Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In

House Rules for HOI4 MP Campaigns Options · View
Demosthenes
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 1:43:17 PM
 Private 1st Class

Joined: 1/5/2017
Posts: 23
You can't win as Republicans if you can't have as many volunteers as them. It's AI vs 3 players...
Regardless, I would agree to this: USSR can send 5 divs, 2 armoured 3 not. Axis can send 2 armoured 3 not between all of them. No resending of volunteers (which you guys did btw). With this you have a perfectly good chance of winning the SCW but USSR can still win it if they're better.
I don't think rules should do a 180 turn because Nationalist Spain lost the war once.
Republican Spain had more men, more tanks and 60.000 international volunteers. The war lasted 3 years, and with the rules you want to make the war would be instantly over.
If it's historical accuracy that you want, Spain was so messed up after the war (500.000 casualties, 400.000+ refugees), all the infrastructure and industry levelled that it couldn't enter WW2.
Unless USSR manages to actually inflict some damage Spain is the most overpowered minor in this game, as I think I showed in last game. If ultimately you want NSP to win, that's fine with me, USSR can just avoid taking say, Madrid or Barcelona and they won't cap. In 1938, USSR can disband the volunteers and Axis can slowly retake all of Spain (which again, against AI should be a piece of cake). But as I said, USSR wins only in 5% of the cases even when SCW has no volunteer rules. But there needs to be a punishment if the Axis mess up in Spain (say, Spain remains in war until 38 and thus will be weaker). I agree that losing Spain completely + the world tension is excessive, but just giving it for free is unfair.
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 2:35:18 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Demosthenes wrote:
You can't win as Republicans if you can't have as many volunteers as them. It's AI vs 3 players...
Regardless, I would agree to this: USSR can send 5 divs, 2 armoured 3 not. Axis can send 2 armoured 3 not between all of them. No resending of volunteers (which you guys did btw). With this you have a perfectly good chance of winning the SCW but USSR can still win it if they're better.
I don't think rules should do a 180 turn because Nationalist Spain lost the war once.
Republican Spain had more men, more tanks and 60.000 international volunteers. The war lasted 3 years, and with the rules you want to make the war would be instantly over.
If it's historical accuracy that you want, Spain was so messed up after the war (500.000 casualties, 400.000+ refugees), all the infrastructure and industry levelled that it couldn't enter WW2.
Unless USSR manages to actually inflict some damage Spain is the most overpowered minor in this game, as I think I showed in last game. If ultimately you want NSP to win, that's fine with me, USSR can just avoid taking say, Madrid or Barcelona and they won't cap. In 1938, USSR can disband the volunteers and Axis can slowly retake all of Spain (which again, against AI should be a piece of cake). But as I said, USSR wins only in 5% of the cases even when SCW has no volunteer rules. But there needs to be a punishment if the Axis mess up in Spain (say, Spain remains in war until 38 and thus will be weaker). I agree that losing Spain completely + the world tension is excessive, but just giving it for free is unfair.


I hear you and will take a look again after I have made some tests and calculations.
This is not just for me loosing as Spain, but because others has said that it´s hard with so many Russian tanks.
I´m trying to make it hard for the Republicans to win and you can't do that in one try.
so have patience and remember this Rules are for next Campaign and not this one.

I have seen that the Tanks that you send to the republicans are not used at all because they don't have the templates for them.
I also know that most of the Russian tanks where driven by Russian cres if not all. They had no military units on their own ,but was incorporated in the Spanish ones i think, but i can be wrong(I´m no Expert here).
I check some thing and come up with a solution.
Anders
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 3:35:10 PM
 Generalfeldmarschall

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal2012 Good Cause Support MedalBanned in ActionAuthor of 7000th post

Joined: 3/9/2007
Posts: 13,057
Location: Auf das der Adler wieder fliegt
Look: The Nationalists should have.no real problem winning if it's played, even if Soviets sends five tank divisions. You just played it very badly, possibly due to speed 3.

"Hvor fattige var de ikke, disse fiskere som levde av havets nåde! De slet sig gjennom livet uten å se sig om til høire eller til venstre. Deres gleder var få, deres bekymringer mange. Men de hadde allikevel et gemyttlig smil til den fremmede, en munter vise og en lun historie. For sånn er de, disse Sørlandets barn."

King of Men wrote:
Anders is correct.

Fivoin wrote:
Yeah, Anders is right.

baronbowden wrote:
I would tend to agree with Anders.

Support Ederon.net via your Amazon purchases!

I joined Ederon.net before it became mainstream
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 4:39:21 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Here is a Alternative on Spain:

I noticed that when you send Tanks as Lend Lease then they don´t use them because they have no templates for them.
I do think that they use ART sent.
So I was thinking then that those countries that sent LL will get the same amount in own units that the can send.
The rest that is allowed comes as regular LL.
You are not allowed to send more troops than this.
So see here below:

Germany: Mix of 600 Planes and 200 Tanks(ca 3 Bat) in units that they can send.
No limit on INF and Support Equipment.
The units only have limits on Armor, but not the rest in the unit.

Italy: Mix of 660 Planes, 800 ART and 150 Tanks(ca 2 Bat) in units they can send.
No limit on INF and Support Equipment.
The units only have limits on Armor, but not the rest in the unit.

Soviet: Mix of 720 Planes, 1500 ART and 350 Tanks(ca 6 Bat) in units they can send.
No limit on INF and Support Equipment.
The units only have limits on Armor, but not the rest in the unit.
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 4:43:07 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Anders wrote:
Look: The Nationalists should have.no real problem winning if it's played, even if Soviets sends five tank divisions. You just played it very badly, possibly due to speed 3.


It was not speed 3 ,but speed 2 Big Grin

I should have done it on Speed 1.
Yes I was bad ,because it was my first time as Spain both in SP and MP.
I learned much of it, so that i can better next time.

Well with speed 1 and good coordination with my Allies it should maybe have been possible ,but 5 Divs of armor is a lot.
I meet 2 Tigers in the Desert in a other game and they stop me and my Allies then.
Demosthenes
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 5:25:55 PM
 Private 1st Class

Joined: 1/5/2017
Posts: 23
Alright. I play USSR and Germany a lot. When the Spanish player is on my side, I win 99% of the time. It's very easy. Without rules on volunteers or lend lease. Why? Because Germany sends 2 tanks, Italy sends 3 and Soviets send 5. Both sides can upgrade with xp those divisions, they can be equal. The advantage is simply on whose side the Spanish player is on. You use the tanks to counter the tanks and encircle/counter-encircle and the enemy while the Spanish infantry acts as meatshields. Anyone with some practice can do it on speed 3. Speed 2 I could do with, it's fine. 1 is just excessive when the total amount of troops fighting is around 40 divisions.

I really disagree with limits on lend lease as well. Whatever you send to Spain you risk losing, it all comes down to the commitment you want to make. Considering that Axis has more incentives to win, they should make a bigger commitment than the Soviets. I remind you that at the time they have a bigger industry, so if they want they can send more of everything. Whatever is sent to Spain will not be used in the war afterwards, it's a gamble and the winning side takes all.
AI will not utilise artillery to the fullest so it's useless to send it to AI in large quantities, they only use support artillery.

While I agree, as I've said before, that the Axis should win in Spain, it shouldn't be a walkover like how it will be with the rules you are suggesting. Winning with 5 volunteers in each side should be easy when the player is on your side anyways.
Anders
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 5:29:17 PM
 Generalfeldmarschall

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal2012 Good Cause Support MedalBanned in ActionAuthor of 7000th post

Joined: 3/9/2007
Posts: 13,057
Location: Auf das der Adler wieder fliegt
From what I understand this is the kind of game you want:
A game where everything is historical until July 1940, except the Allies and Axis have made lots of different builds and research than what was the case IRL. But here's the pinch: You can have one or the other, not both. If you want historical, play the 1939-scenario. Hell, I volunteer to play France in that one if you do that next.

"Hvor fattige var de ikke, disse fiskere som levde av havets nåde! De slet sig gjennom livet uten å se sig om til høire eller til venstre. Deres gleder var få, deres bekymringer mange. Men de hadde allikevel et gemyttlig smil til den fremmede, en munter vise og en lun historie. For sånn er de, disse Sørlandets barn."

King of Men wrote:
Anders is correct.

Fivoin wrote:
Yeah, Anders is right.

baronbowden wrote:
I would tend to agree with Anders.

Support Ederon.net via your Amazon purchases!

I joined Ederon.net before it became mainstream
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 7:44:36 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Anders wrote:
From what I understand this is the kind of game you want:
A game where everything is historical until July 1940, except the Allies and Axis have made lots of different builds and research than what was the case IRL. But here's the pinch: You can have one or the other, not both. If you want historical, play the 1939-scenario. Hell, I volunteer to play France in that one if you do that next.


I would never want to play the 1939 scenario, because I want to make my own build until all hell breaks loose.
I don't want it 100% Historical of course ,but it should be there in the background.
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 7:49:56 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Demosthenes wrote:
Alright. I play USSR and Germany a lot. When the Spanish player is on my side, I win 99% of the time. It's very easy. Without rules on volunteers or lend lease. Why? Because Germany sends 2 tanks, Italy sends 3 and Soviets send 5. Both sides can upgrade with xp those divisions, they can be equal. The advantage is simply on whose side the Spanish player is on. You use the tanks to counter the tanks and encircle/counter-encircle and the enemy while the Spanish infantry acts as meatshields. Anyone with some practice can do it on speed 3. Speed 2 I could do with, it's fine. 1 is just excessive when the total amount of troops fighting is around 40 divisions.

I really disagree with limits on lend lease as well. Whatever you send to Spain you risk losing, it all comes down to the commitment you want to make. Considering that Axis has more incentives to win, they should make a bigger commitment than the Soviets. I remind you that at the time they have a bigger industry, so if they want they can send more of everything. Whatever is sent to Spain will not be used in the war afterwards, it's a gamble and the winning side takes all.
AI will not utilise artillery to the fullest so it's useless to send it to AI in large quantities, they only use support artillery.

While I agree, as I've said before, that the Axis should win in Spain, it shouldn't be a walkover like how it will be with the rules you are suggesting. Winning with 5 volunteers in each side should be easy when the player is on your side anyways.


Well ,hell lets slip the Lend lease limits maybe.
None of these Rules are in the game so let's just concentrate on the ongoing game shall we...

I´m just trying here to come up with Rules to have a good game.

First it was Forts and now Troops in Spain, I wonder what's next, oh i forgot the lousy Japanese player Sad
YES I SUCKED at playing Spain ,because I had to high speed on and wanted speed 1 ,but some people don't like that...
I also made some big mistakes to underestimate Russian Armor and did not coordinated with Italy and Germany.
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 10:03:12 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Hi all,

If we were going to have AI as France and China, could we not then use custom difficulty to get them a bonus ,so that they don´t get overruned so fast?
Just a thought this isSmile
Anders
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 10:49:19 PM
 Generalfeldmarschall

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal2012 Good Cause Support MedalBanned in ActionAuthor of 7000th post

Joined: 3/9/2007
Posts: 13,057
Location: Auf das der Adler wieder fliegt
Marine wrote:
Hi all,

If we were going to have AI as France and China, could we not then use custom difficulty to get them a bonus ,so that they don´t get overruned so fast?
Just a thought this isSmile


The AI is too shitty to manage properly.

"Hvor fattige var de ikke, disse fiskere som levde av havets nåde! De slet sig gjennom livet uten å se sig om til høire eller til venstre. Deres gleder var få, deres bekymringer mange. Men de hadde allikevel et gemyttlig smil til den fremmede, en munter vise og en lun historie. For sånn er de, disse Sørlandets barn."

King of Men wrote:
Anders is correct.

Fivoin wrote:
Yeah, Anders is right.

baronbowden wrote:
I would tend to agree with Anders.

Support Ederon.net via your Amazon purchases!

I joined Ederon.net before it became mainstream
Marine
Posted: Saturday, January 14, 2017 10:58:14 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Anders wrote:
The AI is too shitty to manage properly.


Okay Smile
Marine
Posted: Saturday, February 25, 2017 10:13:38 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Hi everyone,

I will be doing a overhaul on the Rules in the coming week and these changes should be used for the next Campaign(7th).
Make the rules more clearer, Typos, come up with new Rules to get a better feeling and immersion for the WW2 Feeling Smile and try to put as much of the rules in the slots for each Country.

If I come up with something ,that needs attention ,then i will ask the group.
Marine
Posted: Thursday, March 02, 2017 6:17:25 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
This weekend I will put up the final Ruleset for the coming Campaign (7th).

Then I want everyone to read them and especially those that is about the country they are going to play.
Marine
Posted: Sunday, March 05, 2017 8:27:08 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Now the Rules are finished for this time!

I think that they look good now and that I have managed to find a good set of them.

Major countries have their Rules under them ,so that they are easy to find and some others are moved and so.

Now I want everyone to read on them ,so that most is clear for everyone.

/Marine
Marine
Posted: Tuesday, June 06, 2017 2:15:24 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Hi,

I will make some changes on the rules and some suggestions.

I will post the bigger changes and suggestions below later.

Some changes will be small and some bigger.

All these are for the next campaign.

I´m also going to clean up the rules so that they are clearer and simpler to read and understand.
Some is common sense so I delete them.


As always take at look at all the Rules to have them fresh in memory and especially on that country that you intend to play.

Changes:
If there is a OLD Rule it will come first.

OLD: No alliances that were not historical is allowed

NEW: Alliances that do not have anything to do with WW2 is not allowed, use your common sense about what feels like it could have happened in the War.

OLD: (Japan)After China falls or if the Netherlands falls in Europe they may start war goals against UK, USA, DEI.
They may also start war goals against the following Asian countries(Tibet, Bhutan, Nepal) and maybe then get into a war with UK.

NEW: (Japan)After China has fallen they may start war goals against UK, USA and the rest of the Commonwealth.
If the Netherlands also has fallen in Europe, then they can start attacking DEI in Asia.
They may also start war goals against the following Asian countries(Tibet, Bhutan, Nepal)

NEW: (USA)The Atlantic Charter was sign in August 1941 and that is the date when the USA can join the Allied faction, but not the war of course.

OLD: (Soviet)They have some focuses that give them high level(over 5) of forts, does are not allowed to be built on.

NEW: (Soviet) They can build 5 levels of forts manually and then they can also use the Focuses that can build forts.

OLD: It should also only be allowed to change Template when you are in your own Home country and it should be in a Home state where there is no enemy units.

NEW: I say that we make this Rule easier and let´s just use a common sense on this matter.

OLD: When it comes to Templates and ART we use the 7-2 Rule(7 INF and 2 ART with variants).
This Rule maybe have to be changed ,because of the new ART Rules in the Patch 1.3.3.
Here is the generic Rule about this: ART Battalions should never be allowed to be more than INF Battalions.

NEW: When it comes to Templates with ART( Variants included )Battalions, then they should never be allowed to be more than INF Battalions.

OLD: You should also not be allowed to combine more than 7 Elite INF (Marines, Para and Mountaineers)and 2 ARMORED +Variants.
So having a single or two battalions of Armor in an Elite Infantry division is one thing but combining half tanks and half Elite INF are just gamey and don't belong in a historically plausible game.

NEW: You should also not be allowed to combine more than 2 ARMOR or their Variants with Elite INF (Marines, Para and Mountaineers)
So having a single or two battalions of ARMOR in an Elite Infantry division is one thing but combining units with 50/50 or worse is just gamey and don't belong in a historically plausible game.

Suggestions:

Do we need any changes when it comes to GOI?

This is how it looks now:
GoI are only allowed in special cases:
Soviet may put GoI on Finland, Romania, Iran, and the Baltic states, but not if there is a Human player.
Germany may put GoI on Sweden, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey, but not if there is a Human player.
UK and France may put GoI on Spain, Portugal, Greece and Turkey, but not if there is a Human player.
Answer: We leave it as it is now.

We have had some talks on changes on Military Access?

This is how it looks now:
You are allowed to give and get military access with neutral countries.
Answer: We will allow it to be given to countries at war in some special cases(more will come on this)

Have we decided if it´s okay to use Nukes in our Campaigns?
Answer: It´s allowed.

Marine
Posted: Monday, June 12, 2017 5:27:26 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Marine
Posted: Friday, June 30, 2017 12:23:09 AM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
I did this change on Japan in the Rules.

After China has fallen they may start war against UK, USA and the rest of the Commonwealth, but not before Danzig or War.

This came up when Japan had taken China.
Marine
Posted: Friday, June 30, 2017 3:06:59 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Hello everyone,

I have come come to a decision again.

During this summer I will once again take a closer look at the Rules.

I will try to make them as simple as possible.

I will try to follow WW2 IRL, but with the game mechanics in mind.

I know that I sometimes come up with strange rules and so.

I also tend to think to much on how it was in World War 2 and how I can put it in the game ,but sometimes I feel that everything can´t really be in the game.

I will let the us use the game mechanics also and not always follow the Rules.

We want a fun game with a common sense in our minds when we play.

Now that it´s just our core group again, i will remove some rules that we don´t really need anymore ,like some exploit rules and so.

When I come to rules that I might need assistance I will put them here ,for you to say what you think about them.

I´m also think about starting some new threads maybe, one new for Rules only and one for Suggestions and so.

Feel free to come with suggestions.

/Marine
Praetori
Posted: Monday, July 03, 2017 8:06:45 PM
 Captain
One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 340
Good initiative. We do need to think about some of the rules now with the expansions.
The "historical" part can be a bit tricky now with the new DLCs and event-chains since the choices aren't really crystal in regard to the consequences.

I also think we should start thinking about balance and modifications. If there's something we really don't like or something we feel sorely missing there's always the possibility to mod it.
Marine
Posted: Tuesday, July 04, 2017 9:35:53 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Praetori wrote:
Good initiative. We do need to think about some of the rules now with the expansions.
The "historical" part can be a bit tricky now with the new DLCs and event-chains since the choices aren't really crystal in regard to the consequences.

I also think we should start thinking about balance and modifications. If there's something we really don't like or something we feel sorely missing there's always the possibility to mod it.


Yeah I agree the historical things have to stand back for what you can do in the game with mechanics.

Good thinking about things that maybe have to be modded.
Marine
Posted: Tuesday, July 04, 2017 10:03:13 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Here follows some rules that has been with us since HOI3 and some that really might need a change.


Guarantee of Independence is only allowed in some special cases:
Soviet may put GoI on Finland, Romania, Iran, and the Baltic states, but not if there is a Human playing that country.
Germany may put GoI on Sweden, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey, but not if there is a Human playing that country.
UK and France may put GoI on Spain, Portugal, Greece and Turkey, but not if there is a Human playing that country.

This rule is from HOI3 about what countries you are allowed to put a GoI on depending on what country you are and it might have to be changed.
Like that you are free to do it on any country as anybody or we update the list of countries.
It´s also not so easy to put a GoI on a country if they don´t have the same ideology as you.
So what do you think about this.

Declaring war on Turkey/Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan is not allowed before Germany and Soviet are at war against each other.

Should this rules that also is from HOI3 still be used or changed in some way.(This rules is about any country that wants to attack these countries)

They are allowed to declare war on the Axis if one of these two conditions are met: Axis lands in the British Isles (including Ireland) Or if it's January 1942 or later.
This is a Rule as Soviet.


What I was wondering about this old rule from HOI3 also I think it this:
It is the country Ireland that we are talking about here and not only the British part.(Northerner Ireland)
Also is the British Isles only mainland UK or is the Shetland Islands also included?

If the Axis captures a mainland UK naval port ,then they are also allowed to join the war.
This is a rule for USA.


The same with this Rule is the Shetland Islands included?
These two rules are about the same thing almost ,but there is a difference.
In one you have to take a mainland naval port to trigger it and in the other you only need land on a beach to trigger it, so my question here is how should we have it on these two rules?

About a suspect exploit that redcoat found last time.

He as Australia went in to Japan to ask for a licence and then he could see everything that Japan had to offer even variants.
That is a cheat that we have to discuss ,because it can´t be good to have a soon to be enemy being able to see what you have researched.
Maybe we should allow it as long as we are at peace or not.
Maybe it´s spies that give us this info.
So what do you think about this?

Allies and US can embargo Japan after September 1940(Historical date for the Embargo), if World Tension allows it due to Indochina being invaded.( this date goes before the NF that US have ).

Maybe this historical date can´t be used anymore...
Say if Japan takes Indochina before this date and that the USA still has to wait for this date to put a Embargo on them.
I say let World Tension decided this and the NF that USA has.


Alex_brunius
Posted: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 7:12:44 PM
 Hauptmann

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 356
Marine wrote:
Here follows some rules that has been with us since HOI3 and some that really might need a change.

Guarantee of Independence is only allowed in some special cases:
Soviet may put GoI on Finland, Romania, Iran, and the Baltic states, but not if there is a Human playing that country.
Germany may put GoI on Sweden, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey, but not if there is a Human playing that country.
UK and France may put GoI on Spain, Portugal, Greece and Turkey, but not if there is a Human playing that country.

This rule is from HOI3 about what countries you are allowed to put a GoI on depending on what country you are and it might have to be changed.
Like that you are free to do it on any country as anybody or we update the list of countries.
It´s also not so easy to put a GoI on a country if they don´t have the same ideology as you.
So what do you think about this.


Yes. Since you only can put GoI on nations with same ideology now this rule is kind of obsolete. I vote for just deleting the rule and let people GoI what they can if they want.


Marine wrote:

Declaring war on Turkey/Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan is not allowed before Germany and Soviet are at war against each other.

Should this rules that also is from HOI3 still be used or changed in some way.(This rules is about any country that wants to attack these countries)


I kind of like that there is some limit on advancing into the middle east, otherwise it's easy to become a land grab fight between Soviet and Italy ( who can take it first ), to be in a optimal situation before barbarossa / attacking suez.



Marine wrote:

Allies and US can embargo Japan after September 1940(Historical date for the Embargo), if World Tension allows it due to Indochina being invaded.( this date goes before the NF that US have ).

Maybe this historical date can´t be used anymore...
Say if Japan takes Indochina before this date and that the USA still has to wait for this date to put a Embargo on them.
I say let World Tension decided this and the NF that USA has.


Yeah, since embargo is not even a diplomatic action now there is no need for a rule for it.
Marine
Posted: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 7:37:54 PM
 Lieutenant Colonel

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 10/14/2011
Posts: 672
Location: Uppsala/Sweden
Quote:
Yes. Since you only can put GoI on nations with same ideology now this rule is kind of obsolete. I vote for just deleting the rule and let people GoI what they can if they want.


I will change that rule to this: You are free to put GoI on any country you want.

Quote:
Yeah, since embargo is not even a diplomatic action now there is no need for a rule for it.


I agree ,let the National Focuses take care of that and that world Tension decides when you can use that Focus or any other trigger.

Quote:
I kind of like that there is some limit on advancing into the middle east, otherwise it's easy to become a land grab fight between Soviet and Italy ( who can take it first ), to be in a optimal situation before barbarossa / attacking suez.


Should we have anymore countries in this rule or?
We now have Turkey/Iraq/Iran and Afghanistan.
Some countries has NF´s on some of these countries, so maybe they should not be allowed to use them before Barbarossa starts?
There is maybe already limits on when you can use this NF´s.

I will change these in my new ruleset ,that I will put up later.
Praetori
Posted: Wednesday, July 05, 2017 9:23:07 PM
 Captain
One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 9/19/2011
Posts: 340
Marine wrote:


About a suspect exploit that redcoat found last time.

He as Australia went in to Japan to ask for a licence and then he could see everything that Japan had to offer even variants.
That is a cheat that we have to discuss ,because it can´t be good to have a soon to be enemy being able to see what you have researched.
Maybe we should allow it as long as we are at peace or not.
Maybe it´s spies that give us this info.
So what do you think about this?


Hard one. Strategically speaking it's a bit of a balance problem but then again the various intelligence communities and HQs during the war got pretty solid intel on enemy equipment quite fast. Sometimes even before it got into active service (but then some were mere fantasies or propaganda). Most intel came from combat or recon though and not from industrial espionage (as far as is known since a lot of sources and methodology are still secret to this day).
The real problem I see is that stats are available for all to see by a simple license check (even if it's not accepted) and that's from the very moment that the research has been completed or the variant created (ie before production of said equipment have commenced).
I would say yes for countries you're not at war with and no for countries with which you are. But I'm open to anything. It's an intriguing feature in many ways that adds depth (especially with all the custom naming).
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.0 (NET v2.0) - 10/10/2006
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2005-2007 Daniel "Lord Ederon" Scibrany. All rights reserved.