• 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.
Should the number of soviet armour be increased to lower the infantry bulk and get back to 293 divs in late june 1941?
Maybe increase the amount of l.arm to try and replicate the sheer amount of tanks Germany destroyed in Barbarossa IRL.
 
Barbarossa starts on june the first.
Germany: 56 Inf, 1 Cav, 47 Mot, 1 l.Arm, 15 Arm, 2 Par, 15 Mtn, 44 Gar, 5 HQ, 186 Landdivs, 6 MRF, 27 Int, 6 CAS, 8 Tac, 3 Nav, 3 Tra, 53 Airdivs; 450/300 IC.
USSR: 178 Inf, 5 Cav, 38 Mot, 4 l.Arm, 36 Arm, 11 Mtn, 3 HQ, 275 Landdivs, 8 MRF, 17 Int, 16 CAS, 7 Tac, 2 Tra, 50 Airdivs; 367/253 IC.

The third gpw event fires on june the 23rd. 191 german divisions vs. 248 soviet ones.
The fourth gpw event fires on july the 28th. 196 german divisions vs. 225 soviet ones.
On august the 23rd moscow falls, 203 german divisions vs. 218 soviet ones.
On september the 9th finnland switches sides. Those soviet armors simply took Helsinki.
The fifth gpw event fires on september the 10th. 203 german divisions vs. 208 soviet ones.
The last gpw event fires on november the 6th. 208 german divisions vs. 200 soviet ones.

Increasing armor = 8 to 12 reduced the number of soviet divisions by about 30.
 
try setting the sov vs fin passivity to 100% in "switch/SOV_Ger_FIN_Defend.ai", or to give the soviets a handicap of 360 against finland.
Code:
front = { 
	passivity = { 
		FIN = 100 
		ROM = 95 
	} 
}
 
Re: Finland (but not only):

what about changing the current increase of tech teams from

20-40-60-80-100 etc.

to

5-10-20-40-60-80 etc.?

This would make playing minors funnier, and would also help them a bit against their stronger neighbours (just take Finland: having only one tech team, with 12 base IC, is almost ridiculous... having 3, on the other hand, could slightly help it against the USSR).
 
Re: Finland (but not only):

what about changing the current increase of tech teams from

20-40-60-80-100 etc.

to

5-10-20-40-60-80 etc.?

This would make playing minors funnier, and would also help them a bit against their stronger neighbours (just take Finland: having only one tech team, with 12 base IC, is almost ridiculous... having 3, on the other hand, could slightly help it against the USSR).

You still have to pay for every tech team. With no more than 12 IC you can support one tech team, but three would be next to impossible, even if you reduce research efficiency.
 
@NiL_FisK|Urd: Handicap seems to be the better choice, but the problem seems to be that finnland advances at in the north and than the offensive sov ai kicks in.

@Titan79: The intervall needs to be the same. Either every 20 IC or every 10 IC another team can be used.

@Blecky: If you have twice the techs team and reduce research spendings by 50% the reserarch will be increased. Also remember that the AI has to pay nothing for research.
 
@Titan79: The intervall needs to be the same. Either every 20 IC or every 10 IC another team can be used.
Then maybe the interval could be just 10. But it would be good to know what other people think about this!
 
@Blecky: If you have twice the techs team and reduce research spendings by 50% the reserarch will be increased. Also remember that the AI has to pay nothing for research.

Ah, yes, I forgot about that. So it would be a human problem only (we were talking of three tech teams).

Then maybe the interval could be just 10. But it would be good to know what other people think about this!

This would mean that other countries like ITA and JAP would have ten tech teams. This might create some (additional) balancing problems.

Maybe giving them some blueprints for the basic stuff could speed up their research to adequate levels.
 
This would mean that other countries like ITA and JAP would have ten tech teams. This might create some (additional) balancing problems.

Actually it would only increase research to those levels of Armagodden. AoD doubled the number of tech slots buth halfed the speed per slot. But i am a bit reluctant about such massive changes, too.
 
This would mean that other countries like ITA and JAP would have ten tech teams. This might create some (additional) balancing problems.

Maybe giving them some blueprints for the basic stuff could speed up their research to adequate levels.

Actually it would only increase research to those levels of Armagodden. AoD doubled the number of tech slots buth halfed the speed per slot. But i am a bit reluctant about such massive changes, too.
Ok, in that case, let's forget the idea. The problem that minors are hardly playable this way still remains, though...
 
CORE has 1 tech team per 10 IC exactly for the reason of more playable minors and medium sized countries - but with it comes massive rebalancing of the game. We already have CORE for that.
 
Ok, in that case, let's forget the idea. The problem that minors are hardly playable this way still remains, though...
Increasing the minimum amount of techteams is one possible solution. Every country gets 3-4 teams? Another possibility is making the IC value required for additional teams exponential instead of flat.
 
Another possibility is making the IC value required for additional teams exponential instead of flat.
This is exactly what I had in mind - it would be the best solution, IMHO. But, unfortunately, it seems (?) not to be viable... :(
 
That could be solved by making older techs much cheaper to research.
Hm, yes, that's a possible solution. But to be honest, I like the idea that the country which researches a project first enjoys this advantage over the others for a set period of time, so I wouldn't change that this way.
 
Hm, yes, that's a possible solution. But to be honest, I like the idea that the country which researches a project first enjoys this advantage over the others for a set period of time, so I wouldn't change that this way.
Well majors would still have the advantage. If you put a 3 year delay on making techs cheaper you'd have a fair deal. Minors will still have few slots and still have extremely bad tech teams (usually).
 
Well majors would still have the advantage. If you put a 3 year delay on making techs cheaper you'd have a fair deal. Minors will still have few slots and still have extremely bad tech teams (usually).
Ah, yes - a 3 year delay would be fair enough. Don't know why, but I thought you wanted to make this gap way smaller.
 
@NiL_FisK|Urd: Handicap seems to be the better choice, but the problem seems to be that finnland advances at in the north and than the offensive sov ai kicks in.
Well, then set the soviet retaliation only if the finns conquer more than their original provinces - and let the finns get passive against SOV if they have conquered their provinces, like in history.


A logarithmic scale for the tech teams would be cool, but for this the .exe has to be changed. Maybe gunman could do this, with an option in the misc.txt to enable the option.
 
I think the main reason is that i reduce the soviet pririoty for musmansk so much that the finns actually take it. reincresing it might prevent that.