C.O.R.E HOI - USSR

[Azkor]

Copper I agree that the tech share is completely ahistoric, but if they soviets dont get those techs then they fall apart. Is there a way to add to the bit that I modified that the tech gain is for AI only?

If there was a way to kill off the world market trades the soviets are engaged in once they are at war it would go along way towards getting their economy back upto somewhere around 66% of max output.

Also does the hate command work? A good soultion from the german standpoint would be that if they decide to go No Deals with the Bolsheviks then they should expect the soviets to DoW them.

I hope there is a way to solve the soviet economic collapse without having to give them a load of techs they wont develope naturally, but if it makes the soviets into an actual opponent then I dunno maybe its the only way correct the problem.

17 Jan 42 red dogs DoW Germany

Soviets hold Besarabia, Eastern Poland, Baltic States and all of Finland silly Finns fought to the end

Soviet economy 998IC

however they are running at 589 of that 998 or 59%

soviets have 16% dissent? so without the dissent they would be doing much better

 

[hendriks]

Full USSR game, observations

I did a full USSR game on middle difficulty CORE level.

- Even for a human, USSR is difficult to manage.........

- The event "there shall be a navy" a bit strong, -15000 all resources except rubber and +2 dissent, no wonder russia can't build up any stocks with events like this.........

- Germany asks and gets Danzig Feb 1939, no Danzig event, no finnish winter war, Germany declares war on Allies November 1939, has a hard time, (DUH, wintereffects........) Poland annexed February 1940, France holds out until June 1941...........Holland and Belgium taken, Denmark and Norway NOT.

- Germany declares war on USSR 1 day after Vichy event, so no troops in the east, I run over a small part of Poland but here they come, PZKWIV and the works, these guys push me back, I got (with trouble) the T34 76mm 1941 model. The USSR misses some techs, I say, it could do with one doctrine for both aviation and army?? They were behind, but not in the middle ages.......

- The Axis manage some ground in the south, Lvov but that;s about it, Roemania joins and these guys are a push over without German help, it takes long though, but I take Roemania/Bulgaria/Hungary eventually and hold the Germans on the old border.

- Russia's resources are INADEQUATE to feed an economy above 500 IC, expecially when ground is lost, so, I think the first land lease should have 1 conversion tech and the 2nd the other one OR give 75000 of all resources with land lease. I would like to see the supplies up as well, 10000 supplies and this event fires once, twice a year, not enough, the allies send HUGE amounts of supplies, tanks, planes etc. 100.000 trucks alone until 1943.
20000 supplies?

- DISSENT, 10% dissent for Persia, poor russia, this has a devastating EFFECT on the fighting of the troops, so no wonder they do not perform, include a -15% dissent drop with Persia event? Give -5% with every land lease event?

- I didn't build militia at all, Germany already did when I took part of some axis lands in the Balcans, AI panicbuilds too soon, possible solution, take out militia build completely?? Militia is useless and waisted time and IC, only usefull if like historical huge army's are being formed as well (in Russia's case)

- I only upgraded 1 - 2 IC provinces, but Russia really has a LOW output until war hits, I think they can't achieve historical build?

- USA NEVER entered the war, instead the event Japan joins the Axis fired, when German troops were still in Poland. USA was 100% fascist (again). With every election, move alignment towards democracy? USA gave military acces to Japan...........!!!

 

[Kevin Mc Carthy]

USSR AIs

THe USSR AI both pre war and 1940 builds:
paratrooper =5
marine = 5

This is way too much! This is better:

paratrooper =2
marine = 1

I suggest adding the 7 points in the following manner:

Infantry +4
Panzer +2
Strategic bomber +1

 

[unmerged(18738)]

I agree - that's too many airborne units. HOWEVER, if the AI uses paratroopers as infantry - in other words just as the Soviets actually did during the war - than I am fine with that. But drop the marines down to 1-2 %.

Not sure about a stratbomber - did the USSR even care about that? I'd rather see it go to panzerville. Shoot, remember they had 40k panzers at the start of the war.

I am curious about the early emphasis on Soviet mech units. Didn't they employ mech formations after LendLease started and they got the US halftracks?

Back to the paratrooper thing - I wonder if we should create a cost dip event for the AI for paratrooper production? It's big now as an obstacle for human use, but I think the AI should be cut some slack, because they don't use them that way.

-PK

 

[unmerged(18738)]

There shall be a navy...

but we shall have no resources.. This is no goodnik.

Why on earth is the trigger for the exact amount that will be deducted from the resource stocks? 15K is the trigger and 15K is what is deducted. Which only hurts the USSR.

Give it a 20K trigger or drop the resource deduction from the events and help the USSR AI.

-PK

 

[Kevin Mc Carthy]

Originally posted by Phil K


Back to the paratrooper thing - I wonder if we should create a cost dip event for the AI for paratrooper production? It's big now as an obstacle for human use, but I think the AI should be cut some slack, because they don't use them that way.

-PK

If the USSR is played by a human he can do what he wants. If the USSr is an AI then why create an event when you can just adjust the build %?

 

[unmerged(18738)]

One final thing...

I am re-writing ALL of the Soviet and other event descriptions into proper English. No offense intended to those who aren't native English speakers because you have done quite well. Believe me, your efforts are greatly appreciated.

But we need proper grammer in the English versions. Also, if you write new events, please feel free to forward the text to me and I can help you with the final translation.

-PK

 

[unmerged(18738)]

Originally posted by Kevin Mc Carthy
If the USSR is played by a human he can do what he wants. If the USSr is an AI then why create an event when you can just adjust the build %?

Basically because the offense/defense values for infantry and airborne are not the same. I guess it's just a matter of whether you want 'historic' representation of the Soviet Airborne forces or not.

But I agree in a sense, because it would cause further steps and it's just easier to axe the airborne and replace it with infantry. That should be a percentage-for-percentage replacement, IMO.

Another thought - the German FJ should be pretty hardy warriors, especially after Crete and their incorporation into the regular fighting forces. Oh well.

-PK

 

[unmerged(18738)]

I wonder if the GPW AI event doesn't over-industrialize the USSR?

 

[MateDow]

Re: USSR economic collapse

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
Azkor@:

This way seems effective, but it's easy exploitable. GER player can choose not to make Mol-Rib pact, thus breaking USSR economy, all the time moving the border closer to the Moscow/Leningrad/Stalingrad line.

Let's agree that we will use that in CORE if other ways of saving situation fail, ok? This tech share doesn't look too historical, is prone to the GER player exploit and supports too much human SOV players.

thames@:

Yes, it's corrected in 0.6 files. Whole messing with leader files in 1.05 and 1.05b resulted in "purge" problem.

That might set up an event where the Soviets become friendlier with the West in view of a more aggressive German foe. That could set up the appropriate tech transfers from the Allies instead of Germany. That would have the same result, a more self sustaining Russia. MDow

 

[MateDow]

Re: Full USSR game, observations

Originally posted by hendriks
- The event "there shall be a navy" a bit strong, -15000 all resources except rubber and +2 dissent, no wonder russia can't build up any stocks with events like this.........

That is an event that could be modified if it is breaking the Soviet economy. Historically though, Stalin's decision to build a navy did disrupt the economy significantly. MDow

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by Azkor
Copper I agree that the tech share is completely ahistoric, but if they soviets dont get those techs then they fall apart. Is there a way to add to the bit that I modified that the tech gain is for AI only?

I understand the problem, I fully agree, that it has to be soved - but I'm trying to find some less gamey, more historical solution.

If it won't work, we will use this method, that's all. BTW, USSR in 0.6 test version AI vs. AI games is doing quite fine - it actually wins in score of games. Adding to that more reasonable IC development (see 5 year plans idea), some more reasources (after fast check of SOV resources in game and in reality I see a few gaps) and tunning up AI nad trades... it might work.


Kevin@:

Yes, in 0.6 paras are out of AI preferences, marines are reduced (paras are not properly used by the AI).

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Re: There shall be a navy...

Originally posted by Phil K
but we shall have no resources.. This is no goodnik.

Why on earth is the trigger for the exact amount that will be deducted from the resource stocks? 15K is the trigger and 15K is what is deducted. Which only hurts the USSR.

Give it a 20K trigger or drop the resource deduction from the events and help the USSR AI.

-PK

It's anti-exploit trigger. If it was not here, player could have 0 coal/steel/oil, and still got event (and deduction would go only to 0, so he would not loose anything, gaining valuable techs). I kept this on the minimal level, to ensure that AI will be able to get that.

I'm also aware, that this event is serious strain for the AI, but latest adjustments to trade/resources/IC development should balance that.

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by Phil K
One final thing...

I am re-writing ALL of the Soviet and other event descriptions into proper English. No offense intended to those who aren't native English speakers because you have done quite well. Believe me, your efforts are greatly appreciated.

But we need proper grammer in the English versions. Also, if you write new events, please feel free to forward the text to me and I can help you with the final translation.

-PK

Great!


And about over-industrialization - after some new adjustments GPW for 0.6 probably works fine. Only 10% rise of IC and 20% rise of supply effectiveness (more troops can be supported) plus tech that ends effects of this when GER are annexed.

 

[thames]

Re: USSR economic collapse

Originally posted by Copper Nicus
...
thames@:

Yes, it's corrected in 0.6 files. Whole messing with leader files in 1.05 and 1.05b resulted in "purge" problem.

Thanks, I'll wait for v0.6 then...

 

[unmerged(18738)]

Copper, you're getting me very excited about 0.6! I hope at some point you can recall the changes for the Soviet AI so we can digest them for further refinement.

But for now, I am going to simply put the AI aside and await your adjustments.

GREAT!

Besides, I have a another very BIG graphics mod that I am working on for release (let me give you a hint - incredible counter colors and some different political country colors - like that ridiculous bright red going maroon-ish, and others).

-PK

 

[hendriks]

CN, do not forget to look at the 10% dissent hit in the Persia-USSR-Allies war that USSR gets, main problem is that this undermines the effectiveness of the USSR troops + cuts IC total + is unhistorical, it should actually lower dissent.

 

[Ghost_dk]

Originally posted by Phil K

Not sure about a stratbomber - did the USSR even care about that? I'd rather see it go to panzerville. Shoot, remember they had 40k panzers at the start of the war.

The Russians had some of the best long range strategic bombers at the beginning of the war so i find this quite all right.

Regarding the techs given in the MR pact i dont mind taking some of the load of the germans through the USA-USSR trades, just let me know.

Ghost_dk

 

[MateDow]

Originally posted by Ghost_dk
The Russians had some of the best long range strategic bombers at the beginning of the war so i find this quite all right.

The did? I seem to remember the British having their bombers and the US having the B-17. I don't remember the Soviets having a modern bomber. They had that big, slab sided, twin engine bomber that looked left over from the first world war. MDow

 

[unmerged(14683)]

Originally posted by MateDow
The did? I seem to remember the British having their bombers and the US having the B-17. I don't remember the Soviets having a modern bomber. They had that big, slab sided, twin engine bomber that looked left over from the first world war. MDow

You mean TB-3. Check out the sources about Il-4 (DB-3F). Fast (440km/h), long-ranged (max. range 3800km), good altitude (10000 m), but weak payload (2700 kg of bombs) and defense (2-3 MG's).
Classic pre-war SOV concept - fast and deadly, but not prepared to operate in case of lack of the air superiority. Nevertheless, pretty good plane.