In case anyone reads this...
As the brain trust is slaving away on version 1.13 (2.0? Where's Lennart Berg when you need him?), I have compiled some 2 cents suggestions, for what it's worth.
1. A better map - more provinces. We always clammer for this. Darkest Hour did this, but I actually like the much expanded province map found in Iron Cross. In addition, why can't the map show us weather, terrain and even Political on the same map? Iron Cross's map is tinny in appearance, but it does this, IIRC. The existing HOI II map as is has provinces that are way too large, as we all know. Now, to outflank Buffalo, NY one must go through West VA? I grew up near Buffalo. It isn't that hard to get around!
2. An expanded research table. Being done, I know. Maybe not overkill, but more detail, and of course, techs approaching 1964, or at least through the 1950's.
3. If possible, divisions really need to have the capability of more than 1 brigade attached. Armor could perhaps have 3, all others 2, with Militia having 1. Naval Caps could have: CV's 4. CVL's 3, All other caps 5. CLs 3, DD's 2. Subs 2 (torps and SP's I would think).
4. Relatedly -- and this is a "big" one -- there needs to be a penalty for a corps or army formed with all divisions having the same brigade(s) attached! Do you really think that a corps of 3 ARM with SP Art only attached is an effective fighting unit? What about air attacks on them? How do they cross a river? Where is their scouting unit? Conversly, one eng brigade could help all units cross a river quicker (I know - currently it's an engineer commander attached that does this, or all units must have an Eng, right?). If a unified command unit (I. E., a 3-division Corps) then 1 AA unit could defend all 3 divisions - not as well as 3 AA's, but you get the idea. So now, your corps of Arm's could have one with Eng, SP Art and maybe a spot plane attached (!), one with AC (Scouting) Cav and a sapper (new unit - flame throwers), and one with HA, SP Art , and LA. As long as all 3 do not have an identical unit, you're OK. 1 ARM + 2 MOTs could look like the ARM with ENG, SP Art, and AA, 1 Mot with SP Art and AC, 1 MOT with LA and SP AT, as an example. Of course, if you don't build these extras, your opponent/AI will... So -- all three units would benefit from the added brigades, such that Air Attack would not decimate the 2 units without the AA attached, but the AA would be 1/3 as effective as 3 AA's), but if the units break up, no such luck - even if the separated units are in the same province. Make sense? Maybe ARM doesn't get 3 brigades, but, ya get the idea!
5. New brigades: Lt Amphibious Armor, Sappers (Offensive engineer units - flamethrowers). Light AT attachments (Panzerfausts, Bazookas) Light Artillery - weaker but no speed loss. Motorcycle/Sidecar units as attachments -- a scouting unit, cheaper but weaker than AC's.
6. Semi-Motorized Cavalry needs to be clarified. Right now they move through marsh's better than anything else, but what are they? Motorcycle units, or horseback riders? Horses could trot through swamps ok, but vehicles - even 2-wheelers with small AC's attached? Only if Infra is 100% or higher, or maybe a mathematical relationship between infra and mobility...?
7. Let's return to the previous command structure, meaning a Major Gen'l - 1 Division. Lt Gen'l - 3 to maybe 5-6, General - 9, and FM - 12.
8. Another pet peeve. If you assign a commander to a Staff position on your diplomatic screen - he is unavailable to command in the field! This is basic to Military structure!
9. Relatedly, if you assign a field commander to a research slot, his resesarch speed is cut in 1/2 if he is moving or involved in combat! Hard to work on a doctrine when you are on the move or your men are in combat, screaming for your help and direction. You want Guderian to develop your Kampfgruppe Doctrine? Fine, but he better not be clawing it out on the Eastern Front, or you can expect his progress to be greatly slowed! EXCEPTION: Strategically redeployed units - full speed research while in the deployment phase. The train car is an OK place to study and write. Also, a Staff member (on your diplomacy screen) can research at full speed.
10. No more of this idea of giving your poorest FM or Gen'l a HQ unit without suffering from his incompetence! Can you imagine that IRL??? The nearby HQ unit's commander must have his attributes influencing the outcomes - up or down!
11. Rework dissent. The TC drain seems ok, but if Germany is slicing through the USSR, esp with Himmler, etc as security officer, and the provinces are averaging ~30% revolt risk, then ~25%+ of these should have Militia units popping up! The AI treats these conquered lands this way, and garrisons most of them. Why not the player? This, and #4 above, can be great equalizers vs the AI, not to mention jut plain more sensible.
12. Paratrooper units should have either no attached brigades (if jumping. If used as elite ground troops, fine - attach away) or only the new Light ART or Light AT. Yes -- there were gliders, but how much can they hold? Maybe different opinions here are valid. As a compensation, defensive ratings on these units could be bumped up. Also, is it doable to eliminate dissent with Victory Or Valhalla selected on PAR's? Weren't they expected to take increased casualties?
Navy:
If possible, rework Naval combat. IIRC, currently a stack tries to close to 90% of the longest firing distance in the stack (seemingly excluding a CVL's distance, so that the fleet closes to 90% of the longest other Cap ship's range - but I've never been certain about that). This means that a 30-stack with 1 CV, or 2 BB's in it will lose out to a 6-stack of 2 CV's or 3 BB's, respectively. That's crazy. Over time, all ships should be closing to their ideal firing ranges - unless of course too damaged to be in it. So in 8-12-24 hours that poorly-designed AI stack has almost all caps in range, and your tricky stack of CVs and DDs or BBs and DDs is getting hammered -- as it should!
NOTE: The manual seems to indicate that this happens, but I'm not sure I have seen it. If so -- GOOD!!!
Look at historical Naval deployments. Except for the 1 CV in a stack of 30 ships, they were closer to the AI's mixes than what most of us have decided on (except for the DD I's in the BB IV's stack. Can that be fixed?). So on other words, this means that, over time, the AI's stack of 2 BB's + 2 BC's + 4 CA's + 1 CVL, with 18 CL/DD's should hammer your 6-stacks of 3 caps + 3 screens. This also means that CV's will, over several hours/days of fighting, lose out to SAG stacks, unless the CAPs are too slow relative to the enemy's CTF. As it stands now, unless the weather is bad or the distance measurement closes (as it occasionally can do now, rapidly???) my CV's will decimate a 30-ship SAG in a fight of several days.
Submarine combat needs to be fixed. ASW before 1942 now is too powerful, unless perhaps you really rush docs and mix in Level II or better CVL's. At the same time, subs aren't particularly effective vs convoys, although this is a classic HOI II thing, perhaps not fixable. The old saying was that 1 sub is actually a stack of 5, just like DD's. Subs seem quite powerful vs SAG's and CTF's now. They certainly should be able to sink some of these (as IRL) but now, the only way to defeat a CTF (without massed air attacks) is by a CTF or sub attacks. Subs should be effective here, but I think with higher casualty counts. Also, Heavy subs??? Who experimented with these, except the French, and Japan? Who actually used them?
CV strikes on ports drain too much Org, not to mention their ineffectiveness early on. Compare that to the Pearl Harbor results IRL.
The idea that the slowest major vessels, Transport ships, can steam around unprotected and somehow "get away" when attacked is crazy. An unprotected TP, even one, should lose out to almost any enemy warship, unless the enemy is just too old/slow. Yes, Blockade Runners should help with 1-2 TPs, but really?!? This change alone could make major historically inaccurate invasions (Germany hitting the USA in 1942) highly challenging. TP's should be protected by correspondingly large fleets, or at minimum, all areas (not just the larger zones) should have combat vessel presences. You could eliminate the penalty for these ships in the stacks.
Air war:
While not a fan of Darkest Hour, at least yet (Too much extra stuff for me to immerse in learning, and little help given there on the forum) The idea of MRF/INT's on "Scramble" is cool. If a nearby unit is being bombed, the fighters scramble and confront. Constant air superiority wears units out. Right now, this seems to happen only if the province airbase itself in under attack, and I'm not too sure about that.
More AI Strategic Bombing, if appropriate, doctrine-wise.
Additionally:
Be able to give brigades to allies.
Be able to counter-offer to a Demand Of Territory. The USSR wants it's land back? Well, how about this 1/3 back instead?
Decimated nations should be more willing to surrender. this is a compensation for the increased attacking difficulty some of my changes introduce.
Create a situation where your allies could decide whether or not to DOW on a new adversary. Bulgaria did not invade the USSR. Japan was in the Axis, but left the USSR alone. This would allow Japan to join the Axis, and share techs, but avoid war with Stalin. You would have to resolve how taking MC of a country would play out here, as their units shouldn't be allowed to fight...
Finally, a last (?) Pet peeve. "A Liberated England" should be under Oswald Mosely, and King Edward(?). A peace treaty with the UK should have Halifax replace Winston, under King George.
EDIT:
Reworked Espionage! The idea that a country can trot through a war spending almost nothing on Intelligence is preposterous! DH may have better ideas here (IDK0 but perhaps a lowered cost but more output results, esp bigger penalties if little expenditures. Also, if possible, sepatare internal/counterintelligence spending from spy activity. Yes, Cryptography has an input on ground units activities, but if you spend little here, you should be getting sabotaged easily, and even see your key ppl bumped off more!
As I've said before, require military spending while at peace. Your most talented Generals would leave for the private sector if they weren't paid. Maybe allow a reduced peacetime expenditure to prevent this (40-50%, depending on retained staff - bringing back the "Release the Old Guard" option, or better yet, an event that allows you to pick the OG fellows to be sent to the Vet's retirement Home, so you can retain the LW's, Blockade Runners, etc.).
As the brain trust is slaving away on version 1.13 (2.0? Where's Lennart Berg when you need him?), I have compiled some 2 cents suggestions, for what it's worth.
1. A better map - more provinces. We always clammer for this. Darkest Hour did this, but I actually like the much expanded province map found in Iron Cross. In addition, why can't the map show us weather, terrain and even Political on the same map? Iron Cross's map is tinny in appearance, but it does this, IIRC. The existing HOI II map as is has provinces that are way too large, as we all know. Now, to outflank Buffalo, NY one must go through West VA? I grew up near Buffalo. It isn't that hard to get around!
2. An expanded research table. Being done, I know. Maybe not overkill, but more detail, and of course, techs approaching 1964, or at least through the 1950's.
3. If possible, divisions really need to have the capability of more than 1 brigade attached. Armor could perhaps have 3, all others 2, with Militia having 1. Naval Caps could have: CV's 4. CVL's 3, All other caps 5. CLs 3, DD's 2. Subs 2 (torps and SP's I would think).
4. Relatedly -- and this is a "big" one -- there needs to be a penalty for a corps or army formed with all divisions having the same brigade(s) attached! Do you really think that a corps of 3 ARM with SP Art only attached is an effective fighting unit? What about air attacks on them? How do they cross a river? Where is their scouting unit? Conversly, one eng brigade could help all units cross a river quicker (I know - currently it's an engineer commander attached that does this, or all units must have an Eng, right?). If a unified command unit (I. E., a 3-division Corps) then 1 AA unit could defend all 3 divisions - not as well as 3 AA's, but you get the idea. So now, your corps of Arm's could have one with Eng, SP Art and maybe a spot plane attached (!), one with AC (Scouting) Cav and a sapper (new unit - flame throwers), and one with HA, SP Art , and LA. As long as all 3 do not have an identical unit, you're OK. 1 ARM + 2 MOTs could look like the ARM with ENG, SP Art, and AA, 1 Mot with SP Art and AC, 1 MOT with LA and SP AT, as an example. Of course, if you don't build these extras, your opponent/AI will... So -- all three units would benefit from the added brigades, such that Air Attack would not decimate the 2 units without the AA attached, but the AA would be 1/3 as effective as 3 AA's), but if the units break up, no such luck - even if the separated units are in the same province. Make sense? Maybe ARM doesn't get 3 brigades, but, ya get the idea!
5. New brigades: Lt Amphibious Armor, Sappers (Offensive engineer units - flamethrowers). Light AT attachments (Panzerfausts, Bazookas) Light Artillery - weaker but no speed loss. Motorcycle/Sidecar units as attachments -- a scouting unit, cheaper but weaker than AC's.
6. Semi-Motorized Cavalry needs to be clarified. Right now they move through marsh's better than anything else, but what are they? Motorcycle units, or horseback riders? Horses could trot through swamps ok, but vehicles - even 2-wheelers with small AC's attached? Only if Infra is 100% or higher, or maybe a mathematical relationship between infra and mobility...?
7. Let's return to the previous command structure, meaning a Major Gen'l - 1 Division. Lt Gen'l - 3 to maybe 5-6, General - 9, and FM - 12.
8. Another pet peeve. If you assign a commander to a Staff position on your diplomatic screen - he is unavailable to command in the field! This is basic to Military structure!
9. Relatedly, if you assign a field commander to a research slot, his resesarch speed is cut in 1/2 if he is moving or involved in combat! Hard to work on a doctrine when you are on the move or your men are in combat, screaming for your help and direction. You want Guderian to develop your Kampfgruppe Doctrine? Fine, but he better not be clawing it out on the Eastern Front, or you can expect his progress to be greatly slowed! EXCEPTION: Strategically redeployed units - full speed research while in the deployment phase. The train car is an OK place to study and write. Also, a Staff member (on your diplomacy screen) can research at full speed.
10. No more of this idea of giving your poorest FM or Gen'l a HQ unit without suffering from his incompetence! Can you imagine that IRL??? The nearby HQ unit's commander must have his attributes influencing the outcomes - up or down!
11. Rework dissent. The TC drain seems ok, but if Germany is slicing through the USSR, esp with Himmler, etc as security officer, and the provinces are averaging ~30% revolt risk, then ~25%+ of these should have Militia units popping up! The AI treats these conquered lands this way, and garrisons most of them. Why not the player? This, and #4 above, can be great equalizers vs the AI, not to mention jut plain more sensible.
12. Paratrooper units should have either no attached brigades (if jumping. If used as elite ground troops, fine - attach away) or only the new Light ART or Light AT. Yes -- there were gliders, but how much can they hold? Maybe different opinions here are valid. As a compensation, defensive ratings on these units could be bumped up. Also, is it doable to eliminate dissent with Victory Or Valhalla selected on PAR's? Weren't they expected to take increased casualties?
Navy:
If possible, rework Naval combat. IIRC, currently a stack tries to close to 90% of the longest firing distance in the stack (seemingly excluding a CVL's distance, so that the fleet closes to 90% of the longest other Cap ship's range - but I've never been certain about that). This means that a 30-stack with 1 CV, or 2 BB's in it will lose out to a 6-stack of 2 CV's or 3 BB's, respectively. That's crazy. Over time, all ships should be closing to their ideal firing ranges - unless of course too damaged to be in it. So in 8-12-24 hours that poorly-designed AI stack has almost all caps in range, and your tricky stack of CVs and DDs or BBs and DDs is getting hammered -- as it should!
NOTE: The manual seems to indicate that this happens, but I'm not sure I have seen it. If so -- GOOD!!!
Look at historical Naval deployments. Except for the 1 CV in a stack of 30 ships, they were closer to the AI's mixes than what most of us have decided on (except for the DD I's in the BB IV's stack. Can that be fixed?). So on other words, this means that, over time, the AI's stack of 2 BB's + 2 BC's + 4 CA's + 1 CVL, with 18 CL/DD's should hammer your 6-stacks of 3 caps + 3 screens. This also means that CV's will, over several hours/days of fighting, lose out to SAG stacks, unless the CAPs are too slow relative to the enemy's CTF. As it stands now, unless the weather is bad or the distance measurement closes (as it occasionally can do now, rapidly???) my CV's will decimate a 30-ship SAG in a fight of several days.
Submarine combat needs to be fixed. ASW before 1942 now is too powerful, unless perhaps you really rush docs and mix in Level II or better CVL's. At the same time, subs aren't particularly effective vs convoys, although this is a classic HOI II thing, perhaps not fixable. The old saying was that 1 sub is actually a stack of 5, just like DD's. Subs seem quite powerful vs SAG's and CTF's now. They certainly should be able to sink some of these (as IRL) but now, the only way to defeat a CTF (without massed air attacks) is by a CTF or sub attacks. Subs should be effective here, but I think with higher casualty counts. Also, Heavy subs??? Who experimented with these, except the French, and Japan? Who actually used them?
CV strikes on ports drain too much Org, not to mention their ineffectiveness early on. Compare that to the Pearl Harbor results IRL.
The idea that the slowest major vessels, Transport ships, can steam around unprotected and somehow "get away" when attacked is crazy. An unprotected TP, even one, should lose out to almost any enemy warship, unless the enemy is just too old/slow. Yes, Blockade Runners should help with 1-2 TPs, but really?!? This change alone could make major historically inaccurate invasions (Germany hitting the USA in 1942) highly challenging. TP's should be protected by correspondingly large fleets, or at minimum, all areas (not just the larger zones) should have combat vessel presences. You could eliminate the penalty for these ships in the stacks.
Air war:
While not a fan of Darkest Hour, at least yet (Too much extra stuff for me to immerse in learning, and little help given there on the forum) The idea of MRF/INT's on "Scramble" is cool. If a nearby unit is being bombed, the fighters scramble and confront. Constant air superiority wears units out. Right now, this seems to happen only if the province airbase itself in under attack, and I'm not too sure about that.
More AI Strategic Bombing, if appropriate, doctrine-wise.
Additionally:
Be able to give brigades to allies.
Be able to counter-offer to a Demand Of Territory. The USSR wants it's land back? Well, how about this 1/3 back instead?
Decimated nations should be more willing to surrender. this is a compensation for the increased attacking difficulty some of my changes introduce.
Create a situation where your allies could decide whether or not to DOW on a new adversary. Bulgaria did not invade the USSR. Japan was in the Axis, but left the USSR alone. This would allow Japan to join the Axis, and share techs, but avoid war with Stalin. You would have to resolve how taking MC of a country would play out here, as their units shouldn't be allowed to fight...
Finally, a last (?) Pet peeve. "A Liberated England" should be under Oswald Mosely, and King Edward(?). A peace treaty with the UK should have Halifax replace Winston, under King George.
EDIT:
Reworked Espionage! The idea that a country can trot through a war spending almost nothing on Intelligence is preposterous! DH may have better ideas here (IDK0 but perhaps a lowered cost but more output results, esp bigger penalties if little expenditures. Also, if possible, sepatare internal/counterintelligence spending from spy activity. Yes, Cryptography has an input on ground units activities, but if you spend little here, you should be getting sabotaged easily, and even see your key ppl bumped off more!
As I've said before, require military spending while at peace. Your most talented Generals would leave for the private sector if they weren't paid. Maybe allow a reduced peacetime expenditure to prevent this (40-50%, depending on retained staff - bringing back the "Release the Old Guard" option, or better yet, an event that allows you to pick the OG fellows to be sent to the Vet's retirement Home, so you can retain the LW's, Blockade Runners, etc.).
Last edited:
- 1
Upvote
0