• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Very impressive. My problem is if you have AI controlling our troops movements and AI controlling the enemies troop movements who needs a player?
The game becomes risk, I send army group North to attack Leningrad with six corps and 70 divisions.
They are faced by VVS with 90 divisions. Who wins? Well I guess we roll a dice and see.

This is not how I understand the system will work. Organisational it will follow the example above but if you choose to take the 1st Panzer division and punch through the line at point X you can.
While the army will fight in an almost generic way without your input you can and are able to micro-manage where-ever you choose.

So for the risk player he throws all 250 divisons at the VVS and he either wins or loses for the more tactical player he restructures and expliots openings.
Reinforces where needed...

My only worry is are we not asking too much of the AI.
And we have not even talked about air and naval combat yet.

Mark my words people are giving far too much credit to the command structures.
They will exist but it is unlikely they will be used as sole control of your armies.

What is interesting and appears to be missed by most is the promotion of officers can be detremental to your war effort.
A good major general may be worth his weight in gold. Rommel might fight the entire war as a major general because (again as i understand it) you will need skilled leaders in all the different tears of your army two really make the most out of the command structures penalties and benefits. A great fieldmarshal surrounded by great corps commanders can be nullified by average joe divison commanders.
Now if anything that is the only solid bit of information we recieved the rest is speculation that has been miraculusly turned into fact as this thread spreads.


You don't have to have AI controlling movement of your units, you can step in anytime, and in fact you can give orders to each of your divisions all the time. And it's not only number of divisions which will define the outcome. It also depends on what type of divisions you have, how good your officers are and what sort of equipment your soldiers have. So it's not only "gros battalion ont toujours raison”. You have command structure so you need to worry about the whole chain of commanding officers. I think that now you can involve yourself in the chosen level of command. You can be commanding officer of a single division (and not only one division, of course), of a corpse, army, army group or the theatre or, and that's probably what most of us will do, at least at the beginning, of everything mentioned here.
And for the AI, well, I guess we can only wait and hope for the best. I think that it's just natural for AI not to perform as good as human, so if you trust AI to lead your divisions to a decisive battle, go ahead, and if not, well, suit yourself.
 
Alexander Seil said:
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.
Alexander Seil said:
But we're not field commanders...we're sitting in the Fuehrerbunker and have wine and cheese with our operational planning. Why would OUR maps be dunked in mud?
If we want HoI3 to be totally realistic, we shouldn't have that much control on production, technology or intelligence. Not sure, but I don't think even Hitler get to choose all recruited units and built tanks/ships/planes. There are ministers (chief of army etc.) for such tasks.

I'm not sure if I want players to have total control over divisions or just to be able to give commands to the AI. What are we going to do during the war? I give them a command to advance and just sit there unit I need to give a new direction for some armies. The best solution would still be to allow players to have total control over divisions. For example, if I'll play Finland, I would just have one front and would just set one army group to Karelia and one to Lapland. Then what? I wouldn't give them directions for advance since I want to defend during Winter War...

My apologies if I haven't understood your opinions correctly
 
*Still wondering if brigades can be transfered to and from divisions, or used to form ad hoc divisions in a pinch on the field*
:confused::confused::confused::confused:

The fact that this question has been asked repeatedly and never answered means the developers
1) Don't know yet
2) Do know but won't tell us
or
3) No you will not be able to period!

I am leaning to the latter because if it was possible they would have answered by now. Why keep it a secret?

So unless contradicted you can safely assume what you build you are stuck with :):)
 
Last edited:
The fact that this question has been asked repeatedly and never answered means the developers
1) Don't know yet
2) Do know but won't tell us
or
3) No you will not be able to period!

I am leaning to the latter because if it was possible they would have answered by now. Why keep it a secret?

So unless contradicted you can safely assume what you build you are stuck with :):)

I can only confirm that it is either 1,2 or 3.
 
What I gather from all these discussions and dev diaries is:

1) If player can give control of some fronts to AI, it means that there has to be some possibility to give it (the AI) some reasonable orders. Giving her orders to capture one province is beyond ridicilous. It would make some sense to tell her to use this army group to capture one region. Best would be to set boundaries for AI controlled army groups and set limits of advance for them. This would reduce the players burden, but still requires some control to prevent envelopments if one army group advances faster than the other.

2) If AI is made smart enough for a player to trust his precious units into her hands, then AI will surely also be smart enough to provide some challenging single player games. I remain hopeful.

3) I wish that the supply system has some similarities with <idontwanttobebannedonthegroundsofadvertising> game. In that the supply production from cities is sent to a HQ unit, which sends supplies to its subordinate HQs, which in turn provide supplies to units under their command. Supply efficiency diminishes with range so you need a chain of HQs to keep Barbarossa in motion. Something along these lines has been hinted, but only time will tell.

Anyway, these Dev Diaries sure make the wait seem longer...

-Rope
 
I worry about the idea of a skill cap, it leads to situations where you have to arbitrarily decide who's going to be the next wunderkind. I'd much prefer a sort of higher starting experience or xp accruing bonus for the named historical generals. I don't think anyone likes the caps in the current system which make it so that every member of the wehrmacht, given enough experience, can become Alexander the Great.

Well, as I see it, having an exponential (i.e. more and more xp required) rather than linear (i.e. same xp required) to reach a new level would basically be the same as a quasi-skill cap. (can't say I like the way non-leveled xp is removed in total as the general is promoted either, perhaps having 50-100% of it get removed at random would be better as they lose one level from the promotion?)

But I agree with your comments, a static skill cap would have unrealistic effects.

As for command structure. The HOI games have had that in a way before. Remember that the Chief of Staff/Army/Navy/Air force did give units under their command (i.e. the whole army/navy/air force) certain bonuses.

If you have a command structure, perhaps when you click on units in a province, you can decide what level the divisions should be selected as well (perhaps you could use the number keys (1, 2, 3, 4, 5...) to select what level:

1 - Division (click on a province and you cycle through divisions there)
2 - Corps (click on a province and you cycle through corps there [and in other provinces])
3 - Army (click on a province and you cycle through armies there [and in other provinces])
4 - Army Group (Same for army groups)
5 - Theatre (same but for theatres)
...

This way you can have quick access to the levels of the command structure (or perhaps you're only interested in moving Corps around - or strategically re-deploy one Army at a time)

As for strategic re-deployment, I hope this is shown on the map (first hour/days or so the soldiers and equipment are loaded onto trains, then they are quickly moved across the terrain [but still vulnerable to air attack] and then they disembark where they were going [or where they were re-directed to go] and they disembark [org. penalty] and then start getting their act together [building up org.])

Perhaps there is a command structure for other ministers as well?

eg.
Minister of Finance under which you have:
- Minister of Trade
- Minister of Industry & Infrastructure
- Minister of Armaments

Minister of Justice under which you have:
- Minister of Security
- Minister of Intelligence and espionage
- Supreme Court justice

etc.

Slightly more micro hell (especially for the developers digging up what kind of minister each was, but still)
 
what is it that you people hate about OPTIONAL stuff? who said you´d be forced to relinquish even a single division from your control?:confused:

Because deep down we all want Johan and co to force us onto one repetitional path..erm.. maybe not :)

Personally, i cant see what could possibly be viewed as negative with this either, so i imagine that people are misunderstanding things.

Now, if i have understood the system correctly, you have the option of all the micro management in the world, controlling every division, or you can allow the AI to perform a task you give it (attack, defend). I dont know how indepth these AI orders are (or more importantly, how well the AI would execute them), but thats perhaps something for a future DD.

Lets use the Afrika Korps as an example, as its nice and small. Say you ship 6 German divisions over to Tripoli, to augment the Italians. You split these 6 divisions into two corps, and assign them to a HQ under Rommel.

As the player, you can either manage all forces manually, or you can give Rommel, with his 6 divisions various orders, like for example "Capture Alexandria", or "Hold Tripoli". Again, if i have understood the system correctly :)
 
Quick question:

If the HOI3 player can choose between sprites and counters, why not allow the player to choose between "3D" and "2D" map mode?

The 3D map mode would look something like EU3 and the 2D map mode would look like the map now being developed for HOI3.

?

/Ratbag

Read this diary

Johan said:
Another little aspect of the map.. If you play in "counters-mode".. the camera is locked in full 2d and will not tilt for more dramatic 3d looks.
 
what is it that you people hate about OPTIONAL stuff? who said you´d be forced to relinquish even a single division from your control?:confused:

Exactly.... I want the option. Whether it be to have my mobile corps in NW France set to push back an invading allied landing in Brest, or my UK Singapore Defense Force evacuating to the transport fleet in the port if attacked by the Japanese, or my Vladivostock defence force left counter any Japanse attack while Im busy racing towards Berlin.....

I want to be able to leave some units on standby when a specific theatre isnt the main focus of my war effort, rather than have then sit there and watch the AI land in the neighbouring province and just wave at them!
 
I want to be able to leave some units on standby when a specific theatre isnt the main focus of my war effort, rather than have then sit there and watch the AI land in the neighbouring province and just wave at them!

Better alarm bells would be good too. Too often I had the allies invade Spain or Italy and me only find that out by accident after they had already conquered half the country :(.

On the topic people hating optional stuff- I don't get it. I wouldn't care if Paradox would use clown sprites moving on pink camels as long as I can turn it off.
 
I welcome posibility to give some of my army to be controled by AI.

I sopose of those who are complaining nowone tried in HOI2 to play 3 fronts simoultaneously.

oh we have. Better the ai stay away.

At least Tracid did say it will be an option.