Military Doctrines

[Edwin P.]

During WWII each nation had different doctrines that guided the training of its troops and the allocation of resources.

It would distingish the major powers from each other if they had the option to select a military doctrine in each area (Air, Land, Naval) to follow at the start of the game. They could change to a different doctrine in each area for a high cost in MPPs, say 500MPPs.

What does selecting a doctrine do? It reduces the cost or production time for a particular type of unit.

Example: Naval Doctrines (Select one)

a. Surface Combat - Surface ships cost 5% less OR Production time is reduced.

b. Submarine Warfare - Subs cost 5% less OR Production time is reduced.

c. Carrier Warfare - Carriers cost 5% less OR production time is reduced

d. None

Example: Land Combat Doctines (select one)

a. Mobile Warfare - Armor and Corps cost 5% less.

b. Massed Artillery - Rockets cost 10% less.

c. Land Warfare - Army Groups cost 5% less.

d. Trench Warfare - Engineer Units cost 20% less.

e. Logistical Support - HQs cost 10% less.

D. None

Example: Air Combat (select one)

a. Air Superiority - Air Fleets cost 5% less.

b. Strategic Bombing - Bombers cost 10% less.

c. Air Recon - +1 bonus to spotting range.

d. Air Defense - 10% bonus to readiness when intercepting.

d. None

At the start of the game I would allow the major powers to select doctrines in the following areas:

USSR: LAND

GERMANY: LAND, NAVAL, AIR

ITALY: LAND

FRANCE: LAND

UK: LAND, NAVAL, AIR

USA: LAND,NAVAL, AIR

A nation could change a doctrine in a specific branch of the armed services for 500MPP.

[ May 27, 2005, 08:13 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[JerseyJohn]

Good idea, Edwin.

[Lars]

Isn't this already reflected in the Tech system?

And most of what you got there Edwin reflects industrial policy, not doctrine.

But still, yet another interesting concept.

[rleete]

Originally posted by Lars:

Isn't this already reflected in the Tech system?

Exactly the first thought I had about it.

Personally, I'd rather not see anything like this. I'd rather doctrine was determined by what techs are researched and units bought. You get too many variables, and it becomes too much like HoI, which was overly complicated. Kinda like the resources thing - if you break it down too much, it gets into every little nitpicking thing instead of grand strategy.

[Lars]

From sheer boredom I think we're all sitting around redesigning SC1, while Hubert has made his basic design decisions for SC2 already.

COME ON HUBERT, WHERE'S THE DEMO!!!

[Edwin P.]

Industrial tech affects all units equally and advancements occur by chance.

This change would differentiate selected unit types by country and is not affected by chance.

In reality countries focused their resources in in different areas. In the German navy you had the battle between those who favored submarine warfare and those that favored surface warfare ships. The French army doctrine, based on WWI favored Trench Warfare whereas the Germans favored mobile warfare units.

Reducing the cost or production time or giving some other benefit would reflect these differences and make it less a game of the blues vs the reds.

Potential Differences:

1. Cost

2. Production Time

3. Combat Readiness Bonus

[ May 27, 2005, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Lars]

Edwin, Doctrine is a system of behavior to be followed. It doesn't translate into 5% cheaper aircraft carriers, or anything else. For instance, the Marines had a doctrine of amphibious assault pre-WWII. It didn't buy them any landing craft.

[Lars]

And the Navies were all still hung up on the big gun battleship. What do you propose for following the wrong doctrine?

[rleete]

A popup box declaring you an idiot for following a losing strategy?

[rleete]

Actually, that would be kinda neat; having the AI taunt you for doing some boneheaded move.

[Lars]

Doesn't a level 5, strength 15 battleship running around do about the same thing?

[rleete]

Not ness-a-celery. If the opponent is doing lots of carriers, it makes sense.

[Lars]

I can't even remember a game where battleships were ever upgraded. All you ever see are subs and carriers running around.

If the other guy has lots of carriers, I build subs and hope they dive a couple of times. BB's and cruisers are sitting ducks.

[rleete]

You know, I was just thinking about BBs, and when (if ever) I bought one. Seems that they are just too expensive for what they are.

In reality, a BB should rock against a carrier or even a sub. They should be a pretty tough nut to crack, taking at least a 2-1 ratio of carriers to counter. As it stands, they aren't even worth considering.

[Retributar]

I thought that HOI wasn't complicated enough!.

I hope that HOI-2 is even more in-depth!...will wait to see if the lay-off passes's me over before i buy it!!!.

Im for an SC2 game that can be toggled to be either extremely simple and easy to play or...to be as complicated and complex as one desires it to be.

I don't see why that couln't be possible?.

[pzgndr]

Isn't this already reflected in the Tech system? And most of what you got there Edwin reflects industrial policy, not doctrine.

The combination of research techs, including Production Technology and Industrial Technology with different national Industrial Modifiers, are intended to represent the whole spectrum. Sure there were doctrines, but these need to be considered together with actual research advances, production decisions, training, operating & maintenance experience, etc. And ultimately in this game, you the player define the direction to go in terms of areas to research, units to build/upgrade, etc.

If you want an air-heavy force structure or a naval-heavy force structure or a land-heavy force structure, then do it. Why pigeonhole every nitnoid aspect of all this by breaking everything down into more components than we really need for playability?

I will say this. In SC2 it will be possible to customize unit stats for each nation, and these adjustments could be considered doctrinal strengths. The generic game will probably not do this, using starting research tech levels to bump up certain countries where appropriate. Players may want to experiment with mods that adjust default unit stats for some countries to reflect advantages, like subs for Germany or cruisers for UK. There will be a lot of flexibility, believe me.

[Blashy]

Yeah, before Edwin changes this game into the most elaborate WW2 game ever made where one turn takes 1-2 hours to complete... release the demo!

BTW, j/k Edwin

[Edwin P.]