• 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.

hellfish6

Nuke the site from orbit.
93 Badges
Jan 21, 2003
1.215
8
nope.nope.com
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Semper Fi
  • Ship Simulator Extremes
  • Sword of the Stars II
  • Supreme Ruler 2020
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
  • Cities: Skylines
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Naval War: Arctic Circle
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Battle for Bosporus
  • Divine Wind
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: Charlemagne
  • Crusader Kings II: Legacy of Rome
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Rajas of India
  • Crusader Kings II: The Republic
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sunset Invasion
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
  • Darkest Hour
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Europa Universalis IV: Conquest of Paradise
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
For the past couple weeks I've been tinkering with some ideas of how to revamp the units for HoI3.

1. Purpose

I love Hoi2. However, I've always thought that combat - the core element of the game, was pretty generic. Any two countries will have the opportunity to construct the exact same divisions - combat more a matter of research capability to see who gets the newer technology first than it is a matter of showing how the different countries organized and fought with their militaries. I understand that the doctrines were supposed to be the deciding factor to explain why the Germans could outperform the Poles, British and French early in the war. This, in my humble opinion, is insufficient.

The CORE and HIP mods make an attempt to rectify this - CORE offers "small" divisions for the countries that had them (i.e. Italy) and HIP offers differing costs for divisions based upon historical values (Japanese divisions are cheaper to build than American divisions). As well intentioned as these systems are, they exist in a flawed context and are merely stop-gap measures to fill a void in a system that doesn't properly simulate national military strategies. In the end, the divisions are still generic.

2. Proposal

I've made an excel file outlining the most common types of military components that make a division in WWII. My proposal is that the player, who can often spend long stretches of game time doing nothing, be allowed to create his/her own customized divisions. Of course, there should be templates and default divisional structures available for those that don't want to make their own.

The idea is that you start with a group of components - hereafter referred to as battalions - and assemble your divisions from them. As you discover new technology, your gain access to additional battalions to build and your existing battalions become eligible for upgrades.

3. How It Works

The following is a basic list of battalions that were widely available in 1936:

Code:
HQ and Staff Cadre

Militia Bn
Garrison Bn
MP Bn
Lt Inf Bn
Inf Bn
Marine Bn
Mountain Bn
Machinegun Bn
Engineer Bn
Recon Bn

Lt Cavalry Bn
Cavalry Bn
Lt Armored Car Bn

Tankette/Lt Inf Tank Bn
Lt Tank Bn
Med Tank Bn
Heavy Tank Bn

Lt Artillery Bn
Med Artillery Bn
Heavy Artillery Bn
Mortar Bn
Heavy Mortar Bn
Lt AA Bn
AA Bn
Heavy AA Bn

Signal Bn
Medical Bn
Horse Transport Bn
Motor Transport Bn
Logistics Bn

The following battalions are unlocked after the discovery of the relevant technology:

Code:
Airborne Bn
Glider Bn
Mechanized Bn
Lt Mechanized Bn
Mech Engineer Bn
Commando Bn
Airborne Commando Bn

Med Armored Car Bn
Heavy Armored Car Bn
Motor Cavalry Bn
Armored Cavalry Bn
Helicopter Recon Bn

Medium Infantry Tank Bn
Heavy Infantry Tank Bn
Medium Assault Tank Bn
Heavy Assault Tank Bn
Superheavy Assault Tank Bn
Superheavy Tank Bn
Amphibious Tank Bn
Airborne Tank Bn
Main Battle Tank Bn

Lt Antitank Bn (towed)
Antitank Bn (towed)
Lt SP Tank Destroyer Bn
SP Tank Destroyer Bn
Heavy SP Tank Destroyer Bn
Medium SP Artillery Bn
Heavy SP Artillery Bn
Superheavy SP Artillery Bn
Rocket Bn (towed)
SP Rocket Bn
Heavy SP Rocket Bn
Lt SP AA Bn
Medium SP AA Bn
Heavy SP AA Bn

Heavy Motor Transport Bn
Helo Transport Bn
Ordnance Bn
Amphibious Transport Bn
Armored Amphib Transport Bn

Each battalion has specific costs, benefits, stats and modifiers that when combined into a divisional structure affect the entire organization - some of these are cumulative effects, some of them are total effects (i.e. HA value of a division is a cumulative effect from all the battalions, however a single motor transport battalion increases the speed of the entire division itself). A division composed entirely of infantry and artillery will be a slow, ponderous unit. Add a signal battalion and a motor transport battalion to the divisional structure and it may lost some of its attack/defense value, but the organization level and speed of the division increases greatly. For some countries, this was important. For others, they'd have preferred the extra infantry and artillery instead of mobility and organization. This ought to be reflected in the game.

Another example - US Armored divisions were actually pretty small. While most German panzer divisions had at least two panzer battalions and over a half dozen motorized or mechanized battalions, US armored divisions had three tank, three mechanized and three artillery battalions. While the US division was a bit weaker on paper than the German division, the difference was that US divisions were much easier to transport across oceans and, arguably, more nimble and flexible than their German counterparts.

A custom division system will let players have the ability to make the game more their own. If a player wants to build a division entirely equipped with heavy tank battalions, let him - he'll soon find out why nobody ever did this in real life. The cost is very high and the division will be, essentially, totally unsupported by infantry and artillery.

However, a more realistically minded player might want to give his airborne divisions a bit more punch - swapping out some parachute battalions for glider battalions. Add an airborne tank battalion. Such a divisional structure would suit his purposes and gaming style better than a generic division. Likewise if a player wants to add some amphibious tanks to his marine division or create an Army Headquarters division with additional artillery and air defense units to support his attacks, he can. This goes well beyond the current brigade system and is vastly more flexible and personal.

Attached is a sample screen to construct a division. Since its still theory, its not fully hashed out. I gave each division 15 battalion slots, as this seemed pretty standard across the board for real life divisions. The divisional HQ is standard and represents the commander and his staff. It is a "free" battalion.

1battalion2jpglj7.jpg


This is just a sample armored division I created. I borrowed the pallete and unit symbols from TOAW3, and they are not necessarily indicative of all the kinds of units that can/should be available.


When I have more time, I'll make some historical examples of divisions to further illustrate the system.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
^And just think, they will have us to thank for the wonderful new divisional system that we thought of for them to use! :D
 
HMS Enterprize said:
^And just think, they will have us to thank for the wonderful new divisional system that we thought of for them to use! :D

I hope so. But Paradox seems to think they need to dumb down or abstract their game, even if the bulk of us seem to beg for more realism.
 
hellfish6 said:
I hope so. But Paradox seems to think they need to dumb down or abstract their game, even if the bulk of us seem to beg for more realism.

I know what you mean, a simple selectable complexity level at the start of each campaign would be ideal and hopefully satisfy everybody...it might mae the program a little bigger but I think it would be worth it.
 
Let it be modest guys.I think it is to eary for batallion level.

Time will come,probably at HOI 5 or HOI 6 in 2011 when simulation will go so deep,on level of squad.Then,on HOI 7, in 2017,we will build divison from absolute bottom, form the level of ONE soldier.This will be absolute simulation.

And this will happen, realy, soner or later,in HOI game or another grand strategy game.

But this is 2006/7.,so i think Paradox will make progres,naturaly, by small steps.
So i think next step will be a brigade level of basic management of the game.
 
doing it by brigade would probably be a disaster, imho. battalion is the perfect mix of detail and feasability--its flexible enough to satisfy virtually everyone.
 
liebgot said:
Time will come,probably at HOI 5 or HOI 6 in 2011 when simulation will go so deep,on level of squad.Then,on HOI 7, in 2017,we will build divison from absolute bottom, form the level of ONE soldier.This will be absolute simulation.

And then it gets integrated with Call of Duty, Silent Hunter and IL2!!! :D :p

We'll need to live in those Matrix cocoons and say good bye to real life, though. :( It may be worthy. :D
 
Great idea for my taste but the thing is that Paradox seems to not go this way since it was them who dumbed down the whole system from HoI to HoI2. I criticized this a lot (and I still do, the game lost much and every unit feels generic now no matter how the new doctrine system is supposed to simulate) and IIRC someone who worked there (?) claimed that the game is supposed to simulate the head of state's role which shouldn't include that kind of micromanagement. (upgrading submachineguns by themselves was possible in HoI without researching generic_division_1941) Given that the average game reviewer finds the Paradox games that I adore deeply 'too complex', it's very doubtful that they'll go the way you're suggesting and we're supporting since they probably want to sell their games to a more mainstream audience. :(
 
kingsword said:
Great idea for my taste but the thing is that Paradox seems to not go this way since it was them who dumbed down the whole system from HoI to HoI2. I criticized this a lot (and I still do, the game lost much and every unit feels generic now no matter how the new doctrine system is supposed to simulate) and IIRC someone who worked there (?) claimed that the game is supposed to simulate the head of state's role which shouldn't include that kind of micromanagement. (upgrading submachineguns by themselves was possible in HoI without researching generic_division_1941) Given that the average game reviewer finds the Paradox games that I adore deeply 'too complex', it's very doubtful that they'll go the way you're suggesting and we're supporting since they probably want to sell their games to a more mainstream audience. :(

You're probably right - the irony of which is that a lot of people I talk to don't like HoI because it's not in depth enough. And I can't imagine many mainstream gamers would be interested in a game like this - they play BF2 or Command & Conquer - both of which require very little thought and very quick reactions.
 
Thorough and good work!

I only lack some sort of consideration to the side of creating templates: how many different sorts of divisions can a given country have, what would be the important variables (no. of generals, their specialties, what?), that sort...

Other than that, I'm impressed.

:cool:
 
Foulfoot said:
Thorough and good work!

I only lack some sort of consideration to the side of creating templates: how many different sorts of divisions can a given country have, what would be the important variables (no. of generals, their specialties, what?), that sort...

Other than that, I'm impressed.

:cool:

I imagine they'd have templates for the divisions they had historically. The US had, basically, four (infantry, armored, airborne, marine) which changed a little bit over time (armored divisions were actually slimmed down after a while, and reduced their numbers of light tanks). Brits pretty much had three which were more or less constant. Germans had many, Soviets had quite a few, and Japan and Italy had some variety as well. Templates could be easily made with open source data. Hell, give me a week and I'll probably have all of them done.
 
Great Idea!

I think giving the player a choice at the start of the game, either standard game Divisions, build own Divisions in either Bridage/Regiment, or Battalion(my choice by the way) level to play with is fine idea and upgrade system taked about earlier by hellfish6. The same goes for Naval units with build slots for hull size and ship upgrades along the way. Many naval ships were upgraded during the war, and I feel that the game fails in showing this! Now Air Force Wing/Group Formations should be consider also with some more input still needed. My hat is off to hellfish6 in bring this up again with the great pic's of what he is talking about!

Maybe they might change the convoy system back to the old way of HOI 1, with a depot that you can set the level of supply and fuel at each depot, and when this level drops below set point you set earlier if you have a current convoy running resources home it will bring the Depot level backup each day to your set level point if enough ships assigned or continue doing it until it does! :cool:
 
Well, the level of complexity this thread has been discussing is infinitely deeper than anything paradox has produced so far, and although appealing to many of you, might not be as attractive to at least as many other paradox fans (let alone other casual strategy gamers). A Bn system IMHO would make things sooo complicated that I'd be spending the bulk of my playing time organising and building the divisions instead of actually playing with them.

Thats the core point actually, whether you want a game based on "building custom divisions" or a game based on "fighting a historically relevant war".
 
Mosheer Rommel said:
Well, the level of complexity this thread has been discussing is infinitely deeper than anything paradox has produced so far, and although appealing to many of you, might not be as attractive to at least as many other paradox fans (let alone other casual strategy gamers). A Bn system IMHO would make things sooo complicated that I'd be spending the bulk of my playing time organising and building the divisions instead of actually playing with them.

Thats the core point actually, whether you want a game based on "building custom divisions" or a game based on "fighting a historically relevant war".
but you don't have to build each and every division, or don't have to build at all if you don't want to. each country would of course have a default template--the historical make-up of the division and if you want to customize your divisions you can save it and simply produce that configuration.
 
"5/8 General: Offensive Doctrine, Defensive Doctrine, Trickster, Panzer Leader
Chaste, Lazy, Forgiving, Honest, Just, Cruel, Proud, Reckless, Suspicious, Naive Puppet Master, Knowledged Tactician" -Myth's siggy

You forgot Humble!

:D
 
Myth said:
but you don't have to build each and every division, or don't have to build at all if you don't want to. each country would of course have a default template--the historical make-up of the division and if you want to customize your divisions you can save it and simply produce that configuration.

Exactly - the templates will ensure that anyone not wanting to make their own division won't have to. The editor is there for the people that DO want to. I understand that a lot of people probably won't have the interest level to go beyond a casual game (can HoI be considered a casual game??) but I don't think that means that the people that do want more depth and personalization in their game should be prevented from it.