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
I thought all generals were premade in the files. You get some at the start and more every couple years.
I have never seen my game suddenly make new generals because I ran out, I simply run out and have leaderless divisions/fleets/airwings; which I then refuse to put in to battle because of the penalties.
 
I can only think of one feature

- a new HOI :)
 
I've never seen randomly generated leaders. Hell, one of the hardest things about playing China is the lack of leaders when you get past 1938. Countless divisions running around with no one in charge.

You sure you're not seeing a higher HQ leader take command when an HQ and multiple divisions enter battle?
 
That is problem if you want to have realistic game or fun game.

To train a sergeant in US army it takes between 18-36 months.
To train a lieutenant it takes about 4 months.
To have a lieutenant level up (in occasional wars) to a general it takes 13-19 years (156 - 228) months.

Basically a nation who had a few of high-level officers in 1936 can do little to increase that number by 1941.

----

Now comes my rant: I just see this as another modifier to the game similar to IC or base Manpower or Leadership. No matter what you do, it isn't going to increase much.

Maybe possible idea would be to "battle-forge" generals. After each battle there is 0.1% probability that a random colonel will become a brig general.
 
Military Academy feature wouldnt be bad, Military Attaches have been used since the beginning of time. There is no excuse to not have a leader. Today your a private, tomorrow your a General, just make them level 0 with the opportunity to improve. But someone has to be in charge.
 
Well now that EU4 has been released and Paradox have repeatedly said that an EU- Rome 2 will not be coming for a long time maybe HOI4 will be on the not to distant horizon:)
Would love more options when it comes down to each division's settings. Rather than the generic offensive/defensive slider I would love some more tactical options for each division that would impact their combat ability. Would also like a resource/IC overhaul so resources would play a bigger role in the game- there are to often a non-factor in games when really the entire war was fought over them.
Better UI for Air combat- it's a bit of a hassle with all the clicking.
Finally a better political system- but only if the game starts earlier- e.g. 1933.
 
I would like to see a more realistic difference for each nation. For instance, it is completely impossible to get the kind of stuff that the US build up to 1946. Another thing would be the question if even the Soviet manpower pool is currently capable of losing some 100-150 divisions (just a guess) and then, by 1945, end up with the biggest army the world has ever seen.

Remember: the last example would include 4 years of non-stop hellish warfare.
 
misterbean said:
I would like to see a more realistic difference for each nation. For instance, it is completely impossible to get the kind of stuff that the US build up to 1946.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about IC wise, manpower wise, or in some other way?

I mean, I've won the war and demonstrated it's possible to build the historical USN of WWII (which is beyond what you need to defeat the Axis). I know some people think the manpower is kind of low, but the changes to Day of Infamy in TFH address this.

If you put the game on higher difficulties, it's harder to hit production targets, but that's par for the course in HOI3, isn't it?
 
Secret Master said:
Are you talking about IC wise, manpower wise, or in some other way?

I mean, I've won the war and demonstrated it's possible to build the historical USN of WWII (which is beyond what you need to defeat the Axis). I know some people think the manpower is kind of low, but the changes to Day of Infamy in TFH address this.

If you put the game on higher difficulties, it's harder to hit production targets, but that's par for the course in HOI3, isn't it?
Click to expand...

The US alone build more ships than the rst of the majors combined, they build 97 strat wings, some 70 or so int and MR, 25 arm, 50 mot, and enough convoys/escorts and supplies to keep the entire Alliance going on their own. oh, and at least 1 nuclear test lab. that's what? 75 IC by itself right there?

I always seem to hit a dead end when I try it. I keep coming up short.
 
misterbean said:
The US alone build more ships than the rst of the majors combined, they build 97 strat wings, some 70 or so int and MR, 25 arm, 50 mot, and enough convoys/escorts and supplies to keep the entire Alliance going on their own. oh, and at least 1 nuclear test lab. that's what? 75 IC by itself right there?

I always seem to hit a dead end when I try it. I keep coming up short.
Click to expand...

Well, it's not a complete build plan for the entire war, but this is where I got by 1943. With an effective IC of 535 coupled with heavy industry emphasis, the only real question is whether I run out of manpower.

Even the Soviets can build a respectable military and build a gigantic navy.

These were both under FTM, though. Maybe I should specifically run a US game in TFH and try to hit some production targets. You want me to hit the same naval production targets I did in that previous post, and reach some air force and army targets? How about 300 wings total, and 50 armored divisions (ARM/MOT/whatever)? The cost for armor went up in TFH, so I'm not super confident I could reach it in time (historical V-J day of September 2nd, 1945). This would be under normal (since under very hard, the goal is to give the player less than their historical industrial resources). No CGM (since I could probably do anything under CGM if I disband the entire USN and turn it into IC.)
 
I should have known better than to call you out :)
 
Things I would like to see:
-More details, just like in HPP or BICE mods.
-More ahistorical events, to make it more interesting to play different ways (US on their own, Japan in the Allies, China in the Axis, German successful "Sea Lion" & Kriegsmarine focus)
-More pronunciation on economic aspects of war (oil/steel/tungsten and food where massive problems in the main theater of war, Europe. This would stress the importance of strategical areas with resources like the middle east etc.)
-A complete overhaul of the supply network and a possibility to manipulate it for special needs of the player. For example the possibility to create supply depots and route supply between them. Possibility to create railroads (with an own map mode) between positions and allow better shipping of troops and supply.
-An overhaul of the non-land-warfare to make naval and air combat more important and interesting. It should start with more details, specializes OOB's etc.
-A complete overhaul of the AI to make the game more challenging. AI should make effective use of different units like Paratroopers, Mountaineers as well as effective use of the different types of planes and ships. It would be interesting to teach the AI to make use of naval invasions, to breakthrough etc. It would be interesting to give the AI the possibility to focus on more diverse strategies. Spoken from Germany-Players-view: fighting a UK/France fully focused on land warfare and lacking heavy investments in naval buildup would force you to adapt: efficient spying to see what the enemy is doing and get a reward for a good adjustment on your own. To beat the UK's expeditionary army on the continent should make a "Battle of Britain" or "Sea Lion" easier, as a satisfaction for a harder "Fall of France".
-I don't have a good idea to offer for this, but I would like to mention it anyway: introduction of way to ordered retreat. Needs to be carefully balanced to still allow breakthroughs and encirclements.
-More importance to minor/major allies of the factions. The AI ruins any approach to play "coop" with the AI partners. For example, it's quite rewarding for Germany to conquer a lot more than historical, as the AI units were weak and stupidly used. It's fine if you want to go on your own, but if you want to attract more allies to join your war effort, it should be rewarding, too. Perhaps it should be something like a penalty/bonus for combat efficiency, to simulate the fact that the enemy is facing different enemies with different equipment and tactics. Or to just boost the AI to a certain percent for every new puppet/ally you can drag to your faction. To give it event based OOB's and a more accurate and faster reaction to the "province of interest" set by the player. I saw Italy trying to invade Malta with a small force of unprotected Transports and no bombing/coastal bombardment eg.
-A balance adjustment and "new content" in the way of long going wars past 44/45. Most of the games are over much earlier and balance late war isn't given. Supply system, nukes, the inflexible diplomatic, new technologies like rockets and jet planes: these things aren't working good or aren't really jumps in warfare.

-Better presentation of the game. I like the graphics of EUIV, and an evolution of it with (please smaller) sprites for all the units to zoom in and watch a fight going on would be great. Tactical symbols on overview, sprites on close up, that would be fine. I would love to see the pride of my fleet steaming through the stormy see and firing their heavy artillery. I would like to see my interceptors hunting down enemy bombers and I would like to see the factories or streets ruined when they are bombed to the ground. I'm not talking about FPM graphics, but at least the level of Civilization V (have a look at the RED WWII MOD for an picture of what I mean) would be nice, though still 5 years behind the time.
-A more accessible, more comfortable UI. Have you ever reorganized the Red Army? It's a pain. A better way to sort officers. A better way to show HQ or radar ranges (like the plane mission range). A possibility to retreat/maneuver in units shown combat window. A possibility to auto adjust sliders in more than one focus. A "are you sure" question if you accidentally maneuver units that have nearly reached the next province eg. or planes that are rebased in paused mode to the wrong airfield and can't be redirected.
 
Last edited:
Of course the age old argument of historical vs. plausible vs. sandbox will once again come up for HOI4. SO I would like to see something on the main page where you set up a percentage modifier for how historical you want your game. There are many ways to handle this but somehow let those that want an off the rails game have it and those that want WW2 have it. And various points in between.
 
I don't have specific features in my mind to propose, but the general direction I think the game should take is an improvement in the operational and tactical level with more emphasis given to logistics. We should strive for more realism without having to add more features or lots of micromanagement; it could be done under the surface or be completely optional.
 
misterbean said:
I should have known better than to call you out :)
Click to expand...

Well, like I said, all my old examples were under FTM. In TFH, the cost of armor went up, which necessarily changes everything.

On the other hand, somewhere around this forum is a picture and post where I just spent the entire war building CVs and CLs. I think I nearly hit my goal of 300 CVs (with required CAGs) before the game ended. Someone claimed that it couldn't be done, even with the US, so I set out to do it. By the way, the supply costs for 300 CVs and their CAGs are so high that it means 40% of the GDP of the United States is required to keep them in supply. :wacko:

I was actually serious. If you give me a specific set of production targets, I can try to reach them. I will only say that the historical naval build plans for all nations have a ton of ships that inefficiently utilize practicals, so there comes a point where you end up building things that make no sense in game (like the CAs built by the major naval powers). After all, the USN doesn't need 27 submarine flotillas to fight Japan if you just ensure you have carrier dominance of the Pacific in early 1942. But, they are on the list, so....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back