• 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.

Poopfaust

Colonel
9 Badges
Mar 19, 2010
861
351
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • March of the Eagles
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Warlock: Master of the Arcane
  • Warlock 2: Wrath of the Nagas
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
I have been practicing for weeks now and getting ready to kick of the invasion of Poland. With that said, I was hoping someone could provide some input.

1) Supply Routing. Do Supplies from Capital reach Point X travel; (a) in the most efficient route, or (2) does it go in a straight line despite the infrastructure and terrain, or (3) it depends? I ask because I am preparing to start off the war with Poland and in anticipation of Barbarossa, I have high Infra on the German border of southern Poland. Should I create a level 10 infra highway of single regions through to the Russian/Romanian border, or am I missing something?

2) I built some Escorts, which cost a lot. I believe I am reading here and there that they are are a waste or do not work. Is that still the consensus?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
I have been practicing for weeks now and getting ready to kick of the invasion of Poland. With that said, I was hoping someone could provide some input.

1) Supply Routing. Do Supplies from Capital reach Point X travel; (a) in the most efficient route, or (2) does it go in a straight line despite the infrastructure and terrain, or (3) it depends? I ask because I am preparing to start off the war with Poland and in anticipation of Barbarossa, I have high Infra on the German border of southern Poland. Should I create a level 10 infra highway of single regions through to the Russian/Romanian border, or am I missing something?
So, a bit of a combination. For some reason, the system has an issue with units moving laterally (essentially, 'north' and 'south') rather than forwards/backwards ('east' and 'west'). So, in some cases, it will pick efficiency regardless of infra and terrain in order to use the fewest numbers of nodes. It also does not handle these cases redundantly, making smaller problems for itself by following where the headquarters are or anything.

2) I built some Escorts, which cost a lot. I believe I am reading here and there that they are are a waste or do not work. Is that still the consensus?
So, again, sort of. With sufficient escorts assigned to a convoy, this can deter attacks by submarines, but as I recall, they won't sink a sub (which is why I will evermore argue against off-map convoys that work on the onesies-twosies principle in this game: it doesn't represent the nature of a convoy in wartime). Better to invest in the destroyers that will actually kill a sub.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Thanks again Wraith. So what would be a sensible way to prepare for Barbarossa, as far as Infrastructure/Supply? Attempt to make all hexes lvl 10, or make maybe.., three axis of lvl 10?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Thanks again Wraith. So what would be a sensible way to prepare for Barbarossa, as far as Infrastructure/Supply? Attempt to make all hexes lvl 10, or make maybe.., three axis of lvl 10?
I would build as much as you reasonably can, especially along the shortest routes...

...also, fight faster and with better planning than the Germans did.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
I prepare for Barbarossa from an infrastructure standpoint starting as soon as I have Poland on the ropes. I want two or three paths of 100% infra plus 100% in all the border provinces. The wretched infra in the USSR will be difficult enough without losing some of my supplies before they even reach Soviet territory.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The other sensible way to prepare for Barb is to show up with four panzer armies of two panzerkorps each. I'm a Misterbean Take 2 disciple. Master the battle plan editor and create one called Swamps. Use it to draw blue lines around every swamp west of the Urals. There is not a good symbol there for impassable provinces, so I mark them with the landing craft icon. Then I set up four penetration axes, using another battle plan (call it whatever you want): one to cut off Courland, destination Riga. One to cut off western Ukraine/Bessarabia, destination the Black Sea coast east of Odessa. Two to rip through and block off the center so they have nowhere to retreat to but into the Pripyat Marshes, then to race around and block all exits but the ones at the Homel side. Done correctly, this'll win Barb because you will encircle and destroy, oh, about four armies' worth of Soviet divisions. Losing four armies stings.

The best, best, best thing you can do is to read and digest Misterbean's Take 2. While it is based on an earlier version (FTM, I reckon), nearly everything in it is important to know. The importance of practicals is very high.
 
Last edited:
  • 2
Reactions:
The supply AI will generally attempt to use infrastructure of level 7 or over, if available. Making a couple of Level 10 supply highways across Poland is pretty close to a necessity, no need to upgrade all of the other provinces, although in some cases the AI will push supply through provinces adjacent to the main route if there's not enough throughput on the main route.

Use the Supply map overlay to see where the AI is routing the supplies to your troops on the Soviet border, then build up the weakest links along that route first., gradually improving it to Level 10. There's generally a bottleneck just below Lithuania, if the Soviets haven't annexed them before you launch Barbarossa., where even Level 10 isn't quite sufficient, so you may need to make a double-wide path for a few provinces. You can generally build two main paths across Poland, one above and one below the Great Priyapet Marshes, branching them and extending them into Soviet territory as the invasion advances. The main point is, keep an occasional eye on the supply map and see where the AI is sending the supplies through, so you're not wasting IC improving provinces which don't need it.

Limiting north-south movement along the Soviet front will keep the AI from cancelling the current supplies in transit for that unit and sending fresh supplies all the way from Berlin. A province or two is fine, as the AI will merely change the path over the last province or two, but much more than that and it may create a new route,

jkk's point about Practicals is something to seriously consider. Building a few IC (as in 10-20) before starting to produce mass quantities of combat units can boost your Construction Practical, and is still supportable with Germany's access to raw materials,. Building infrastructure later will be considerably faster and cheaper, particularly if you research a level or two of Construction Theory so it doesn't decay as quickly. It also means that you're not building large numbers of combat units immediately, then having to supply them for 3-4 years before they see action. Building a SMALL number of units over time can ramp up your Practicals, so they're cheaper and faster to build when you do start cranking them out. in mass quantities.

The best illustration of the importance of Practicals is in building a German navy. Lay down the keel for a new Battlecruiser in January of 1936 while you research main guns for capital ships, then start a second BC around 4-5 months later. You can start building your first actual BB once the tech for main guns is done, and a second a month or two later. The first BC will eventually complete, and its effect on Capital Ship Practical may be high enough to force the completion of the second BC the next day, saving 4-5 months of IC which you would otherwise have wasted by building them simultaneously. The BBs should both complete before the start of hostilities, again saving months of IC/days as a result of the subsequent builds completing sooner. This effect, duplicated on Construction by building IC and upgrading airfields and infrastructure in Germany in 1936, should make the cost and completion time of an ambitious infrastructure highway across Poland relatively reasonable.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
The biggest example I have ever seen of what Kovax says about practicals has been with German carrier groups. Again inspired by Misterbean: He encourages this: first 1 CV, then two more, then two more groups. What you find is that with all those laid down, the first causes the second two carriers to complete sooner, and their completion causes the two additional groups to plummet in price and completion time. I mean saving multiple months and the IC cost falling off the table.

The way I would explain practicals is that doctrines, technology upgrade research, builds, and usage all contribute to lowering the cost and build speed of a given type of unit. So for the USSR, for example, with high dependency on a lot of infantry divisions, I can't just upgrade their weapons and say we're fine. I can't just build a division now and then to keep the boot camp open. I have to build them consistently, keep up with their techs, research relevant doctrines, and ideally get them some battle experience.

As far as construction practicals go, let's see. When I first researched the tech to build infra in my current game, they cost about 0.41 each and took a long time. Now they probably take 60% of the time and cost about 0.24. Not a bad volume discount--but if I stop building stuff that uses construction practicals, time and cost will edge upward.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Yes, Practicals decay over time, but less so if you research the Theoreticals for them. Note that the decay reduction listed for Ministers doesn't work, so there's no point in choosing one who offers a 25% reduction in something like Capital Ship decay if you can get one that offers a functional benefit instead.

If I play GER, I research and build a CVL as soon as I can. That will speed the research and production of my first real CV after I research at least 2 levels of Carrier Engines. Any slower than that and they're not going to stay out of harm's way in later naval engagements, and risk getting sunk. The "training" CVL can be attached to that obsolete WWI BC fleet in the Baltic, which can be very useful to block off one end of the English Channel later if/when you decide to invade the isles. That CVL would only slow down any other fleet that you might attach it to. Unlike a true CV, you CAN attach a CVL to a combat fleet without having it pull all of the escorts back to defend it, leaving the BBs and CAs unprotected. CVs need to be in their own fleet.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Yes, Practicals decay over time, but less so if you research the Theoreticals for them. Note that the decay reduction listed for Ministers doesn't work, so there's no point in choosing one who offers a 25% reduction in something like Capital Ship decay if you can get one that offers a functional benefit instead.
*Unless you've performed the hex edit of the exe that corrects this issue.*
 
As for escort vessels, it's been pointed out that enough escorts can deter a small sub group (1 or 2 subs) from attacking the convoy. In most cases, the escorts cost more than the ships they're escorting, and tend to get sunk IN ADDITION TO, rather than instead of, the convoy ships. That's not at all cost-effective, in my estimation. I will use the ones available at the start, but never build any.
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
As for escort vessels, it's been pointed out that enough escorts can deter a small sub group (1 or 2 subs) from attacking the convoy. In most cases, the escorts cost more than the ships they're escorting, and tend to get sunk IN ADDITION TO, rather than instead of, the convoy ships. That's not at all cost-effective, in my estimation. I will use the ones available at the start, but never build any.
They really should have given a better shake to naval combat, to better represent the Battle of the Atlantic.
 
They really should have given a better shake to naval combat, to better represent the Battle of the Atlantic.
Naval combat wasn't bad, other than a few odd quirks (like ALL of the escorts pulling back to protect any carriers in the fleet, leaving the battleships and cruisers unescorted), but the convoy raiding system left quite a bit to be desired.

My own pet peeve was that they didn't include US naval blimps as convoy escorts. Note that no convoy ever lost a ship to submarine attack while escorted by a blimp.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Naval combat wasn't bad, other than a few odd quirks (like ALL of the escorts pulling back to protect any carriers in the fleet, leaving the battleships and cruisers unescorted), but the convoy raiding system left quite a bit to be desired.

My own pet peeve was that they didn't include US naval blimps as convoy escorts. Note that no convoy ever lost a ship to submarine attack while escorted by a blimp.
The GUI wasn't great and I felt like it needed to be given the land treatment with battle events and the like.