Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

HOI 4: What do you want to see?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Show only dev responses
For all the arguments I would love to see a province-less system. I know it causes issues but they are possible to overcome if time and effort and a little original thinking is used. I know it's a 1 in a 1000 chance of paradox doing it but I know they read this forum so if they read this please at least consider it.

Anyways enough of my little plea. Intelligence needs to be worked on. It doesn't need massive changes just more details. As has been said before, the information should be accessible on the map. The player should also be able to see a suspected OOB and what units they have. This is especially true for ships. If you've had a fight with the Bismark and it got away, your not going to forget it's existence. I think it just boils down to increasing the UI a lot.
 
Things I would like to see.

1. Less History. Events such as Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland NOT automatic. No historical input other than the start of the game and who is what in regards to government types. Allow for leaders and political staff to be unknown in their skills. For a certainty, Hitler would never had given Goring all that power if he knew he was an idiot. And putting Rommel and Guderian into your best units because you "know" they are good, not in real life. Make it unknown/random. Make random events that happen to influence a country towards axis or allies or communist. Patton was not fully realized how good he was until he proved it. Doolittle was ignored before the start of the war and even left the army, but his ideas were right on. The US nuclear research received a very large amount of gain due to many nuclear scientists and chemists being Jewish and fled Europe to get away from the Nazis, one was in Denmark for example. It is not just the skill of your own leaders, also the lack of skill of the enemy, the mistakes they make and just plain events that happen out of anyone's control. Weaver's death in a plane crash ended or crippled the four engine bomber program in Germany as he was the only one pushing it.

2. More random, equipment upgrades. As factories develop new weapons, no one knows if they will work at all until they are tried out. Sometimes the wrong one is picked. The BF109 was good, but the Heinkel version might have been better, it had a better turning ability. Politics can sometimes ruin a good thing.

3. How about recon aircraft to give you info on the military units on your borders?

4. How about airborne and commando missions to destroy road and rail lines? You know, much like D-Day, Fort Eben Emael, Crete.... for example. Or, what the Germans did in the Battle of the Bulge, sent airborne disguised as US MPs to direct traffic in the wrong direction.

5. How about spy missions to destroy factories.

6. How about gaining a tech research by means of espionage?

7. I agree on production, how could you put more ability into producing something when it is at the maximum. If you pay $10.00 for something that takes two days to make, paying the person $20 to get it in the same time frame isn't very smart. A machine running at maximum cannot be given higher current in electricity to force it to go faster and not have go faster, it would just not draw that added electricity and would not use more. You can pour more gas into a gas tank, but that is not going to help if it is already full. I am not sure where some form of asset, could be wasted, or who would do that without orders from some authority. To have the system automatically increase something beyond the maximum knowing it is wasted does not seem to make sense to me.

8. How about recruiting outside resources, such as scientists and engineers?

9. What about the use of neutral ports, is this possible in this game, I have not tried it yet? IE: Graf Spee in the South Atlantic.

10. How about loss of communications with a unit, tell it to go North and it does not get the order because it is out of supply, the courier was shot, or the radio was jammed.....
 
Quite simple: A more aggressive/responsive AI. Even on the highest difficulty, a player as Germany can annex around 3-4 nations without the U.K. declaring war (this is quite ahistoric, I'm referring to skipping Poland altogether).
 
I think that provinces broken into hexes would be good for the smaller tactical battles
folks talk about. easier to do encirclements as well. it will distort the map a bit so it
won't have the smooth outlines as now but that is eyecandy and really has little to do
with the movement and combat. Easier to detirimine movement, supply. All map
systems use a point to point calculation using either long/lat, hexes, or points with
a set distance between them with a modifier for terrain/weather.

Improved naval system. Alot of great detail is in it now but is lost in the abstract
manner it is used. No torpedo usage for surface ships (inc in guns?) cags do not
fight cags tho it does say they do on their descriptions when you look at them (at
least they are supposed to fight land based but they don't ever fight other cags).

Needs vastly improved invasion system. small nations and even large ones cannot
do "Normandy" style invasions in 1941 let alone 1939! A serious practical research
must be unlocked and then continued research to allow greater and greater abillty
to conduct landings. Ocean liners do not an invasion make....

Heavy AA should be removed from the map and only be from units created. They
require not only guns but troops to man them, supply them, and protect them. Albert
Speer did mention that the amount of troops and equipement tied up to defend
Germany from Allied air attacks consituted the "Second Front" well before a single
Allied soldier landed in France. Factories should only be ordered to be built a locations
at the start. Not built then dropped where you want. That just darn silly.

Certain ports of an adequate size should be where ships are built. Not build and dropped
where you want them. This makes them vulnerable to bombing or ground attack. They
are not created in thin air and then transported to a port.

Garrison troops should inflict more casualites on attackers when they occupy forts at a
level of 5 or greater. These forts would include their own artillery (Maginot line and large
coastal forts) and also have the possibility to inflict damage on invading ships. Ships in
the invasion causing bombardment should be able also to damage the forts.

Naval units should not be able to repair battleships at dinky level 1 ports like Wake Island
(Imagine them hauling the USS Missouri up on the sand to patch torpedo holes). the level
of the port should detirimine what size ship at max can be repaired. this would force those
ships heavily damaged to return to major ports. ships get repaired to quickly as well. many
damaged were out for months or years but gamewise sometimes only weeks.

Theatres should have multiple commanders. 1 land, 1 air, 1 naval. This would allow 3 different
types of commands so that when you order offensive bombing (strategic) of a certain point chosen
the AI won't assume you want to invade and take the point instead! Orders would be enlarged for
each of the officers to allow for more varied theatre orders for land/sea/air.

Specialized naval engineers for the Allies (there are factual) to open and increase the tonnage you
can bring into a port. I know you can do this in basing but these units should cut the time needed
to increase port size and while based there increase the amount of supply you bring in. Salerno,
Brest, Cherbourg are examples...

Break the formation of divisions into two parts: 3000 man and 1000 man units. The first 3 boxes
are 3000 man only. the last two (the final thru research of superior firepower) can be either 1
3000 man unit or 2 1000 man unit.
 
<<Improved naval system. Alot of great detail is in it now but is lost in the abstract
manner it is used. No torpedo usage for surface ships (inc in guns?) cags do not
fight cags tho it does say they do on their descriptions when you look at them (at
least they are supposed to fight land based but they don't ever fight other cags).>> plasticpanzers

Yes, the advantage of the Japanese "Long Lance" torpedo with much greater range was never countered by other countries. Their night fighting ability with their ships was also not overcome. At Guadalcanal, the sea there was named iron bottom sound for all the US Navy ships sunk there in night battles. They basically owned the slot at night, the US at day. They only way it was overcome, wait until light and bomb the heck out of them with carrier and land based aircraft, such as with the Yamato.

<<Needs vastly improved invasion system. small nations and even large ones cannot
do "Normandy" style invasions in 1941 let alone 1939! A serious practical research
must be unlocked and then continued research to allow greater and greater abillty
to conduct landings. Ocean liners do not an invasion make....>> plasticpanzers

Yes, a transport is insufficient. It is a logistical nightmare. It is not just some simple thing, carry troops to coast, send them ashore.

Yes, lets just invade Greece, get the port and drop a Battleship in the Med. Shipyards have to be built. You can build torpedo boats and landing craft in river areas, but not a Battleship. You have to have the drydock/shipyard that is wide enough for the size of the ship.

<<Naval units should not be able to repair battleships at dinky level 1 ports like Wake Island
(Imagine them hauling the USS Missouri up on the sand to patch torpedo holes). the level
of the port should detirimine what size ship at max can be repaired. this would force those
ships heavily damaged to return to major ports. ships get repaired to quickly as well. many
damaged were out for months or years but gamewise sometimes only weeks.>> plasticpanzers

The crew CAN do minor repairs, like the Graf Spee repaired some of the damage, was not able to get the seaplane fixed though, did not have the parts. But they got jammed turrets back up and running, welded over holes and such. A repair ship like the Altmark could have helped a lot, but again only so far.
 
Oh i agree that crews did amazing things. After one battle near Guadalcanal the crew of
a US crusier that had its entire nose blown off by enemy DD torpedos (!!) inc the forward
8in turret built a false bow from palm logs! The thing is tho when damaged in the game
the damage does not get worse after the battle (like in real life when later on ships would
sink due to increasing problems) so that would be "damage control" gamewise. Its that
no port nor repair ship coud put a new bow on that crusier. It would have to go back to
port for a major refit. Same with the BB N.Carolina zapped by a torpedo and got a 20foot
hole, back to a major port after crew did what they could. Just that the smaller the port
the less likely they could repair a larger ship. Just no facilities and there are no repair
ships in the game. you have to increase the port size to get this effect which balances
out to the same. It would take a large base to repair a BB or CV from really bad damage
such as the USS Franklin (CV)
 
Also would like the see "Wild Card" sub attacks on naval vessels. Almost unheard
of for a sub to get a major ship. There should be a wild card % that the sub would
torpedo a warship in a group it "surprises" from 10-100% damage. Japanese cruiser
Kinugasa and CV Taiho fall in the group. % increase if the ship is already damaged
such as Hornet/Yorktown.
 
A war-goal system more live Vic 2's; I'd like to be able to draw up new borders as I want, but I wouldn't even stop there, I think provinces should be eliminated and there should just be a map that you can move around on freely, it would make pincer movements and encirclements etc. much more dynamic, it would also make drawing up new borders (as mentioned above) look nicer.
 
comsubpac said:
is hoi a naval warfare simulation ... ???????
Click to expand...
It's not a simulation of anything, it's based on very abstract models. The one taking care of 70% of the world remains pretty bad.
 
how about a animation for nuking, I mena when you nuke someone with sprites on there is nothing, no mushroom cloud, your planes go there and get back, I mean really, YOU JUST NUKED OTTOWA! now watch as nothing happens
 
guzz60 said:
A war-goal system more live Vic 2's; I'd like to be able to draw up new borders as I want, but I wouldn't even stop there, I think provinces should be eliminated and there should just be a map that you can move around on freely, it would make pincer movements and encirclements etc. much more dynamic, it would also make drawing up new borders (as mentioned above) look nicer.
Click to expand...

you can create borders more to your liking by save editing though it is less fun,

one feature I would like to see are diplomatic hadovers of places, say you conquered Japan and Korea but wanted to give Korea to China, it would be easier if there were a button on the diplomacy tab that says "hand Provinces over" and have you selct the provinces via the map, it should also improve relations when you do this, only slightly if you give poor land or more so if you give good land (rich in resources, good infastructure, good IC, a high level port or airfield)
 
comsubpac said:
Hmmm .... let's see



is hoi a naval warfare simulation ... ???????
Click to expand...

This post from you is not surprising me Consumbac. Sure HOI is a naval warfare simulation. It is a strategic naval warfare simulation, and he probably though you got that. You occur to me as extremely pessimistic and conservative when it comes to any type of criticism or idealism regarding HOI. You are on constant hunt for idealistic posts about HOI, and when you find them you make sure they are stigmatized, relativized and smashed down
 
Last edited:
I have just spent a bit of time reading through this thread and am surprised by noone mentioning the need for a complete re-work of the manpower system. Perhaps someone needs to tell me what the sense is behind the current manpower mechanics - 'cos it's a complete mystery to me!

HOI3 has the pool of available manpower increasing faster as one goes from volunteer army, through 1, 2 and 3 year conscription. Er, why? :wacko: What this has to do with officer recruitment is just another mystery.

Introducing conscription increases your pool of trained soldiers - the rate of growth dependent on how large your potential annual intake is and what proportion you call up. Even then you need to stick at it for years to get a large pool of manpower to mobilise a large army. Conscription doesn't create a manpower pool - that's created by what mummy and daddy did some 20 years back. But you all know that anyway.

Perhaps there should be mechanics that distinguish your manpower pool (driven by population size and 'shape', birthrate, etc.) from your trained manpower pool and this again from the active armed forces.

Going from 1 through to 3 year conscription only changes the size of your active army - e.g. if you want to fight wars whilst at 'peace'.

A mechanism that distinguished your potential manpower pool from your active and reservist pools would be good.

One could then link dipping into the manpower pool to other effects - e.g. dissent, national unity and a hit on the IC.

That way one could represent the problems both the US and Germany had as war approached - how to create a large mobilised army when starting with next to no trained reservists. For Germany the consequence was the poor performance of units made up of the 'white recruits' in the Polish campaign.

I feel that the ICE folks could model a lot of this - e.g. the manpower bonus event when one conscripts women into the factories. Something for a future ICE 4.3! However I suspect that a proper fix would need to await HOI4
 
I think this was mentioned already, but a province-less, 3-d map like the total war seriers so that you can actually pick the terrain you attack or defend. This would solve one particular problem I have. That is, stationing a division in a province with a river, you can't pick which side of the river they dig-in at.
 
- Oh Gamers Map

- A new tech system based on a hybrid between the HOI2 and HOI3 system

- Manpower divided into skilled labor, unskilled labor, skilled soldiers (professional soldiers), unskilled soldiers (conscripts), sailors and airmen

- Industrial mobilization feature

- Manpower mobilization feature like in DH

- Institutional/social mobilization feature

- Food

- War exhaustion

- Improved combined arms system

- Overhaul of third world, minors and colonies

- All aspects of a longer (1-10 years) than historical WW2 represented.

- Morale, both at the battlefield and on the home front represented

- Separation between men and materials/equipment

- Dynamic resource system. Some resources decrease in volum, while the volum of other increase as time pass by. Ecomonic supply and demand model as a result of this

- A proper unconventional war system with nukes and other unconventional weapons correctly and historically represented.

- Reworking of the consumer goods and supplies system.

- More sounds. Specific sounds for the different types of units like in Red Alert, world In Conflict and other real-time strategy games. Different sounds for bombings, shootings, motors, fighting, torpedoes, splashing, screaming, shouting propels etc.

- More graphics. Flaks, nukes bombings, explosions etc.

- Dynamic core province system like in DH

- Dynamic ideology and regime change system like in DH

- More advanced IC system where IC is divided into several qualities

- Selling, buying and giving way of resources and equipment overhauled. Marshall help and lend and lease as part of this

- Several important historic events/conflicts remodeled. Ruhr occupation, attack on Pearl Harbor, battles of Khalkhyn Gol etc.

- Demographics (a dynamic one) along with a correct demographic map

- Railways

- Separation of landform and terrain. Geography and biology are not the same.

- A reworked intelligence system, where British intelligence wins the war, like it did historically

- Synthetic oil plants (an possibly other very important buildings), like in AOD

- A guerrilla war system as part of the partisan system where partisans can effectively figh a superior enemy for decades

- The option to play with a "senate" where politicians or the dictator in power gives the player orders. Rewarded if successful, punished if not.

- Most crucial AI flaws balanced out.

- Connection between infrastructure and terrain implemented

- Improved supply system where support equipment and "land convoys" needs to be built and maintained

- Realistic economic growth system. The balance between IC whoring and historic economic growth.

- An even more dynamic technology system where new technology only affects only some parts of the airplanes, tanks and ships.

- A foreign policy parameter classification system similar to national ideas in AOD

- More dynamic and rich event system, similar to decisions in DH

- A realistic infrastructure expansion system.

- New diplomatic mission: military attaché. More realistic and effective sharing of technology between non-allied nations.

- The periphery is crucial to the center for any country. Give all countries the incentive to defend the periphery as the resources and manpower there are essential to the survival of the nation. The game is too focused around the importance of the capital and the economic center as it stands now.

- Loss statistics like in AOD
 
Last edited:
- A new tech system based on a hybrid between the HOI2 and HOI3 system
Click to expand...
Explain.

- Manpower divided into skilled labor, unskilled labor, skilled soldiers (professional soldiers), unskilled soldiers (conscripts), sailors and airmen
Click to expand...
This would be good. The game needs a better MP system, anyway. The current one treats all MP equally, which creates problems.

- Industrial mobilization feature
Click to expand...
Already covered by laws. They may or may not be unbalanced, but the system is there.

- Manpower mobilization feature like in DH
Click to expand...
Yeah, I actually like the DH's mobilisation system. However, if we are talking about HOI4, then I have no doubt that with a better MP system, mobilisation system would be improved, too.

- Institutional/social mobilization feature
Click to expand...
I don't understand. What do you mean by that? At a glance it seems that it's sth like National Unity.

- Food
Click to expand...
Ok.

- War exhaustion
Click to expand...
Already possible to add it in HOI3. Try HPP mod.

- Improved combined arms system
Click to expand...
You are being very vague. If you are talking about the simplicity of the current CA system (which is problematic in case of many div compositions), then I agree.

- Overhaul of third world, minors and colonies

- All aspects of a longer (1-10 years) than historical WW2 represented.

- Morale, both at the battlefield and on the home front represented

- Dynamic resource system. Some resources decrease in volum, while the volum of other increase as time pass by. Ecomonic supply and demand model as a result of this

- Realistic economic growth system. The balance between IC whoring and historic economic growth.

- A realistic infrastructure expansion system.

- New diplomatic mission: military attaché. More realistic and effective sharing of technology between non-allied nations.
Click to expand...
Ymm... What? You really need to be more specific!

- Improved supply system where support equipment and "land convoys" needs to be built and maintained
Click to expand...
Sounds good.

- A guerrilla war system as part of the partisan system where partisans can effectively figh a superior enemy for decades
Click to expand...
Good for Cold War purposes, but if the game doesn't tackle CW, then I doubt that we will see sth like this in a WWII game.

- The periphery is crucial to the center for any country. Give all countries the incentive to defend the periphery as the resources and manpower there are essential to the survival of the nation. The game is too focused around the importance of the capital and the economic center as it stands now.

- Loss statistics like in AOD
Click to expand...

Agreed. However, the first problem mostly arises from the fact that all resources and supplies are stockpiled in the capital, which is blatantly unrealistic.

- The option to play with a "senate" where politicians or the dictator in power gives the player orders. Rewarded if successful, punished if not.
Click to expand...
Too much Rome: Total War.

- More advanced IC system where IC is divided into several qualities
Click to expand...
Yeah. I think that even a basic distinction between Heavy IC and Light IC would be good.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back