Richmond516 said:
Yeah can't wait to try out the Ruskie paras.(...)
Event chain is probably too much - players will be able to develop paratroopers themselves, without artificial support and AI is unable to use them properly.
BTW, I don't agee with the conclusion, that Tukhachevsky demise stopped/shaken development of the paratooper units in USSR - all your data above shows, that Soviets developed those units greatly AFTER the 1937. 5 paratrooper corps (roughly 5 divisions), next 5 in early stages of forming + numerous independent brigades is nothing to laugh at. Although they lost most of those units as plain infantry...
I think though that there's something wrong when the USSR is outnumbered by Germany 23-11 divisions on the battlefield.
Never happened to me. You have to build lot's of plain infantry and you will gain numerical advantage. Unfortunatelly, we can't properly simulate Soviet tank development (24k+ in 1941!), as that would totally unbalance the game.
But you can still make difference with infantry masses.
I'm sorry I didn't know that about the Ukraine. I have never really studied pre-Barbarossa Russia except for the war plans and I didn't know about the Great Famine. I don't suppose they allow that to be incorporated in the game as a consequence of the Five Year Plans? I mean I just keep building and building whenever they offer me Five Year Plan increments and the 'statistics' don't really matter to me because I don't know about them.
Great Famine happened (or rater - was caused) in early 30'ties, so it's out of the range of the HoI timeline. Still, events like that won't make into CORE, as we try to keep Paradox policy about not adding things directly connected with genocide. And the events on Ukraine can be surely qualified as that.
How about if the USSR goes to war with a major power (Germany, Italy, Japan, USA, Britain, France) then it gets the option to raise 'Guards Units' w/c are better equipped, supplied and armed than regular units. These would available for almost every type, as there were initially Guards Rifle Divisions and Guards Cavalry Brigades and then Guards Tank, Mechanized even Fighter and Bomber divisions. This would give the unit a higher attack or organization value to reflect the higher morale and better weapons that it would have. This would only be available on upgrade as the units would have to be pulled out of line, rearmed and refitted.
Thing to consider... same as B sort infantry divisions.
Another thing I would like to ask is what exactly do Soviet Militia divisions represent? In the game I'm currently playing they run the gamut of virtually every type of poorly supplied/hastily raised division from District Militia to NKVD Border Guards to Category B and C units. (...)Actually that's another thing I noticed that was conspicuously lacking. There is very little reference to the Russian war plans that involved the A, B and C category units and the echelon type battle. I've been trying to recreate this in my game and I've built up the 'Stalin line' as well as border defenses manned by NKVD and Category A units. The Soviet strategy called for the sacrifice of the first line units which would absorb the enemy strength like a sponge while the Category B and C types formed and mobilized. There were various arguments for a Soviet Forward Deployment or RearWard Deployment, the use of fortifications like the Stalin Line or a Soviet Mobile Deployment. The old SPI/TSR boardgame Barbarossa let you play with these options and I think it would be great fun if CORE could program these into the game. Basically, based on the yearly wargames, STAVKA would choose one of these deployment plans and this could be reflected by adjusting IC and infra to reflect the strategy. For instance, Soviet Forward Deployment would entail putting the mass of the Russian army in forward areas possibily in fixed defenses like the Stalin Line. Thus the Event would make the border areas fortifications increase but at cost in rearward defenses as guns and concrete are diverted to frontline areas. On the other hand a rearward deployment would probably entail some scorched earth tactics and might see the front held by low quality Category A or B divisions as a sacrifice force and the area between them and, lets say the Dnepr, set for destruction as railways and factories are wired and ready for demolition, leaving the advancing Germans in a wasteland while the Russian forces build up their strength. While CORE does have those options to choose tanks over fortifications I think there should be a bit more than that.
Well, honestly I've never heard of ANY real defence plans of Soviet command. All Soviet general books and most of the historical books agree, that Soviet plan was based on the fast counter-attack, retaking the initiative and bringing the war to enemy territory. Some generals write mostly about lack of ANY plan, but IMO it's propaganda/censorship standard to all the books in communist regime.
Soviet strategical defence was great improvisation and it was mastered somewhere around 1942/43. Before that, Soviets attacked when they could (see Charkov battle and all the battles in Orel/Viazma area in 1942).
I know that with current system Soviet infantry is not properly moddeled - standard one is too good (maybe it qualifies for Guards?) and militia is too weak. Maybe in time we can add extra unit to this list, chaper but significantly weaker...
If you're going for historicity you could fire off an event creating the major force structures that were around in 1941 like the Western, Northwest, Baltic, Southern, Southwest Military Districts with maybe one or two infantry divisions as a base. It's kinda disconcerting to see those endless listings of corps given from country to country as expeditionary forces.
Hmmm, I understand the first part, but what it got to do with expeditionary forces?
And about the changing districts in fronts in the 1941 - don't know if it's good excuse for giving free units. As I said before - you can easily gain numerical advantage. Really.
(...)The reason I'm bringing this up is when the Axis have an early blitzkrieg in 1939 and even go as far as taking Africa and the middle east and have won allies like Siam, Afghanistan, Turkey and Mongolia, the British and French just get steamrollered over (and I, as Russia, am next in line). When I send them techs in the hope that they'll open up a second front I find to my horror that they haven't even researched basic tanks or basic service rifles. They're too busy raising divisions.
About the research AI thing, it's mainly corrected in the 0.7. But ultimately AI will be always more on raising divisions then human player -that's hardcoded part of the game, changable only for the Paradox developers.
Finally when the events fire about Soviets rally around Stalin in the face of German atrocities couldn't there be a more tangible form of this rallying around Stalin? Like in the form of an infantry division each time the event fires?
I believe I've already answered, how you can gain numerical advantage. ANd dissent drop is usually much better - you know that when you country got high dissent, the combat effectiveness drops?
And the thing you don't see - Germans loose valuable manpower (v. important!) and supplies.
