HOI4 Dev Diary - Stability and War Support

[wildbillhdmax01]

@podcat Question will this help with counties fighting to the very end even after that've already way over lost? Will this stop us from having to go east of the urals? I mean after taking all of Western Russian which includes the most important cities, and all of their industry it's kinda ridiculous that I have to snake my way to Omsk.

What about casualties? How will that affect Stability and War Support? Russia taking over 5mil casualties, and losing all of Western Russian to still have the Soviet Union fighting is stupid. I hope Stability and War Support will change that. I mean historically the losses on the Eastern Front really hurt the War Support for Germany.

 

[CrazyZombie]

@podcat Question will this help with counties fighting to the very end even after that've already way over lost? Will this stop us from having to go east of the urals? I mean after taking all of Western Russian which includes the most important cities, and all of their industry it's kinda ridiculous that I have to snake my way to Omsk.

Well, IRL most Soviet industry was successfully evacuated to the Urals, so yep, enjoy your tour.

 

[AndrosDorvin]

That is looking very good, keep up the good work Paradox!

 

[Shatter12]

I wonder if this will affect China vs. Japan, where the CUF takes all of mainland China and the Korean peninsula only to have to wait another 6-7 years before they can contest the mainland itself due to the industry and technology they possess. Will this mean that Japan capitulates to China when they're pushed off the mainland, will they fight to the bitter end or will a ceasefire/truce be signed where the war ends with the entirety of mainland China annexed and Korea released (as a puppet), etc., Etc.

 

[Shatter12]

Well, IRL most Soviet industry was successfully evacuated to the Urals, so yep, enjoy your tour.

It's all well and good for the industry to be elsewhere, but if you capture the entirety of the major population centres (west of the Urals), then they really can't continue fighting very well.
And in game, as far as I know, the moving of industry to the Urals is either unrepresented and/or doesn't matter much considering how little is moving.

 

[CrazyZombie]

It's all well and good for the industry to be elsewhere, but if you capture the entirety of the major population centres (west of the Urals), then they really can't continue fighting very well.
And in game, as far as I know, the moving of industry to the Urals is either unrepresented and/or doesn't matter much considering how little is moving.

Well, heavy resistance of Soviet forces since the first day of war which led Germans to stop in the outskirts of Moscow unable to make final rush is also unrepresented. Just as existence of significant number of reserves in the rear, saved specially for big counteroffensive. Just as heavy partisan activity, which made supply of German armies kind of complicated thing to deal with.

So I think, it is fair that if we have to fight with "Artificial Idiot", that fight would be a bit harder at the expense of game simplifications. Let's just remember that EVERY war in HOI4 can be won by defense on good positions until enemy will lose all his equipment reserves.

 

[PK_AZ]

The team is split on the issue of money. 14 out of 15 people on the team want money in. @podcat thinks differently.

The issue is that money played very little role in the internal economies. The Reichsmark was essentially monopoly money during the timeframe of the war. Inflation was an issue, but price controls and rationing could counteract that. Manhours spent is a far better value to assess the "cost" to the war economy of building weapons. For the purpose of paying soldiers, the government could always just print money, so in this particular event the effect is simply that it costs more pp.

Personally, I would love to get money back in the game at some point, but it'll probably be focused more on international trade where you actually had to pay in hard cash.

Podcat, I'm with you. Production-based economy beat money-based economy. Thats universal rule of making cool grand strategy games.

 

[CrazyZombie]

Podcat, I'm with you. Production-based economy beat money-based economy. Thats universal rule of making cool grand strategy games.

Ok, I want to buy in the Reich license on Bf.109. Or license on Pz. III. Or project of Admiral Hipper-class cruiser. Or cruiser itself, Lützow for example. Forgot to mention - I play as SU.

So, with what am I supposed to pay?

 

[pete_ts]

It's a move in the right direction. I'm crossing my fingers now that maintaining large armies for a long period of time also decreases war support in lieu of actual monetary cost

 

[Secret Master]

So, with what am I supposed to pay?

Does Germany even care about rubles?

If I were Germany, I'd rather you pay with finished goods (CIC) or resources I need (oil, tungsten, whatever).

I'll be more than willing to sell you a license for something I can use to fuel my military; Soviet rubles can't help me build or maintain Panzer IVs or BF-109s.

EDIT: And my inspiration for this response are the actual economic treaties signed by both powers. The Soviets were paying for German stuff with resources.

 

[CrazyZombie]

Does Germany even care about rubles?

Germany cared about reichsmarks. They got them.

Germany was paying for resources - money were paid to buy something in return.

 

[Secret Master]

Germany cared about reichsmarks. They got them.

Germany was paying for resources - money were paid to buy something in return.

Actually, the 1939 Germany-Soviet Credit Agreement established a line of credit. This line of credit was used by the Soviets to get capital goods, and then the Germans (especially in later treaties) were receiving Soviet resources in repayment.

By my estimate, between January 1940 and the start of Barbarossa, 597 Reichsmarks worth of Soviet goods were delivered to Germany in exchange for 437 million Reichsmarks worth of German industrial stuff. You could waste time exchanging cash and negotiating lines of credit between the Soviet Union and Germany in the game, or you could just have Germany pay CIC for Soviet resources and skip a step.

 

[LiberiusX]

Actually, the 1939 Germany-Soviet Credit Agreement established a line of credit. This line of credit was used by the Soviets to get capital goods, and then the Germans (especially in later treaties) were receiving Soviet resources in repayment.

By my estimate, between January 1940 and the start of Barbarossa, 597 Reichsmarks worth of Soviet goods were delivered to Germany in exchange for 437 million Reichsmarks worth of German industrial stuff. You could waste time exchanging cash and negotiating lines of credit between the Soviet Union and Germany in the game, or you could just have Germany pay CIC for Soviet resources and skip a step.

Exactly this. I'm not saying the Russian people deserved what the Germans did to them, but the Politburo(Stalin and Molotov) was insane to feed the Germans raw materials in return for significantly outdated equipment, while the Germans used the raw material to build state of the art guns, tanks and airplanes. The Soviets were not very interested at all in Reichsmarks. As one author put it, The Soviets thought they could ride the German tiger and they got bit...and almost eaten.

 

[CrazyZombie]

You could waste time exchanging cash and negotiating lines of credit between the Soviet Union and Germany in the game, or you could just have Germany pay CIC for Soviet resources and skip a step.

I'm not sure about current system of "give factory in eternal slavery" for the tank/plane/ship. According to the fact that in theory even 1 civil factory can potentially build endless number of factories, no license can cost so much. And if I buy not the license but some number of produced equipment? What then?

No-no-no, money are needed for sure, because "civil goods factories" is way too scematic concept and buying/selling everything for civil factories ofc works but still feels odd.

Exactly this. I'm not saying the Russian people deserved what the Germans did to them, but the Politburo(Stalin and Molotov) was insane to feed the Germans raw materials in return for significantly outdated equipment, while the Germans used the raw material to build state of the art guns, tanks and airplanes. The Soviets were not very interested at all in Reichsmarks. As one author put it, The Soviets thought they could ride the German tiger and they got bit...and almost eaten.

Soviets needed time first of all. All armament, Germans needed, they already got in Europe. Czechoslovakia, France. Undamaged factories, arsenals, workers not caring much on whom to work...
You wouldn't have discovered America if came in 1941 in Kremlin and tell Stalin that war was be inevitable. He already knew it, intel knew it, general staff knew it.
Still, Stalin expected Hitler to be more sane person - intel estimated number of mobilized divisions and military production as inadequate for successful war with USSR. Noone expected them to attack with what they got in 1941.

Also, you don't get concept of international trade. You sell resources - whatever it will be - for currency of your partner, to be able to buy something from him for his own currency, you just got as the result of a deal.
Soviet Union didn't need reichsmarks, true, but it needed what expected to buy for that reichsmarks. Also, there was possibility that Hitler would be sane enough to not start the war for what Soviet Union can simply sell to him, especially when he is already in the war with half of the world.

 

[man0lo]

There are also some new ways to affect War Support and Stability outside events

I think severe austerity measures could also cause reducing of Stabilty or War Support or Party's popularity...For example Total Mobilization which provides only 10% of the civilian production for consumer goods should cause discontent...especially in Democracies

 

[CrazyZombie]

I think severe austerity measures could also cause reducing of Stabilty or War Support or Party's popularity...For example Total Mobilization which provides only 10% of the civilian production for consumer goods should cause discontent...especially in Democracies

Kekeke, time for Communism to arise because of more tolerant to such measures population. Already tired from fascist path as most common choice.

 

[uishax]

I am really impressed with this diary, especially with the bifurcation of public support to general and war support.
One thing I'm worried about is the war support being overly static, it would be extremely satisfying as a player to see your support skyrocket because you won massive victories with little casualties, it provides a strong incentive to play to minimise casualties rather than throw bodies at an enemy, especially in single player where you try to roleplay as the god-general-patriotic leader of your chosen country.

It also simulates historical changes, the fall of Warsaw so quickly with so little casualties boosted public support in Germany, and the fall of Paris caused massive German war fever. These can be reflected by lets say a 50% increase in war support. This temporary buff would go away with time, but if Germany then took London, they can take that 'improved national spirit' focus, which would exchange that temporary war support bonus for a permanent stability boost, reflecting the public having infinite confidence in the government, but having already won the greatest war, they are eager to enjoy the spoils rather than launch another offensive against the Soviets.

It can also simulate the impact of historical events, such as a failed Dunkirk evacuation on war support, and also represent how different countries have different casualty tolerances in different circumstances (offensive casualties or defensive). The US currently has enough bodies to match the Soviets, when the public would clearly never ever tolerate 2 million US soldiers dying in France. However, if the soldiers died defending mainland US, then it would only harden US resolve.

 

[LiberiusX]

Soviets needed time first of all. All armament, Germans needed, they already got in Europe. Czechoslovakia, France. Undamaged factories, arsenals, workers not caring much on whom to work...
You wouldn't have discovered America if came in 1941 in Kremlin and tell Stalin that war was be inevitable. He already knew it, intel knew it, general staff knew it.
Still, Stalin expected Hitler to be more sane person - intel estimated number of mobilized divisions and military production as inadequate for successful war with USSR. Noone expected them to attack with what they got in 1941.

Not really supported by the evidence. Stalin shut himself up for a week because he refused to believe that Hitler had actually double crossed him(beyond the fact that Stalin ignored intelligence showing a German buildup of divisions in Poland well before Barbarossa was initiated). Also, pretty well documented that Stalin and Molotov's strategy was to let the Axis and Allies burn themselves out allowing the Soviets to pick up the pieces. Not a bad strategy...unless you are Stalin and refuse to acknowledge that you will be on the menu before Britain.

I guess you are half right. They did need time. Time for everyone else to kill each other.

Also, you don't get concept of international trade. You sell resources - whatever it will be - for currency of your partner, to be able to buy something from him for his own currency, you just got as the result of a deal.
Soviet Union didn't need reichsmarks, true, but it needed what expected to buy for that reichsmarks. Also, there was possibility that Hitler would be sane enough to not start the war for what Soviet Union can simply sell to him, especially when he is already in the war with half of the world.

Pretty sure the trade deals were strictly set up in terms of raw materials for finished war material. I'll have to go back and check.

Stalin being such an "avid" student of history should have known that the last time a European dictator got frustrated with trying to invade Britain, they attacked Russia. In fact...Stalin did know this, he just couldn't believe he was duped.

 

[PK_AZ]

Ok, I want to buy in the Reich license on Bf.109. Or license on Pz. III. Or project of Admiral Hipper-class cruiser. Or cruiser itself, Lützow for example. Forgot to mention - I play as SU.

So, with what am I supposed to pay?

With toasters.

 

[Axe99]

I understand it is a relative thing & you are European focused, but Japan was not stable in the 1930-40 period. I would say the Emperor had actual less influence on government than the King of England did and it was only in 1945 with the implementing Imperial Rule allowed Japan to surrender. If you look at the number of Prime Ministers & cabinet re-shuffles 1936-40 and political assassination of an elected Prime Minister & coup attempts 1930-40 it would not be seen as stable. Now it was not likely to go Communist or Fascist, but it between democratic & military dictatorship type of governments that were in play.

Now with Tojo coming to power, first as Minister of War in 1940 & more importantly also (held both jobs) as Prime Minister in Oct 1941 the Japanese government becomes much more stable. There is a reason Japan didn't enter the larger war earlier and it was because the government was not stable, France falls in June 1940 & Britain is on the ropes at that point but they wait until almost the end of 1941 to go after the European colonies. I have been doing research for my government mod.

Your Stability mechanic will be very important in the development of HOI IV.

One thing on this is balancing Japan as well. While something that helps represent the turmoil within Japanese Government would be good, it'd have to be done in a way that didn't make Japan even less of a factor than it is now. Until the mechanics are nuanced enough to handle that, then a more-stable-than-it-might-have-been-historically Japan might be a best-possible outcome in the current situation. Just a thought, could be off as always .

I always see the US importing rather then changing their laws. They always manage to run out of steel; and are always at Free Trade. To me, it would make sense to change the economy law rather then waste civilian factories (albeit the US has a substantial amount). This is more down to the AI being stupid rather then it being smart; as it uses the PP for other things and imports rather then keeping the law at Free Trade for the boosts.

One thing that could work here would be to allow the US (or anyone else) to buy their own resources. Free Market means anyone can buy, not anyone except the government. It would allow the US to remain a trading nation without running out of what it needs (although I'm not sure what the historical US settings were).