HOI 4: What do you want to see?

Cybvep said:

When and where did he say that?

Click to expand...

He was talking about the three projects that they will be announcing at their upcomming Paradox conference. He went on to say:
"One of the projects is something that people say 'I know you were going to do that' ".

They also then announced that the next version of HOI would follow CK DLC strategies.

And finally PODCAT is working on one of the next projects.

Taken all together that is why I've said they "basically" already announced that HOI4 will be one of the next 3 projects.

My dream for HoI4 -- a pipe dream that probably has zero chance of being implemented, I admit -- would be to have a game in which warfare had to be waged and organized at a truly OPERATIONAL level.

In other words, you would have to mount true Operations (and get to name them as such) -- e.g. Barbarossa, Torch, Overlord, etc. etc. -- against your enemy. No more just attacking whenever and however and wherever you please. You could use the nifty 'battle planner' to plot out your operations. You would have to set objectives -- cities/territories to capture by certain dates, within a definite time-frame. You would have to build up supply and resources to a critical level before the operation could be launched. Once the allotted supply runs out (the time-frame limit for the operation would essentially be defined by this), your operation will come grinding to a halt -- *crippling* maluses to mobility and attack strength, thus making continued advances nearly impossible, *unless* you were able to access a limited strategic reserve (of troops/supplies) that you would have to keep in strict reserve from the start of the operation.

Logistics would be an absolutely critical -- the most critical, maybe -- factor. Supply, weather, and lines of communication would make all the difference in operational success or failure.

This means the war would be (as in the real war) defined by periods of intense operational activity followed by lulls -- not just constant attacking from 1939-1945.

As someone who LOVES the ability to put generals under AI control -- even with all the shortcomings of this as currently implemented (not a shot at Pdox, just an acknolwedgment that AI control could be improved -- I think the AI control would be perfect for the Operational scope of the game. You could do your best to plot the Operation, set the OOB and pick the generals in charge, get your supply built up -- but once the operation is launched, it's up to your AI generals -- probably at the Corps level -- to carry out their objectives. Some may have (bad) ideas of their own -- some may be too aggressive, others too conservative, in trying to take their objectives. Maybe you would want to sack a certain general, but there would be a serious organizational cost to doing so.

Anyway, this is my dream, an OPERATIONAL HoI. How hard something like this would be to program, I can only imagine. But it would be awesome if pulled off.

Your talking about a Strategic level game with Operational level components. I think its something that would have to be moddable for two reasons....1) They wouldnt invest the time and resources necessary into making it i dont believe, because i dont think it would necessarily increase their return. So its risk vs reward. And 2) piggy backing on #1 i think it would not endear itself to the casual gamer whom simply want to build units and conquer nations. I think they are the majority while we hardcore historians and wagamers for life are the minority.

It´s not impossible to do operational scale games, but then it would have to be theather, maybe even locally focused. Playing Germany on such a scale would be impossible or, well, force to give AI control and watch it instead of actually playing it.

21oliver said:

Your talking about a Strategic level game with Operational level components.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is a better way of putting it.

21oliver said:

I think its something that would have to be moddable for two reasons....1) They wouldnt invest the time and resources necessary into making it i dont believe, because i dont think it would necessarily increase their return. So its risk vs reward. And 2) piggy backing on #1 i think it would not endear itself to the casual gamer whom simply want to build units and conquer nations. I think they are the majority while we hardcore historians and wagamers for life are the minority.

Click to expand...

I think you're right that something like this is unlikely for HoI4, although IMO it would improve the game immensely (even though HoI is already a great franchise). I'm not sure I agree with your second point, though. The majority of PC gamers may indeed just want to build units and conquer, but I'm not sure that's Pdox's audience. When you think about how much of a leap -- in terms of sophistication -- HoI3 was over HoI2, it becomes clear that Pdox thinks pretty highly of its core audience. Just the implementation of a more detailed OOB in HoI3, as opposed to previous versions where you just had any number of units stacked and controlled by a general, is an indication that Pdox trusts its players to handle somewhat advanced military concepts.

In the end I don't think I'm proposing (or wishing for, more accurately) anything beyond what the typical HoI player already can handle. The game already incorporates aspects of supply, logistics, infranstructure etc. I think an Operational dimension could be a reasonable next step in added complexity.

Beagá said:

Playing Germany on such a scale would be impossible or, well, force to give AI control and watch it instead of actually playing it.

Click to expand...

I don't see that it would be impossible at all. Having to plan Operations means you'd have to make hard decisions about the *limits* of your capacity to wage war. You wouldn't be able to attack on all fronts whenever you choose (as you pretty much can do at present in HoI). I actually think it would make the scope of the game *more* manageable, not less.

But again, I *like* using the AI control feature, usually at the Corps level. I like the feeling of controlling what the objectives are, but having to depend on your generals to carry it out. I think it also 'levels the playing field' a bit against your AI opponent, which is to say, gives the human player a needed handicap against a limited AI opponent so as to make the game more challenging.

I think they feel they are stretching it already. I believe most gamers would prefer to sit down in an hour and play a game. As it is HOI3 takes likely several...to scale it down even further you may be talking several days to play a game. Now your looking for a small piece of the market place. While some of us would love the detail its probably not the wisest of marketing moves. The game is intentionally balanced and modified for game ease and play as it is, which is why most of us hardcore historians/gamers have so many issues with it. I have said numerous times, the game really isnt designed for us, we simply play it because its the best available atm for us. the game is designed for the average gamer. Far too much of the game isnt accurate or detailed enough to suit most of our needs. I think we have to simply be happy with the new eye candy each expansion and / or turn to mods, or simply live with it.

Not sure I agree with the above. Just look at EU4. That still takes many days to finish. Same for CK2.

Warspite_TW said:

And you really expect that two AI nations will be capable of ever signing such a peace treaty? And if they ever did, the outcome will be hilarious at best.

Click to expand...

It works in EU, CK, Vicky and Rome ect...

I'd like to see a separation of the 'rare materials' resource into rubber and rare metals; I think the resource dispersion throughout the world would be a lot more logical if that distinction was made (ie: rare metals in some parts of northern Scandinavia, Australia and South America whilst rubber would be in abundance in South East Asia and parts of Africa for instance)..

jju_57 said:

Not sure I agree with the above. Just look at EU4. That still takes many days to finish. Same for CK2.

Click to expand...

Not really, EU 4 is a game you can play quite fast - and above all, on your own. You can only play HOI 3 THAT fast, with any major, with AI control.

21oliver said:

I think they feel they are stretching it already.

Click to expand...

I sincerely hope Pdox doesn't think this! I see frequent complaints about how EUIV has 'dumbed down' that series -- and there is some validity to that. But I sincerely hope Pdox doesn't remove from a hypothetical HoI4 any of the innovations they introduced in HoI3 in the hope of giving the game a broader appeal.

Or at least, I hope they don't simplify the military aspects of the game in any way. But I think many of the 'national administration' mechanics need a serious overhaul. Things like tying national dissent to production of consumer goods -- this is just silly and I would love to see it done away with entirely. The Industry, Politics, Intelligence components of HoI have never really worked well, or at least, worked well enough to be *fun* -- they are always just a chore to deal with, IMO. Intelligence needs to be made a much more important part of the game, not just a trivial 'send spy to X country' mechanic. Politics can be ignored almost entirely (as can Intelligence). Research has become tedious and predictable and needs to be approached from a new angle --- it must be possible to envision something beyond the "tech tree" approach that has dominated 4x games ever since Civilization 2!!

In short, for HoI4, I would love for the military side to be made even deeper, and for the non-military side to be freshly (and radically) redesigned for the better...

In all honesty i think its likely well see a few cosmetic / eye candy additions with maybe one innovative feature and that will be it. And in the end, it really doesnt matter much. The issues go to the very heart of the game, it likely will never change as it would require essentially a new game being designed. So we will play it until something better rolls our way....

The Operational Idea is exactly what I would like to see too.
It wouldn't mean a too complex style, nor would it make the player inactive just watching.
The gameplay would be different from previous HoI of course.
You would more act on a higher tier of command and not shuffle Divisions around but give orders where to engage. While the Divs would be still the smalest units.
Pimping the current "Operation Painter" to a "operational planning tool" like I sugested already in some other wish thread, it would be possible to give commands to attacks/defending actions with just a click..
There is not that much extra code needed. But It would change drastically the way waging war would feel for the player.
Adding the possibilty to override the ai(switchbox) would also give possibility to still direct forces directly.

Beagá said:

Not really, EU 4 is a game you can play quite fast - and above all, on your own. You can only play HOI 3 THAT fast, with any major, with AI control.

Click to expand...

A completely hands off game still takes over 40 hours from start to finish on most systems. 450 years x 365 days at 1 second per day.

My opinion in the end none of this matters until they randomize more and remove some of the hard scripting. Nothing is going to make the game overly enjoyable as long as i know everything the AI is going to do, when, where and with what units. Hell Id be happy to keep the game as is if i could get that changed.

21oliver said:

My opinion in the end none of this matters until they randomize more and remove some of the hard scripting. Nothing is going to make the game overly enjoyable as long as i know everything the AI is going to do, when, where and with what units. Hell Id be happy to keep the game as is if i could get that changed.

Click to expand...

Use peterhoi3's ai mod.
Thats vanilla with improved production ai.. quite a difference already..

I had it once, i didnt play it much, i heard good things about it. Its mostly about improved US production right? My concern is mostly the heavy scripting leads to predictable behavior, for me there is no way around that being boring as hell. Everytime the Czechs fight or Croatia is created its like Christmas for me, because finally its something different.

Not many people play hoi for randomness tbh.

Eu4 or vicky 2 is better for that.

It's a wargame not a sandbox alt timeline game so leave it as is.

When i say randomness i dont necessarily mean sandbox. I mean plausible. Its a bit ridiculous say as the Soviets, i can delete my entire military, because i know exactly when and where the Axis will attack, i know pretty much exactly how much time i have to rebuild, and i know that no other nation will ever jump across my empty borders.

Replaying exactly how the war took place as many people here do, i just dont see it. Its still not historical, there are way too many elements missing or misrepresented, so any illusion that "i beat the Soviets when Hitler couldnt" is purely that, an illusion. In fact i cant remember any other game where i knew in so much detail everything that was going to happen before hand. Thats why you see so many players after awhile playing such off beat scenarios, like trying to take over the world as a minor.

If you play mostly MP as it seems you do then you dont necessarily have to deal with it as much as the human element is the biggest randomizer going. Sooner or later youll play opponents that will simply do things you dont expect, and youll be challenged and forced to react, and it will be a test of your skills.

There are many players whom want a total sandbox, im not one of them but i have often said it seems most players play Norm or VH, so maybe the game would be better suited with historical/plausible/sandbox modes instead.

21oliver said:

When i say randomness i dont necessarily mean sandbox. I mean plausible. Its a bit ridiculous say as the Soviets, i can delete my entire military, because i know exactly when and where the Axis will attack, i know pretty much exactly how much time i have to rebuild, and i know that no other nation will ever jump across my empty borders.

Replaying exactly how the war took place as many people here do, i just dont see it. Its still not historical, there are way too many elements missing or misrepresented, so any illusion that "i beat the Soviets when Hitler couldnt" is purely that, an illusion. In fact i cant remember any other game where i knew in so much detail everything that was going to happen before hand. Thats why you see so many players after awhile playing such off beat scenarios, like trying to take over the world as a minor.

If you play mostly MP as it seems you do then you dont necessarily have to deal with it as much as the human element is the biggest randomizer going. Sooner or later youll play opponents that will simply do things you dont expect, and youll be challenged and forced to react, and it will be a test of your skills.

There are many players whom want a total sandbox, im not one of them but i have often said it seems most players play Norm or VH, so maybe the game would be better suited with historical/plausible/sandbox modes instead.

Click to expand...

so you basicly want to force the player to make the dumb mistakes.

like engaging the RAF over england, or stoping army group center?