• 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.
Besides, that would make STRATs uber and they are already hard to balance, so I don't like this idea at all.
I agree. I would prefer a AoD balance on Strategic bombing, felt very powerful but still a huge IC attrition war for both sides.

HOI4 will probably have as many provinces as HOI3, if not more, so...

I really hope it won't. It would be repeating the same mistake to put thousands of empty provinces with no value on the map. The added maneuver room is IMHO not worth the cost in performance, time consumption, micromanagement and how much worse the AI becomes.

I think the sweetspot would be somewhere around 50-75% of the land provinces HoI3 has, and perhaps more seazones instead for more detail in the naval warfare.
 
Yeah, I think that HOI3 had too many provinces in some places and it's hard to argue that more provinces make things easier for the AI. Too many provinces also mean that minor countries cannot even guard their borders, which makes them beyond useless in the AI's hands.

I agree about the micro, too. I hated the Eastern Front in HOI3 and I almost never played the SU on manual control... I think that for HOI4, sth between DH's map and HOI3's map would be ideal. However, I think that they will keep the province count in the HOI3's range. If they reduce the province count, you will see many posts about "dumbing the game down" and "the return of static warfare" (as if people never played HOI2/AOD/DH).

The funny thing is that you see people arguing for NO provinces. Good luck with that. That would be a nightmare for the AI and a total micromanagement hell.
 
well i didnt mean that they should take 1 mp per run. was talkin about 10% of that value, with big raid but still something.

also game needs tech/law or something, which spreads industry all over, so lets say, aircraft parts are build in many different small companies, and then there is place where they are put together, and in this way, should strategic attack have less impact on IC.

also would be nice if there would be option for using old mines etc underground factories, which cannot be effected with bombing.

i also liked ones idea about IC, that its too general. ship yards makin ships only and subs, while tank factories make tanks and so on. so when builgind new industry, u get then choise that what kind of industry it is going to be and is it dug inside the ground safe from bombing, makin it more expencive to build, and longer.

wasnt it year 44 when germany was in heavy rain of bombs during allied bomber and yet still they managed to produce tanks and aircrafts much more then in previous years no matter that they were strat bombed..

also, there could be malus, if industry is running short on rare materials. i dont mean IC malus, that should run as good as with it, but on armour value on produced tanks etc as theres no important metals to put in armour plating makin it worse against AT hits. fracturing and so on. same with airplanes, they come heavier as wood has to be used or something else on some parts, making them climb slower, go slower and carry less ammunition, affecting its combat ability.
 
The funny thing is that you see people arguing for NO provinces. Good luck with that. That would be a nightmare for the AI and a total micromanagement hell.
I don't think it would have to be much harder for the AI then HoI3s scale, just require a very different approach.

There are many examples of the AI being able to move pretty well on a map without provinces or big grid in other real time strategy games. Everything from Starcraft to Total war battle maps.

Micromanagement is bad in HoI3 partially because you tend to move one province at a time, if in a province-less map you instead give orders to move 200km to the next strategic objective (City/Airbase), then the amount of moves is actually reduced.
 
The funny thing is that you see people arguing for NO provinces. Good luck with that. That would be a nightmare for the AI and a total micromanagement hell.

Their will always be some sort of 'province' on the map.
You can make it invisible, but for a game like HOI, where battles happen on the 'campaign map' itself, there will always be some sort of province, grid, etc. (for battlecalculations mainly)
The fact that it works in games like Total war is because battles don't happen on the campaign map but on a (randomized) battlemap.
 
also i wish that if u bomb city to ruins and then attack it with ground troops there should be much bigger penalty to attacker, and some boost to defenders, as ruins are much easier to make fortresses, as there is alot of hiding places, and stuff to use to make bunkers from bricks etc, also roads are stuck with bomb craters and fallen building ruins.. thats what happened in stalingrad, wasnt so easy cake to take when it was such in conditition.

its way more easier to clear up city which is intact, as there isnt many hiding places, windows and doors and corners.. but in ruins, different story.
 
well in away it could work with hoi4. you just draw a line on the map, where you want that division to set up after attack, and facing. and then next division continues next to it. longer line you draw for division to defend, more weak it is againt pinpoint attacks of armored spearheads etc, but more invulnerable against artillery barrages.. in that way, with short line, division has maxium effect and can even keep reserves behind in rest, while with streched line there is no reserves behind and everyone is at front, or something like that. and also, it could be determined that how widely you attack with division as well. in this way, you can make multi layer defences. in small area, comparing it to province system where second line is 50km behind the first. ive played such an game some 15 years ago, which had this system in use, and it was good, just cannot remember the game name anymore. but it worked. then, in mapmode, there could be one mode, where you can see all possible locations for field airfields, and make one of those as airfield just by landing your planes there and supply trucks would follow/go ahead there to wait planes to land. no need for IC to build airfield, which was the case in russia. open field is an ready airfield. and there was lots of field/plains for example.

also supply/logistical issue can be calculated easily, more away you are from railroad, more time it takes for trucks to pickup the supplies for the unit. that makes controlling the railroads major issue, which it was in real life too. they were the lifelines. there is already distance tool for airplanes, and almost that same tool can be used to determine with current road level structure/if forest/hills/mountains/swamp, that how fast the supply is going, on open plains, trucks can drive on open plains, when its not the muddy time/winter.
well for winter there was those snow plows or how u call it, opening roads from snow.
 
I would like to see more stats on military leaders. Victories/losses, why not some medals or other stuff just for fun. Maybe something like a grade or % based on what this particular general has achieved in terms of objectives plus a few notable "faits d'armes" (held this city/bridge/mountain pass vs bigger force or something similar). Nothing really essential but I'd like to know who does well and who doesn't, who I can promote/demote etc etc...

I know some of you don't like useless stuff but I think it's fun and adds flavor to the game. :)
 
I'm sure it has been raised but I don't feel like reading 51 pages.

SUBS! Get them to work correctly. In HOI3 they are wrecked. Make subs a viable force not just against convoys but in naval fights. Even having 1943 subs in 1939 means next to nothing. In HOI3 it is a waste of IC to invest and build subs, expecially as Germany. A few NAV's does way more and sinks just as many convoys.

So PLEASE fix subs.
 
light aa guns cant reach high flying bombers, but 88´s can(IRL). so in a way there should be 2 levels of flying, high and low. and at low both AA types/light/heavy can fire, while at high only heavy AA can fire- and planes like cas, multiroles with ground attack missions and perhaps tacs on ground attack should use low flying mode which makes them vulnerable to light aa too. and bmbers going over the areas of those should be affected by it
 
Now here's a wich that I know will not be in the game.

Country specific units. No more every brigade is 3K men. No more a unit from country A is identical to country B. And make the equipment specific to the country. Don't just call it a Panther which is identical in the game to a Sherman etc. But out of all possible changes this one will not be possible.
 
Being able to give territory (with or without core) to another nation, that's one of the many things. Expanded Diplomacy is another (Like EU IV has, the Force peace thing).
 
I'd like to see Paradox test and fix the game so a total, complete conquest of the world is not stopped by game engine problems and hindered by UI and AI shortcomings.

In that vein, as compared to HOI3, I'd especially like fixes for supply chain management (conquered territory and especially annexed countries should also produce supplies, supplies should be movable in any quantity given sufficient infrastructure...). And fixes for performance issues (bad, bad threading) and crashes that occur with too many units on the map (a simple unit limit or a way to represent larger numbers of units as one unit to reduce load would do fine).

And better ways to manage still massive amounts of units, especially UI features / elements that deal with lists and map areas and production batches and sequence priorities. And group/filter selections (promote all generals that have these three traits, put them in charge of theaters...).

And more fine-grained control over the AI, with options to turn on or off more AI features. And I'd like some plan drawing on the map to be relevant to the AI, at least I should be able to draw arrows for directions / provinces in which battle groups push, with the AI splitting its assigned forces up according to a preset (equal split, certain ratios, or AI choice) - these should override the general AI behavior on a theater area, and have more specifically assigned forces...
 
Last edited:
You know what I want to see?!?!

Ads! Thats right!

Your troops just won the battle---why don't you throw back a can of mountain dew to celebrate?!

Your shores are being invaded by the enemy! Better drink a Red Bull and use those wings to fly there fast!

The future of advertising----I LOVE it!
 
i would like to have more generals for major countries. always running out of them :)

That would be so easy to do too...tie it to officer production in the tech screen. Every 2000 officers produced (or whatever number they work out) adds a new lvl0 general to your queue with random max and one random trait, for instance.
 
I consider myself an amateur historian and i would have no problems with something real purists at heart would....nations shouldnt be penalized with no Generals/Admirals because they simply cant find the names of real ones. I agree with Wesleytj. And i wouldnt care if they named them "Generic General 1, 2, 3 etc...", I wouldnt even care if they gave them fake names, with a small indicator so you would know they were fictional. In the end it still is a game, and we already know they make up the benefits of the generals as there is no way to truly gauge what stat to add to each, not with so many lower generals in the game.
 
I consider myself an amateur historian and i would have no problems with something real purists at heart would....nations shouldnt be penalized with no Generals/Admirals because they simply cant find the names of real ones. I agree with Wesleytj. And i wouldnt care if they named them "Generic General 1, 2, 3 etc...", I wouldnt even care if they gave them fake names, with a small indicator so you would know they were fictional. In the end it still is a game, and we already know they make up the benefits of the generals as there is no way to truly gauge what stat to add to each, not with so many lower generals in the game.

They already do give them fake names. Don't assign a general or admiral to a unit and you'll see; they give them some nation-appropriate name.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.