclimatization.

While I won’t go through each doctrine individually, we’re making use of the new battalion modifiers to adjust how you are incentivized to build divisions:

image11.png

Mountain artillery gives you a good reason to use artillery support in your mountaineer divisions, at the cost of a mutually exclusive choice with the following option:

image4.png

Balance subject to change, of course.

The final choice (and a choice which exists in each of the branch specialisms) is to decide between adopting your mountaineers as the core of your elite armed forces, or integrating them more widely:

image9.png

The new modifier ‘[Type] Special Forces Cap Contribution’ is a dynamic modifier that reduces the cap consumption of that special forces type, when counted against your cap. So, you’ll be able to support significantly more mountaineers, but not more paratroopers or marines.

image14.png

Here you’ll get bonuses that are more applicable to a wider array of circumstances. If you plan on unlocking and utilizing a second branch of special forces, this option might be more your cup of tea.

Marines

image23.png

The initial investment for the Marines branch will net you some similar small bonuses to special forces efficacy, a slight increase in naval invasion capacity (which can be acquired quite early), and you’ll unlock the Pioneers support company.

Pioneers are used here to represent marine-trained sappers and combat engineers, and will be an alternative to standard military engineers. They have increased offensive capability in notably hostile environments, and can be further specialized as shore parties or jungle climate specialists:

image3.png

image5.png

The second mutually exclusive choice in the Marines tree is as below. If you want to go all-in on highly elite, more self-sufficient marines, you can go down the Marine Commando route. Marine commandos are a new line battalion that have the ability to perform quick hit & run naval invasions with an equally quick getaway plan - they no longer need to be at a port in order to exfiltrate. All battalions in a division must have this ability in order for it to function.

image17.png

Further down the tree you can capitalize on the hit & run playstyle:

image16.png

The alternative path will take you down a combined arms path, integrating more closely with other branches of your military:

image6.png

image12.png


Paratroopers

image22.png

Elevating the paras will grant you tougher air transports, generally improved special forces, and the ability to field a small amount more paras.

image7.png

The first choice you will have to make is which paradrop effect you want to adopt. Aimed at disruption, the recon and sabotage doctrine will damage enemy constructions after a successful landing.

image8.png

Combat insertion is intended to augment well-planned general advances. If utilized carefully, this approach can put a hole in even the best fortified enemy frontline - however, the risk is high.

image10.png

It had to be done.


The mutually exclusive branches for paratroopers once again distinguish between a focus on paratrooper combat and support ability, or a wider combined-arms benefit:

image21.png

Make use of signals companies to coordinate a hasty defense after a drop.

image1.png

At the cost of increased training time, ensure that only the toughest recruits find their way to the paras.

Or choose to integrate the paras more traditionally into your armed forces:

image2.png

image15.png

2023-08-01_13-38.png
2023-08-01_13-41.png
2023-08-01_13-58.png

2023-08-01_13-59.png
2023-08-01_13-59_1.png

2023-08-01_13-59_2.png
2023-08-01_14-00.png
2023-08-01_14-00_1.png
2023-08-01_14-00_2.png
2023-08-01_14-01.png
2023-08-01_14-01_1.png
2023-08-01_14-01_2.png
2023-08-01_14-02.png
2023-08-01_14-02_1.png
2023-08-01_14-02_2.png
2023-08-01_14-03.png
2023-08-01_14-03_1.png
2023-08-01_14-03_2.png

That’s all I have to show this time - as always, feedback on the details is encouraged; constructive criticism welcomed.

/Arheo
 
  • 61Like
  • 46Love
  • 4
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Great addition.
I hope the paras and the raider marines would have some AI use though.

Raiders can perhaps be made to work with a similar AI to CK2-CK3's viking raiders?

As for Paras, I feel like the AI would need to have certain organized invasion push moment to utilize something like that.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
This is the single most exciting dev diary I have seen in years. I love special forces and using them in my playthroughs, but I had always found it a pity that I couldn't play Marines as if they were commando raiders, or have paratroopers that could actually contest a tile with a division on it.

Now we have a system that allows us to customise them to fit the most famous examples of special forces in WW2! Marine Commandos or USMC style? US Rangers or Gerbirgsjagers style? Even having a choice between D-day style paras, or a more integrated Fallshirmjager force. I love it all and I'll be playing with it a lot. The new models were also something I've wanted for a long time and is just the sweet sweet cherry on top of a wonderful dev blog.

One question, mostly about flavour and art; Will we (or could we please?) have new nation-exclusive unit icons resembling some of the historical units featured in the sprites? Just to really hammer home the fact that someone is dealing with special forces. For example, the wings/anchor/tommy gun crest of the British Commandos, the anchor/globe symbol of the USMC or the diving falcon of the Fallshirmjager. Otherwise, will there be new generic special forces icons?

Edit: Actually, 1 more question! Of course, I doubt we'll see it this expansion, but what are your thoughts on motorised special forces? That is, along the lines of the LRDG & the Autosahariana?
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 3
Reactions:
Looks like nice additions:)

However at the moment the development/ work on the AI is something I would like to hear about.
Will we get a development diary about AI, especially Naval AI that has many, in my opinion, game breaking issues?
 
  • 8
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This whole update is shaping up to look amazing! Great work

I'd like to ask if in the future you guys plan on adding Light Infantry? Smaller units with strong HP(harder to kill) but less hard attack/breakthrough, but very versatile on terrain.

Also, has there been any though on increasing the presence of militia and irregulars? Especially in China.

I'd also like to suggest that militia/irregulars should have less hard attack/piercing, and possibly less breakthrough. As it stands their stats are essentially identical to regular infantry, and even end up being better than infantry via some Focuses.

Last little tidbit, will assault companies be seen more in other countries? Perhaps they should also receive a breakthrough increase, since as it stand they are more geared stats-wise for defence.
 
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
This devildog finds this DD highly motivating. Oohrah!
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
This whole update is shaping up to look amazing! Great work

I'd like to ask if in the future you guys plan on adding Light Infantry? Smaller units with strong HP(harder to kill) but less hard attack/breakthrough, but very versatile on terrain.

Also, has there been any though on increasing the presence of militia and irregulars? Especially in China.

I'd also like to suggest that militia/irregulars should have less hard attack/piercing, and possibly less breakthrough. As it stands their stats are essentially identical to regular infantry, and even end up being better than infantry via some Focuses.

Last little tidbit, will assault companies be seen more in other countries? Perhaps they should also receive a breakthrough increase, since as it stand they are more geared stats-wise for defence.
Light infantry soldiers are not harder to kill than regular infantry. Light infantry had less heavy weapons, meaning less firepower and higher mobility (but not as good as mountaineers), but they died just as well as any foot infantry.
"Assault companies" were a mixed bag of units in different, countries, but not special forces.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Definitely NO, there were no mechanized paratroopers during WWII. Light tanks were in small scale use, so that is OK.
There was mechanization. The British delivered trucks, Jeeps and Bren Carriers during the Market Garden, and these mechanized groups were the vanguard. The USSR realized the need for mechanization of the Airborne Forces already in 1930. TB-3 and Il-4 could transport the T-20, Bren Carrier and BA-64 under the fuselage. Not to mention the transport Pe-8 canceled due to the war.

Demonstration of equipment of the airborne troops and aircraft adapted for its landing: TB-3-4AM-34FRN, Il-4, Li-2 aircraft, small tanks T-37A and T-38, light armored personnel carrier "Universal", armored car BA- 64, cars GAZ-AA, GAZ-67, "Willis". 1942

And please tell this to the Germans who created the Gigant heavy gliders for the transfer of medium tanks and armored vehicles for the invasion of Britain.
 
  • 7
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Could the Marine Comandos also enable the exfil feature for amtracs? It would make a lot of sense for amtracs to be able to drive onto shore from the water and also back into the water from the shore
 
  • 4
Reactions:
There was mechanization. The British delivered trucks, Jeeps and Bren Carriers during the Market Garden, and these mechanized groups were the vanguard. The USSR realized the need for mechanization of the Airborne Forces already in 1930. TB-3 and Il-4 could transport the T-20, Bren Carrier and BA-64 under the fuselage. Not to mention the transport Pe-8 canceled due to the war.

Demonstration of equipment of the airborne troops and aircraft adapted for its landing: TB-3-4AM-34FRN, Il-4, Li-2 aircraft, small tanks T-37A and T-38, light armored personnel carrier "Universal", armored car BA- 64, cars GAZ-AA, GAZ-67, "Willis". 1942

And please tell this to the Germans who created the Gigant heavy gliders for the transfer of medium tanks and armored vehicles for the invasion of Britain.

I feel that these are better represented by motor recon support companies and the truck requirements of other support units like artillery and field hospitals. After all, thats what air-landed motor vehicles were usually for.

I don't think they were for moving whole divisions of paratroopers as a dedicated mechanised combat unit. As for air-landed tanks, we are already getting that as mentioned in the dev-blog, but they were still intended to play the role of armoured support for the parachute infantry - not as a dedicated airborne panzer division.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Since we remembered the Me.323 Giant, let's airborne be able to get a battalion of medium tanks / medium AA / Medium self-propelled howitzers. As a distinctive feature from other special forces (pioneers, rangers)
 
  • 4
Reactions:
each branch here will use the corresponding experience type: Army XP for mountaineers, Naval XP for Marines, and Air XP for paratroopers.
I think that there is a bit too much difference in how the three types of XP can be obtained to make the three branches balanced and I get that they are not supposed to be equal in the first place, but I fear this will probably only make paratroopers even less appealing with air XP.

So what about tweaking the cost with half army XP + half relevant XP? So 100% army XP for mountaineers, 50% army XP + 50% naval XP for marines and 50% army XP and 50% air XP for paratroopers. That will somehow level the three branches more while still keeping their unique flavor.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
I think limiting the branch specializations to 1, even with the ability to gain a second one later on, is a mistake. Special forces already have a limiter through their cap, meaning these doctrines are only going to effect a few divisions at best. This limiting factor already encourages in most cases players to recruit all their special forces of one type: in my case marines if I intend to naval invade, mountaineers in all other cases. If on top of this I’m limited to only further specialize one of my special forces even more, then I’m absolutely never going to mix special forces and utilize more than one type. This also means I don’t see a scenario where I ever choose airborne, because they’re automatically a final choice anyway and I’m not going to waste a slot on them when I could have it for marines or mountaineers.

I think you’re preemptively trying to balance a system which likely does not need balancing. Allowing players to spread out their points across all three branches of special forces is not going to “cheese the system,” because special forces are already limited in number. Instead you’re just further encouraging players to stick to one type of special force and never diversify (which is already what the current system does to some extent but at least it doesn’t actively punish us for diversifying like it will now). If you open up all three trees it would allow for this to become a late game xp sink (which is sorely needed) and encourage people use more types of special forces rather than less.
 
  • 4
  • 3
Reactions:
Maybe instead of a cap based on the percentage of total army there should be cap based on manpower. So special forces are usually full time volunteers working at military. E.g. special forces can constitute at max 1% of recruitable population, but not more than 50% of total manpower? It just would make sense if a mountainous countries like Bhutan,Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Lesotho, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Switzerland, Lebanon, Nepal, Tibet etc. could have 100% mountaineers armies. It could also depend on special forces type, because paratroopers are more special than marines and marines are more special than mountaineers.

You don't need to change the base system to achieve unique country flavors for special forces though... I think the current system already portrays well how special forces are indeed a small portion of your fielded army. There are country modifiers that can push the special forces cap up as much as you want, so you can just use those and give special national spirits to countries that you want to be more unique with their special forces. Definitely in favor of adding more of such unique national spirits, though.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
I hope Swiss Mountain Paratroopers benefit from both special forces doctrines to just become an insanely overpowered infantry unit :D
 
  • 4Haha
  • 2Love
Reactions:
Very nice! In my last MP coop campaign i dependet heavily on my Austro-Hungarian marines. I can't wait to spice them up even more with this tree! Oh and nice looking models too! Though i can't help but notice an absence of Japanese units, or do my eyes decieve me?
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Overall this looks excellent, but I am very concerned about the exp cost of these, particularly the marine tree. Exp is difficult to come by in the prewar period, and there are now so many things calling for its usage: doctrines, division design, tank design, ship design, aircraft design, high command etc. Naval exp is particularly hard to come by if you aren't at war and don't have the luxury of a large navy and fuel supplies to do constant exercises with. I think a rebalance is in order, either of exp costs across the board or rate of exp gain.
 
  • 7
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions: