HOI 4: What do you want to see?

SuiciSpai said:

well, you know, the engine is always developing and the artists (2d/3d) don't code a thing. So why not?

Click to expand...

Because it usually ends up being really bad having blown the whole budget on flashy 3d graphics. And I don't need it. I play these games for complexity, not graphics. Just look how the managed to ruin CIV5. They even dumbed it down. Waited for it for years and then played it for 3 hours and got bored.

- Not less provinces, they are fine.
- More details, more complexity.
- Better naval warfare + air

I would love peace options like: install friendly gov or cede all occupied provinces. The Auto-Hunt rebells mentioned a while ago would be awesome too! And I would love if there was a historical and a ahistorical game where you can make alliances instead of influcencing ppl. to come to yours. So you(Finlland) can say:
"Yo,bro wanna make a finnish swedish alliance?"(it would be called by the one who started the 1.alliances and if he leaves the 2. and so on..).
and if sweden likes you AND sees a benefit in attacking su and thinks they can do this they reply: sure bro!
And if they don't see a chance or have problems or no benefits they are like: Nah, maybe later.

The Auto-Hunt rebells mentioned a while ago would be awesome too!

Click to expand...

Make a custom Theatre, give the AI GARs and some mobile troops (CAVs or MOTs, but if you don't have those, even standard INFs or MILs will do the job) and you will be fine. The player would do better, but it's not sth that is fun, so you can delegate that task to the AI.

Cybvep said:

Make a custom Theatre, give the AI GARs and some mobile troops (CAVs or MOTs, but if you don't have those, even standard INFs or MILs will do the job) and you will be fine. The player would do better, but it's not sth that is fun, so you can delegate that task to the AI.

Click to expand...

Well just pressing a button like in EU4 is way easier than that and if they have it in EU4 they can just use it in HoI4 as long as they share the same eninge

Why do I have to research special equipment for my Militia and Garrison troops? Can't they just use the same stuff as my front-line units, or better yet, the slightly used stuff that my line units traded in to get their latest and greatest toys? Upgrading a unit's gear should cost a LOT more, and the choice should need to be made carefully, not just auto-spam new toys for everyone every 4-5 months. Most countries built stockpiles of equipment before the war, and were still hard-pressed to maintain enough production just to insure that every new recruit had ANYTHING to use. We should be able to research two or three levels, and THEN upgrade once to the new level, not have to make each incremental upgrade sperately; in fact it should be too expensive to upgrade every round for almost all countries.

As for AI, I'm more concerned with the poor political and strategic AI, which leads either to completely "broken" games or a stroll through a totally defenseless opponent's territory, more so than the few quirks and weaknesses with the tactical AI which result in a few easy victories in one theater.

gunstickuncle said:

This may sound ironic, but I am being serious:
Please don't put any effort in better graphics (except scaling) and fancy stuff.
Most of the time we use counters anyway and don't give a damn about the beauty of trees or rivers.
As long as I can see what unit I am moving in what terrain, I will be content.

Click to expand...

I think the production/diplo interface etc could be prettier but overall the map is quite good.

I have trouble with:

1- Vertical strength bar which fails hard at showing strength loss and thus makes some people think aircraft are useless, and not allows to see damage to ships fast

2- Naval battle screen is VERY lame, could use some big improvements, not only on the ships themselves but also graphical effects for damage

3- Counters on the battle screen fail hard because at first glance, all armor divisions look the same, and it´s only when you hover over them that the difference appears. That is, na armored division could be a ARM CAV crappy thing, or a behemoth 2 ARM MECH SPART TD that can chew anything. You can´t tell at a first glance, and with all those battles happening at the same time... you eventually just stop caring who is fighting whom. So besides the counter itself, something else that shows the composition of the division quickly.

aasand said:

Because it usually ends up being really bad having blown the whole budget on flashy 3d graphics. And I don't need it. I play these games for complexity, not graphics. Just look how the managed to ruin CIV5. They even dumbed it down. Waited for it for years and then played it for 3 hours and got bored.

- Not less provinces, they are fine.
- More details, more complexity.
- Better naval warfare + air

Click to expand...

You didnt get the point. If there is a HOI IV, it will use (if its sooner than later) the EU IV engine + some upgrades. Its not from scratch or budget on shiny 3D, paradox have already 2d/3d artist.

HOI 3 engine is the same as EU 4.

Clausewitz.

Beagá said:

HOI 3 engine is the same as EU 4.

Clausewitz.

Click to expand...

Yes but EU4 uses the latest version which has tons of enhancements

It would be nice if we can see supply represented by supply truck that move on the map. so that we can attack enemy supply transport, protect our own, and see when will supply be delivered (instead of always being at the end of day).

Interesting that does explain why Vic 2 and this had some trouble here and there.

Even then I´d prefer both games to use a new dog with few old tricks, not an old dog with few new tricks.

podcat said:

yeah, roughly like this:
V2/Hoi3(tfh) is version 1.5
CK2 - Clausewitz 2
EU4 - Clausewitz 3

These are separate code bases

Click to expand...

Interesting, as although CK2 is far more advanced than HOI & V2, it certainly holds its own with EU4, so presume this is more to do with the game itself than its engine.

podcat said:

yeah, roughly like this:
V2/Hoi3(tfh) is version 1.5
CK2 - Clausewitz 2
EU4 - Clausewitz 3

These are separate code bases

Click to expand...

Wow, so Podcat, your team does actually read this thread! Could you do us a huge favour and let us know if we’re all just wasting our time and breath? I must have spent a good 3 days thinking of and writing up several posts over a year ago for a heap of radically different yet fully thought through ideas, but that was only half of them and after not seeing any developer responses to anyone throughout the entire thread, my fanboyism for this series was eventually overcome with the realisation that I should have utilised my time doing something/anything that may actually come to fruition and actually be constructive, and I think a lot of people here are thinking the same thing, and have refrained from spending the time to write up and post other potentially great ideas that could help make future releases even better. So yeah are you able to say save your breath boys/keep the ideas coming/we’re years away from being able to do anything and are focusing on other projects/or that along the current lines of thinking for a potential HoI4 and progression that no further ideas would be considered etc. And/or if you guys were to ever consider a HoI4, what are some of the biggest design hurdles and what would your team like possible ideas for Eg, battle of the atlantic, is it likely to be abstracted off map, or would you like to get rid of sea regions entirely and how best to achieve this etc? There are so many people on here willing to spend their time coming up with all sorts of solutions that could save your team days/weeks, but just need some direction

The main thing for hoi4 for me would be armour and aircraft numbers represented somehow. Also having division strength better implamented the main disadvantage of mass retreat was losing majority of heavy equipment and vehicles. Two other things that can always be improved on is the supply system and naval combat/conveys.

For HOI4 i think we need more of the same plu something added:

- A good and more realistic weather system. So actually more modifier releated to the weather. Because for how the system for the terrain it's cool, but we also need a weather system. And a casual but reliable one. So actually there could be an Hot October in Russia when you can continue your offensive meanwhile you could have a bad JUNE where for the much rain the terrain becomes unrelabile and you need to stop to attack.
- A supply system between the arcade and the new one, because the idea it's great, but it's not working good enough. Something like not based on the province that the supplies needs to be transported, but more on the distance. And the system picks up always the best choiche taking ports and land cost in account. ( actually you could make that the player can assign also a province to stock from there all the supplies, so it's like if he lost for some reason that province, he is going to loose much fuel and supply).. like a mobile HQ.
- More way to support multiplayer like the possibility to JOIN AN EXISTING GAME, without the need to rehost and all the players to rejoin. Because if the host needs to give the save to actually have all the players starting with the same save, actually you could do, that the host stop the game, then he transfer the save of the stop to the player, and then the player can join the lobby. I don't understand why you need to force all the player to leave the game, and then rehost. and it's so fucking frustating.
- Good charts ( we have now, but they are bugged )
- Good chat. And not the 80'.
- The possibilty to have an highscore of how you have performed. And the possibility to edit and create scenario from the players for the players.

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned or not, but it would be great if you can retire commanders and reactivate them if need be.

I would like the ability to set a maximum strength, as a percentage of full strength, for all air and land units. So, if I desire a unit to have 1800 men per brigade rather than 3000, I can just set it to 60% rather than trying to watch many units and wait until those are worn down--then risking shattering due to low strength.

Why, you ask? Well, sparing manpower is one good reason. Also, something that might be more important is the reduction of required supplies. It is possible to develop an army with experience levels so high as to allow strength to be at 50% of normal. There are times that larger number of formations are needed rather than full strength units.

As the game is I can just shut off replacements for ground units. This works well enough in the early stages. However, if the war drags on, it becomes impossible to watch all the units so as to turn on replacements before destruction.