Development Diary #8 - 3rd of December 2008

[Modestus]

It's an image of undifferentiated mud, and has nothing to do with any map that was ever used by any commander. Real operational maps clearly indicate elevations (and infrastructure), whereas on this map you can barely tell the Alps from the Amazon. Utter nonsense.

EDIT: Also, Roosevelt and the like probably never touched an operational map in their entire lives (Churchill probably did, having been an officer). If you're going for that perspective, clearly the mud-soaked look isn't the one to go with. As of right now, HoI2 map looks a lot more attractive than this.

EDIT2: And, in case you were wondering what it would look like if the map made any sense, this is it -

http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/dos...175.html?gs=14

EDIT3: I hope it would be easy enough to change province textures to a single color with a mod, that would largely negate my objection since I don't care for textured maps in grand operational wargames anyway. I could also make it brighter, as to minimize the possibility of wanting to bang my head against the table in frustration at playing in a world of permanent twilight.

Well if its like the Rome map you will be able within reason mod any type of texture you can imagine.

If its like EU3 with little tiles masked into each other then it will be a lot harder because any strong contrast between the colors of different texture tiles will stand out like a sore thumb.

Unfortunately I see in the first screen shot of this thread what appears to be two similar tiles masked into another texture.

[Fiendix]

And I say please DO. Just make the AI be able to handle it and allow independent divisions directly attached to army-level commands.

we already had the plane ai mess up in hoi2 - for gods sake dont do that again. Its the most agravating thing possible. Keep the ai as far away from my units as possible. HOI IS a division control game form the 1st version. Dont change the basics. Yes help out if needed but dont force stuff upon us.

[Piggy]

It's an image of undifferentiated mud, and has nothing to do with any map that was ever used by any commander. Real operational maps clearly indicate elevations (and infrastructure), whereas on this map you can barely tell the Alps from the Amazon. Utter nonsense.

EDIT2: And, in case you were wondering what it would look like if the map made any sense, this is it -

http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/dos...175.html?gs=14

Personally I would love the map to look like the one you posted, but lets be realistic here, the scale of this game is the entire world, not a small theatre. They cant possibly put that much detail into 10,000 provinces, showing groves of tree's, roads, railways etc.

The map looking like mud is your opinion, which you're obviously entitled too, I however think it looks fine. Besides, I was merely pointing out what Johan had stated in DD#1 regarding the philosophy for the look of the map, no point arguing about it, it isnt going to change. I only repeated what he said, its not my perspective, its theirs.

I completely dissagree that HOI2's map looks better.

[Alexander Seil]

But will it?

I'm speaking from 35 years of wargaming (maybe you are, too) and I share your disdain for the "bean counters" who reduce wargaming to ultra-control math. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the chronic inability of the game to avoid nonsense like 200 divisions stacked on one province in the Philippines, or something similar. If I order the VI Armee to take Rostov and it blunders around in some endless loop shuffling troops back and forth between here and there, how is that fun?

I have played Airborne Assault (and its subsequent iterations) and it does a fine job of handling sub-units. But what piece of Paradox history would convince you that they are capable of the same thing? That's no dig on Paradox - I have all their games. But I don't think it's possible to design a "corps AI" that can handle divisions.

The problem is much less complex than in AA however. There are no elevations, roads, coordination, etc. in HoI to worry about. Also, note that the AI in recent Paradox games is a lot more brutal than the HoI2 one (even if the games are simpler). The Rome AI isn't Rommel, but it's no joke either.

In fact, if the AI understands the war in terms of large scale structures, it would be probably much easier to program - HoI2 relied on the concept of "fronts" which was fuzzy and ill-defined. In this case, and particularly in the case of player-defined formations, the formations have, presumably -

a) A fixed number of elements (assuming units have to be specifically assigned and don't just move in and out of HQ's control)
b) A more limited geographic area (pretty much just the provinces they are in, and the province you order them to advance to)
c) (major speculation alert) Specific orders to execute

None of this was ever a part of HoI2, which understood everything in very crude terms. The only area where I foresee a problem is with enemy AI's trying to grapple with the new levels of formations. But I don't see a problem coding a friendly AI that does sensible things in an area of one "meta-province" if asked to.

EDIT: What I'm really talking about is that in HoI2 there was effectively only one level of AI - the Fronts. I don't know how dynamic they really were, but, in any case, breaking it up into proper formations make for much easier definition of tasks - the fronts of HoI2 become the Theaters of HoI3. So while, strategically, it may still be none too bright, on the lower levels it would benefit immensely simply from the fact that the tasks subordinate AI have to perform are much less "fuzzy" than what a Theater-level AI has to think about. If a Corps is ordered to attack the province it is next to, the task is clear and there is little chance for AI to mess up.

To Fiendix - whether the plane AI was a mess-up or not is a subject for a debate on the HoI2 forums and came up numerous times. Your opinion is by no means the consensus one (there isn't a consensus on that last time I checked). I personally much preferred HoI2's air and naval planning systems to HoI1.

[bbasgen]

EDIT2: And, in case you were wondering what it would look like if the map made any sense, this is it -

http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/dos...175.html?gs=14

You've conflated two critiques now. Your first was purely aesthetic, and I'll add my voice to the chorus that disagrees with you and likes the new map. Your second is an attempt to impose a tactical map (including roads no less) on a strategic war game. Good luck with that.

[Alexander Seil]

I'm not attempting to impose a tactical map on a strategic wargame, it's you and your chorus insisting that the map is supposed to look like an operational map, yet it does not. That the particular screenshot I linked to comes from a low-level operational wargame is irrelevant - any operational map would have elevations and major elements of infrastructure on it. The HoI3 map, as it stands, wouldn't be functionally different if it was monochrome and non-textured, because the texture doesn't really add any detail, just a lot of green-grey graphical noise.

Also, unlike you and your chorus, I'm not trying to impose anything. I'm voicing my opinion (I can prove that I have received a permission from someone in your chorus already). If you think my opinion is strongly worded, wait until HoI3 gets reviewed by major gaming sites. It can be the best wargame in the world, but Paradox bet on the wrong horse when it came to graphics....

[Hansag]

BTW, Hitler directly commanded army group south for a month or so.

If calling in reserves would be affected by the commander in the command structure. Perhaps retreating might as well O.o (Thus Germany might get very high strength reductions at the later part of the war when Hitler has started to use even more amphetamines - and thus start to increase the number of "No retreat, no surrender"/"fight till the death" commands)

[Hannibal Barca2]

I cant see it alpha cos China block gamersgate from which the pictures are linked but from what I've seen so far I like it

However, its still just alpha screenshots... remember what some Eu3 alphas looked like

[Brad1]

I'm really excited about the new Leader system. I request that this be the subject of next weeks DD

[El_Empanada]

Just make me cry guys... having seen that I actually could die in peace .
But somethings seems wrong to me, Santiago province limits looks weird, or frontiers with Argentina aren't so irregular, seems to me that you push Argentina territory to far to the west just at the north border of Santiago.



The port in HoI3 should be Valparaíso and at the end of the map should be Cauquenes, Talcahuano = Concepción, they are two parts of the same city.

Also, there is a province called Osorno ? no matters how bad the game could get, but if you have Osorno province that's is for me enough reason to buy the game (that's the city were I grown ). And in the same way I wouldn't buy HoI3 if you make some province called Valdivia xD.

Chile is the ROFLest of nations. Even with 10,000 + provinces in the worls they manage to be still one-province wide.

Man that hurts, its not our fault that the max. width is of only 440km and I think that the average doesn't get to 200km .

[Piggy]

Also, unlike you and your chorus, I'm not trying to impose anything. I'm voicing my opinion (I can prove that I have received a permission from someone in your chorus already). If you think my opinion is strongly worded, wait until HoI3 gets reviewed by major gaming sites. It can be the best wargame in the world, but Paradox bet on the wrong horse when it came to graphics....

So I guess Johan is part of our "chorus" then, because I simply quoted what he said?

Im pretty confident that reviewers know that a map that spans the entire world cant be as detailed as map that spans one region of the med.

[humancalculator]

I love all of the new ideas. I am extremely delighted that each division, corps, army, etc. will have its own commander. It really adds to the realism.

Just a question, as units come off the production line, are they automatically assigned a corps, army, army group, etc., or do you have to do that manually?

[Alexander Seil]

So I guess Johan is part of our "chorus" then, because I simply quoted what he said?

Im pretty confident that reviewers know that a map that spans the entire world cant be as detailed as map that spans one region of the med.

I don't remember saying it had to look like Rome, I merely said that Rome's looked better, and there are certain things (like the deliberate decision to keep the map flat) that have nothing to do with level of detail in textures.

I didn't come up with the "chorus" either, but clearly you and your "chorus" have no problem in self-identifying yourselves so, so I'll just run with that. What I genuinely wonder about is why some members of the "chorus" are so zealous in their attempt to refute what was clearly an aesthetic impression (I associate green/grey with mud. Big whoop.). You're one the winning side. Arguing against my aesthetic perception only makes you look uncertain in your own aesthetic assessment.

As for my argument that Johan's statements contradict the actual look of the map, I'm still as right as I ever was. Incidentally, this is not subjective - you're more than welcome to refute me by producing an image of an operational map that has the same features as that of HoI3.

EDIT: Incidentally, my prediction that the game will get slammed by GameSpot, IGN and the rest is also very much refutable. As is your position. But we'll have to wait until next year to find out.

I'd much rather discuss formation AI than rehash whether and why my aesthetics should conform to those of the "chorus."

[fmac42064]

Great update as usual. I do not know what to do until this is released!!!!!!!! I guess I could make a mod for HOI2 Arm to keep me busy, but looking at the improvements that I have seen, I don't think that this will work either.

When can we expect an update about naval or air units and strategies? Keep up the great work and great screenshots.(I love the tank)

[Fiendix]

To Fiendix - whether the plane AI was a mess-up or not is a subject for a debate on the HoI2 forums and came up numerous times. Your opinion is by no means the consensus one (there isn't a consensus on that last time I checked). I personally much preferred HoI2's air and naval planning systems to HoI1.

hmm those that feel its ok dont know or dont care that you can cheat the targeting ai and be immune to ground attacks if not in battle thus really make planes pointless at time. There were certainly not many complaints in HOI1 that you could target a province - the issue was that you couldnt fly around an area and needed to click a lot. A simple solution would have been a sortie starting from the place you clicked on first. I dont refute the pluses of zones.
But for the current kind of dumbed down logic AI i thank. I also dont need the x other issues with the plane ai that are either WAD or none issue for Paradox.
Let the player do what he feels with his units.
If you want to relegate stuff to the ai let there be an on/off option like with sliders, autopromotion or convoys - note - none of which work correctly.

[Crilloan]

I'll say it for the thousandth time on this forum - micromanagement IS NOT realistic. Repeat that like a mantra. They're not dumbing the game down and their reasoning is spot on, if it works like how I think it works.

that was a very good point!
(had to highlight it)

Countries are not run at 100% efficiency today and they were definitely not run better during WW2.

Im looking forward to see more details about the command structure.

/C

[Alexander Seil]

I don't oppose individual control of divisions, and I doubt now that it is completely removed, but it also seems that the game is geared towards playing at a Corps level. Especially given that the "stack," as an operational unit it was in HoI2, doesn't seem to be a part of the game anymore. I wouldn't be surprised if the "preferred" way to play the game is by managing Corps, not divisions.

As far as the air targeting AI in HoI2 goes, if a player choose to cheat or exploit the AI, that's really the player's problem.

I also disagree on your convoys argument. The convoys worked just fine for me, and autopromotion was used universally by other players (although *I* only use manual promotion), judging by the number of questions and analysis threads dedicated to that feature.

[Bullfrog]

well, pretty close.

[Fiendix]

it goes beyond the problem of cheating the ai but other human players in MP too.
Really your definition of "micromanagement" isnt a consensus either. Let players have a choice and do as they want instead of voteing for a O 1 solution.
HOI is a war game. Removeing control of individual units would be a step back.

edit: ech really we dont know what P has planned so anything we say might be moot..

[Dakk]

Sweet sweet details!
It's coming together nicely... The part about divisions not stacking is most intriguing.

@Bullfrog
You couldn't take the time to rotate the pictures (and possible edit into one) for your loyal viewers?