Development Diary #1 - 15th of October 2008

[lordvagrant]

Looking good Paradox team.
I especially like this line

This map is not about modelling various administrative regions inside countries but a place for fighting wars.

Knowing a bit more about the developer's philosophy will help us fans see the bigger picture and (hopefully) not whine so much about a perceived misplaced line.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Waiting for Asian Screenshots......

[Seelmeister]

Or, like EUIII, it only shows the leader of the alliance

I think in EUIII this feature was very useful, when you fought multiple war's over the course of hundreds of years, against many different foes.

However, Hearts of Iron is obviously focused on WW2, we all know that its going to happen in any given game, and the chances are we are going to spend most of our time in any game fighting that one war. My point is I don't think an indicator is really necessary for this.

[skippermonkey]

Um.. thats an interesting signature el_loco...

I take it that the world is now at least 3 times bigger, production times for units and facilities, etc are also 3 times reduced to cover the space?

Also, the thick black borderlines are region boundaries i take it?

(Having bedford as a province is as close as i'm ever going to get to home, maybe i'll relocate my capital there for 1000 ducats....doh, wrong game)

[Gigalocus]

I think in EUIII this feature was very useful, when you fought multiple war's over the course of hundreds of years, against many different foes.

However, Hearts of Iron is obviously focused on WW2, we all know that its going to happen in any given game, and the chances are we are going to spend most of our time in any game fighting that one war. My point is I don't think an indicator is really necessary for this.

I was joking

However, its easier then clicking on the diplomacy tab

Ok I will stop now, silly idea

[jorian]

considering that HoI3 will be more like EU3, i guess we will get more of an early-20th century simulator than a WW2 simulator, which is good, so you can create your own kind of carnage, or try to replay history to make it replay itself


What i would really like to see in newer games would be the possibility to use a nation name/flag/uniform style/color/ nation agenda configuration from your own inside the game, even in an MP game (data could be shared with the other players and then everybod could see your african democracy nation, or west-chinese nationalist oligarchy), these could simulate the difference between YOUR history and the real one

it would also help to make anyone enjoy the game as they wish, even solving the old swatiska dilemma that it can't be in a game (but everyone still mods it into), simply because the player would choose the flag from the costum content list (and in MP others would allow the choice of the player with a click) and play with that without any modding, simply because this choice (the choice to use costum content) is since the beginning included into the game. Making the people have costumized choices is a great thing, and noone could blame the game for people who use certain symbols

Costumization is the future of the games, since years RPG-s and other games (GTA or Sims 2) started to focus on this, some (Spore) have only because of the costumization options success, now imagine a Paradox game with costumizable tanks (painting, weaponry, chassis) your own "Imperial" flags and governments (imagine a couped nation around 1935-37)

Do you wish to use a pink flag with a smiley in MP? If the other players accept your choice, then its just a small time untill the image is shared with the others untill the game, also: no more modding dilemmas, or unchecked GM's/modders simply because you could do the modifications from the game within. It was already a great step in EU3 to have the chance to rename provinces, following this path there could be games that are never the same and addictive.



An other thing would be interensting to NOT play a nation, but instead a political party striving for influence and power, waiting and manipulating to gain controll of a nation or owerthrow the current one.

If this could be simulated, we could finally try to play the german elections, as the nazi party, or an entire different one, or even go back in time a little and help/block the commies from creating the Soviet Union and to kill the Tzar and his family.

The important one is that these shouldn't be represented as untill now with just some events or a notification, but the player should have a major role in the action, and be "involved" within the game much more.

...


...I hope you understand what i mean, i got a little enthusiastic while writing, but I am not sure if I wrote in clear/understandable english

[SirGrotius]

This looks great. I'm picturing my armored columns digging deep into enemy territory and having to worry about my flanks now with the number of provinces.

[skippermonkey]

considering that HoI3 will be more like EU3, i guess we will get more of an early-20th century simulator than a WW2 simulator, which is good, so you can create your own kind of carnage, or try to replay history to make it replay itself

I hope so, i like in EU3 you get to choose to play the game with historical mode on or off. Not sure how this would work with the HOI2 style historical decisions etc, i personally would love an EU3-IN style National decisions and Missions section.

Also, ahistorical games is fun!

[Veldmaarschalk]

considering that HoI3 will be more like EU3, i guess we will get more of an early-20th century simulator than a WW2 simulator, which is good, so you can create your own kind of carnage, or try to replay history to make it replay itself

HoI3 won't be like EU3 in that respect and it also won't be an early 20th century simulator. HoI3 will be a game about WWII

Interview

WG: One criticism of Europa Universalis III was that historical events didn’t play the strong role they had in earlier games. Will this be true for Hearts of Iron III?

JA: Hearts of Iron III is a shorter time period than Europa Universalis III so gamers tend to want to play it more historically realistic. We learnt from EU III: In Nomine to let players control historical decisions instead of having them wait for historical events, thus giving players more control.

WG: What will the timeframe for Hearts of Iron III be?

JA: Hearts of Iron is all about World War II so it will be the same as previous games 1936 until 1948.

[ubik]

A promising start for the Dev Diaries...

Is there the chance of playing with military counters instead of toy soldiers?

[Shadow Knight]

Great information Johan, thanks!

[dharper]

Looking good, although I'm waiting impatiently to hear about diplomacy, industry and warfare.

[lycurgus]

Looks great. Can't wait to win the battle of Evesham!

[GeneralHannibal]

HoI3 won't be like EU3 in that respect and it also won't be an early 20th century simulator. HoI3 will be a game about WWII

Interview

As it should be.

[mib]

Waiting for China pics...

[Maldorians]

+1

[SimoneZ]

Waiting for China pics...

Yeah. I hope the povinces in south China is tripled, too.
There were quite a lot of fierce battles there.

[Darth Tracid]

+1

that´s spam.

[Wiking]

I like it.

Although I too support the return of day names. That was way cool!

[The_Carbonater]

Really good!
Will the combat system be more realistic now?