Infrastructure in 1.5

I build them in the Historical Scenarios because they can be really useful when you have a huge country like China or USA although I mostly build them when I’m bored with resources to spare. It gives me a sense of superiority when I have railroads while my neighbors still use dirt paths.

Habo778 wrote:

I mostly build them when I’m bored with resources to spare.

In 1.5 if you have allied doctrine infrastructure is essential if you plan on building Railroad guns. They move sooooooooo slowly infrastructure is important.

i find infrastructures to be too costly in Historical 25p European theatre (too many small provinces)

My recent game I tried building some infrastructure - I play the 100 player map exclusively, by the way. Playing New England, I expanded down the eastern seaboard and across the south into Mexico. Moving units from my primary production area (New England) to the battle front (Mexico) was extremely slow, so I thought I would build infrastructure up on a path in between. I built a line of about 7 or 8 provinces but realized it was not practical. I would need about 15 more provinces built up and by then the battle front would have moved forward a lot. The cost and the build time made the idea unworkable. And that was just to have level 1 infrastructure. To get it to level 3 was just a wildly impractical dream.

I try to use them more and more but only to level 1. I really wish there would be mre of an incentive to use it because infrastructure is vital to a country's economic buildup and military transportation.

I like the speed of transportation where it is but I also propose a small economic bonus because there is no way I am building more than level 1 infrastructure. The speed of the game as it is, is fast enough anyway.

Either:

1. Small economic bonus

or

2. decrease the cost and build time at each level.

I RARELY see people using infrastructure anywhere in their nations.

It is much easier in 1.5 than in 1.0. In my opinion, there should be lvl 4 infra that almost has high speed 'trains' that transport the units at 180 kph

Well what I liked in 1.0 thee was an econ bonus that offered a strong incentive as well as a bonus on transportation.

I use it a lot, and it is useful but build time should be increased and economic bonus HAS to be there. Infrastructure was vital on the Eastern Front, and honestly, the German failure to expand their infrastructure eastward was the real reason that lost them the Great Patriotic War.

Great Patriotic War.. I see what you did there.

I don't find infra very useful either. I thought it had to do with my play style, where fronts are always on the move and the direction of expansion often changes. When I played a S.American country, invaded Africa and moved East towards Arabia, I tried building a Sahara railway of infrastructure (province sizes SHOULD make it worthwhile there!), but I found that I built most units much closer to the front, in conquered territory, and hardly anyone used it.

As others said, I'm positive towards it and really try to make effective use of it, but I find that very difficult.

How about an alternative?

It might be a nation-wide average number/indicator, which goes up as you invest and goes down as you expand (being conquered is usually bad for infra); and the result is a percentual speed bonus for all your land units moving in own territory? To be transferrable to allies moving in your territory as well, probably?

K.Rokossovski wrote:

I don't find infra very useful either. I thought it had to do with my play style, where fronts are always on the move and the direction of expansion often changes. When I played a S.American country, invaded Africa and moved East towards Arabia, I tried building a Sahara railway of infrastructure (province sizes SHOULD make it worthwhile there!), but I found that I built most units much closer to the front, in conquered territory, and hardly anyone used it.

As others said, I'm positive towards it and really try to make effective use of it, but I find that very difficult.

How about an alternative?

It might be a nation-wide average number/indicator, which goes up as you invest and goes down as you expand (being conquered is usually bad for infra); and the result is a percentual speed bonus for all your land units moving in own territory? To be transferrable to allies moving in your territory as well, probably?

No i think that would have some balance issues and i do prefer the current system its just that infra should get more importance, and give economical bonus and morale bonus.

Infra is vvital in real life, for example if real WWII was stuck in CoW, the Germans wouldnt really be able to get to the east. i think maybe they could make it more vital by saying: lvl 0 infra: maximum of 5 units in province at a time normal speed no economical/morale bonus- lvl 1 maximum of 7 units allowed at a time, 5% economic bonus and +3 morale bonus- lvl 2 infra maximum of 10 units at a time, 10% economic bonus +8 morale- lvl 3 infra unlimited units at a time, 20% economic bonus +12 morale

That would be better.

Also K. Rokkosvsky i wondered what you thought of "Nazi Propaganda" and WWII

Tribunate wrote:

Great Patriotic War.. I see what you did there.

No I don't build them

I have had one situation in ehich infra really helped me, i was USSR china betrayed me, i would have lost but i built lots of maz level infra and managed to reinforce the east incredibly quickly. i won that raound SOLO and u could say i wouldnt if it werent for infra

How's does infra even help?

It speeds up units loads

I suppose it depends lots on your strategy.

For nations with many fronts, the ability to relocate faster can be crucial.

But I also think ppl forget to pay attention to unit speed in forest, hill and mountains. Do you realise how much it slows them down?

I find a lvl 1 infrastructure often worth the cost in difficult terrain because power projection is a function of firepower and time.

There's even more to it, but xmas is over, so I'm not giving it away

Its gotta be Xmas somewhere pal

For me, it depends on doctrine and geography. It could help compensate unit speed for the Allied doctrine or emphasize speed for the Pan Asian doctrine. Depending on geography, it could help a lot or it doesn't do anything at all. Take a look at France and the UK for an example; both are Allied, but France needs it more because it's more inland compared to UK. Other examples include the Manchukos, Japan, Egypt, and Greece for World at War.