• 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.

HoI 4 Dev Diary - Policing Garrison Rework

Its Wednesday, so you know what that means. Today we will discuss a feature previously alluded to, the Policing Garrison rework.

The main thrust of this rework is the removal of the resistance suppression garrison mission from the map, and the addition of off-map suppression garrisons. This change is being made to increase performance, as well as remove what we feel is a tedious part of the game. Suppression garrison forces will now be managed through occupation laws and a choice in what division template will be used to provide suppression. The system will then distribute manpower and equipment to states with resistance. The old, defense-related, garrison missions will persist and will be named to “Area Defense.” This should result in a much cleaner map endgame. No more prebuilding and shuffling around horseybois.

DD_GARRISON_06.png


This feature is tied heavily to the rework of resistance. As we mentioned previously, resistance will no longer be so easily controlled. Active resistance will regularly attack defense forces and disrupt their local state. These attacks will result in a small but continuous loss in manpower and equipment. This should help to curb the power of a world conquest run (IE historical Germany).

DD_GARRISON_01.png


The higher the resistance level, the higher the suppression requirement. Suppression requirement is the main factor that controls how much garrison is needed. A secondary factor that controls how much garrison is needed is the occupation law. Different occupation laws will have modifications to suppression needs per for each percent of resistance. And finally, the player will be able to choose what type of garrison template they are using.

DD_GARRISON_03.png


The player will be able to design garrison forces as they always have, using the division designer. All existing templates available for recruitment will also be available to assign as a division template. The template being used will be able to be controlled at the national level, occupied nation level, and state level. A state may in turn use fractions of a division to meet suppression requirements.

DD_GARRISON_02.png


To manage these interactions, we have expanded the occupied territories menu to give a breakdown on resistance, compliance, and what forces the player has stationed in occupied territory they control. In the same menu the player can choose occupation law, and what division template is being used for policing garrison work. Different requirements in manpower and equipment will be shown when choosing which template to use. The player may choose to have no garrison present as well, but this will result in a huge boost to local resistance.

DD_GARRISON_04.png


When designing garrison templates, there will be a couple of factors to consider. Some existing battalions will have their suppression values reworked and battalions with hardness will have bonus to resisting damage taken from resistance activity. The result of this is that battalions with hardness will be more expensive materially, but provide protection for your manpower. If manpower is more of a long-term concern than production, there is a benefit to using battalions with hardness. If manpower is not a concern, using low hardness battalions in your division template is probably a good idea. This will also give some new life to light tanks that have found themselves collecting dust in your stockpile

That's all for this week. See youse guys next week.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
In Rhodesia during the '80s

I think you mean 70's. By the 80's, the White minority government of Rhodesia had lost its fight against African left-wing nationalists.

mounted infantry was used against communist guerrillas because trucks were too loud, dust-kicking, and fuel-consuming for Rhodesia's embargoed economy. Plus there were tactical bonuses on the plains and difficult terrain: https://rhodesianforces.org/GreysScoutsRideAgain.htm

I don't think anyone's saying that, in the absence of any better form of mobility, and over certain terrain, there aren't some small-scale uses for cavalry, but platoon-scale actions like that described here are light-years away from what we're discussing. Where there were better forms of mobility, and even often when mobility was simply on foot, even in the Bush War horses were not used.

Ian Smith's lot deployed many relatively effective units, including armoured cars, helicopter-born infantry, light infantry, and special forces. With the all due respect to the men of Grey's Scouts, there is no reason to believe that this small mounted unit was any better than the Selous Scouts or the RLI.

That's really silly. It wasn't like German suppression divisions didn't fight in Normandy.

The Germans threw everything available into the fight, including Ost-battalione from e.g., the Georgian legion who were hopelessly outmatched and surrendered very quickly, and who can fairly be said to have been in France simply to hold the country down. However, the only actual Sicherungsdivision in the West, the 325th, did not actually fight in Normandy but was instead destroyed in the battle of Paris.
 
Last edited:
The Russian Protection Corps (which I mentioned earlier because of their cavalry unit) briefly fought against the Red Army when trying to defend Belgrade in 1944; it was a bit of a niche kind of security division though...
 
Its Wednesday, so you know what that means. Today we will discuss a feature previously alluded to, the Policing Garrison rework.


View attachment 513268

.

Hey, am I the only one to see this "Military Governor" button?

Do we get to choose which general / politician / policeman to appoint as a governor of an occupied state/country?
Very interesting if true, always wanted to see more politics in games.

Actually I suspect if will be more likely a choice between Military Governor / Civilian Governor / Local collaborator with dependency on what kind of subject countries one's ideology allows.
 
Rivers should be useful for parallel movement, and river gunboats aren't a bad idea. :D

Oh, I definitely don't think they're a bad idea :D. I just may not have an entirely balanced view on this particular point ;). As well as partisan suppression, the USSR and Poland both used them to defend river boundaries as well, and the USSR used them for support along the coasts.

Before things like river gunboats, rivers could also be very useful for infrastructure - the river systems in Germany were mined by the British, which caused at least some disruption to their internal flow of resources.
 
Oh, I definitely don't think they're a bad idea :D. I just may not have an entirely balanced view on this particular point ;). As well as partisan suppression, the USSR and Poland both used them to defend river boundaries as well, and the USSR used them for support along the coasts.

Before things like river gunboats, rivers could also be very useful for infrastructure - the river systems in Germany were mined by the British, which caused at least some disruption to their internal flow of resources.

We had a thread about this years ago with the idea of having a "small craft" transport pool which would help with supply along rivers and the coast as well as being vulnerable to interdiction. I remember you being in the thread.
 
We had a thread about this years ago with the idea of having a "small craft" transport pool which would help with supply along rivers and the coast as well as being vulnerable to interdiction. I remember you being in the thread.

We did and I remember as well :). If you ever want to hear me yabber on about the relative importance of coastal convoys and riverine traffic, just say the word (although I wouldn't do it in this thread) :).
 
Hello, as of France will get reworked, will Soviet Union and nations involved with Soviet Union get new& better focus trees? There is nothing on about the winter war and continuation war never starts meaning German's lose huge support up north. Soviet Union also has impossible focuses like "Reconcile Japan" (or whatever it is called), cannot be done as of Japan will make East Asian Co-Phrospherity sphere faction.
 
Hello, as of France will get reworked, will Soviet Union and nations involved with Soviet Union get new& better focus trees? There is nothing on about the winter war and continuation war never starts meaning German's lose huge support up north. Soviet Union also has impossible focuses like "Reconcile Japan" (or whatever it is called), cannot be done as of Japan will make East Asian Co-Phrospherity sphere faction.
No sovietunion this time. Dlc after this probably
 
Oh, I definitely don't think they're a bad idea :D. I just may not have an entirely balanced view on this particular point ;). As well as partisan suppression, the USSR and Poland both used them to defend river boundaries as well, and the USSR used them for support along the coasts.

Before things like river gunboats, rivers could also be very useful for infrastructure - the river systems in Germany were mined by the British, which caused at least some disruption to their internal flow of resources.

I will add that all the oil coming from the romanian oil fields to Germany transited by rivertankers. In SU the main oil fields were in the Caucasus and a big part of their production was shipped through the caspian sea and the volga.
 
Also, will we be able to summon the off map divisions to the map if an occupied province is overrun?

Also can we “disperse” an on-map division offmap to garrison an area?


This. It makes perfect sense to have this. You need to also return divisions to the map if you need them. It does not make sense to send divisions away into Garrison limbo to not have them return ever again.

For example, as Germany you have most of France with 20 off-map garrisons. The allies invade Northern France. You need the option to mobilize those divisions to defend.

Not having a dev reply to the OP makes me nervous...
 
This. It makes perfect sense to have this. You need to also return divisions to the map if you need them. It does not make sense to send divisions away into Garrison limbo to not have them return ever again.

For example, as Germany you have most of France with 20 off-map garrisons. The allies invade Northern France. You need the option to mobilize those divisions to defend.

Not having a dev reply to the OP makes me nervous...

It could be that they already implemented it and plan to reveal it later (they kept mum about incorporating new nations around the world), or they are still trying to make it work and don’t want to make promises


If they do incorporate it, “summoned” divisions should start with very low organization and take a few weeks to get moving. They also ideally should be redeployed back into the occupation zone.

I feel that the same mechanic that allows for off map divisions to go back and forth can also be used to represent reservists and reserve divisions (like the national guard) during peacetime
 
This. It makes perfect sense to have this. You need to also return divisions to the map if you need them. It does not make sense to send divisions away into Garrison limbo to not have them return ever again.

For example, as Germany you have most of France with 20 off-map garrisons. The allies invade Northern France. You need the option to mobilize those divisions to defend.

Not having a dev reply to the OP makes me nervous...

As well as the points made by Dlin369 there is also the question of what exactly deploying 0.84 of a division means.

If they have set the system to use exactly what's required then it suggests they can't be deployed to the map. (unless it spawns a damaged division I guess)
 
This. It makes perfect sense to have this. You need to also return divisions to the map if you need them. It does not make sense to send divisions away into Garrison limbo to not have them return ever again.

For example, as Germany you have most of France with 20 off-map garrisons. The allies invade Northern France. You need the option to mobilize those divisions to defend.

Not having a dev reply to the OP makes me nervous...

Well, it's not like you are supposed to leave France undefended apart from this type of garrisons. You should always have proper units guarding ports and important provinces anyway. It also doesn't seem like you are sending divisions into this mode and not have them returning again. Instead you it looks like you have some sort of presence in terms of a garrison that is based upon templates you have designed, but they aren't units you have assigned to this. You never really build them, they get created by placing garrisons in states. It's not like there weren't plenty of garrisons around that weren't necessarily linked to an entire division that could be summoned back into action as a full unit.

Then again, having the possibility of actual units that use a full template to be activated and placed on the map could be quite interesting.

Why would it make you nervous anyway? Devs don't sit around all day waiting to answer questions here.


That doesn't in any way contradict what aono has been saying. These sort of divisons were used to garrison territory behind the immediate frontline area of the eastern front. They weren't used anywhere else, apart from one divison in Paris. Yet there were ton of troops guarding Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, France and the Balkan area. Which means that aono's statement of there not being one standard security division was completely right. Sicherungs-Divisionen were specifically created for garrison purposes on the eastern front, but they were not the standard garrison unit in general.

So judging by this image Garrison units while off map are still interactive? they're visible on the map and you can click on them right? because that's the impression i'm getting.

I don't think that is the case. Those are your regular divisions guarding important provinces. I guess the screenshot is just supposed to tell you that there aren't tons of garrison-division sitting around all over the map, instead you just see the actual combat-divisions.
 
I don't think that is the case. Those are your regular divisions guarding important provinces. I guess the screenshot is just supposed to tell you that there aren't tons of garrison-division sitting around all over the map, instead you just see the actual combat-divisions.

Ah too bad. it would've been cool if garrison units at least had icons on the map.
 
That doesn't in any way contradict what aono has been saying. These sort of divisons were used to garrison territory behind the immediate frontline area of the eastern front. They weren't used anywhere else, apart from one divison in Paris. Yet there were ton of troops guarding Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, France and the Balkan area. Which means that aono's statement of there not being one standard security division was completely right. Sicherungs-Divisionen were specifically created for garrison purposes on the eastern front, but they were not the standard garrison unit in general.

I posted that to answer someone's claim that there were "no standard security division". There was, but it was not the only division type used for that purpose. In France ordinary infantry could do double duty as coastal defence and guarding unit. Also, the Germans regularly sent understrength Eastern Front divisions to France to replenish and reorganization, and the mere presense of many German divisions there served security/guarding function.

The Germans had separate Security Regiments, Battalions and such, not all were attached to divisions. More info on that here http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Sicherung.htm
And more: the Germans had replacement troops (Ersatztruppen), with reserve division and smaller units, that were also used for security duties http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/Gliederungen/Ersatztruppen.htm

Some areas with heavy partisan activity, for example in Yugoslavia and around the Pripet marshes in Belorus, required combat units, not just guarding and security. Therefore those areas were more often occupied with regular infantry, light infantry and/or mountain units.

So many types of units were used for security duties, some were specialized for that purpose, others were combat units doing double duty or actively fighting partisan formations.