Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

**Suggestion thread:** What would you like to see in a patch 1.3?

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.
Show only dev responses
Leobama Bama

Leobama Bama

Captain
29 Badges
Apr 25, 2011
331
23
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria: Revolutions
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • For the Motherland
  • For The Glory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Darkest Hour
  • Commander: Conquest of the Americas
  • Europa Universalis III: Chronicles
  • Arsenal of Democracy
  • Cities in Motion
  • Shadowrun Returns
  • Steel Division: Normand 44 Sign-up
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • 500k Club
  • Victoria 2
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Lead and Gold
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Crusader Kings II: The Old Gods
  • Crusader Kings II: Sons of Abraham
  • Crusader Kings II: Sword of Islam
Now that 1.2 is finally out and seems to be working well (a few things to change) I don't want this to become a disorganized free-for-all.What I am going to do instead is lay down some rules(including the forum ones)

1 Only three suggestions per post, plus an optional fourth suggestion for the interface (since interface suggestions are typically smaller jobs)
2 Please put these three or four suggestions in bullet points to make it easy to read.
3 You cannot make more than one suggestion post. If you think of another thing and you haven't used your three, edit it into your original post.
4 You can suggest something that has already been suggested; this is sort of a voting thread, not just nomination.
5 You can repost something from the wishlist thread.
 
I'll just post my all time top three wishes as 1.3 is in the pipelines

  • Loss statistics
  • Post 1945/Cold war support
  • A less IC-centric game. Countries with no or little IC henceforth better reflected (crucial in a post 1945 context). Different appraoces to this must be discussed
  • As for the interface, I want more graphics. Explosions, splashes, searhlights, carpet bombings, ship sinkings etc.
 
Last edited:
Loss statistics
Post 1945/Cold war support
A less IC-centric game. Countries with no or little IC henceforth better reflected (crucial in a post 1945 context). Different appraoces to this must be discussed
Click to expand...
All fine points IMO.

Additionally...

- more realistic MP system, so no more unlimited pilots or paratroopers
- better convoy system, so that ports do not have unlimited capacity and that sinking convoys means that resources get sunk, too
- reduce micromanagement when possible (HOI3-style "reserve" order, mission queue, tech queue, more customisable automated sliders etc.)
- improve logistics; seriously, the current system is very arcade in nature
 
Deffinitely loss statistics similar to the one in AoD. (Loss notifications in the battle end message (we lost x soldiers, they lost y), and the general losses per country in the ledger.)
 
Pannonius said:
Deffinitely loss statistics similar to the one in AoD. (Loss notifications in the battle end message (we lost x soldiers, they lost y), and the general losses per country in the ledger.)
Click to expand...
Great Idea, but the devs said they'd only implement this if they could get it absolutely perfect (in realism terms).
-1945,1944 and 1916 scenarios with events
-More events to cater for ahistorical scenarios like a post successful 1944 bomb plot Germany etc.
 
BeardedHoplite said:
-An interbellum scenario
-More icons for units (or integrate Kazoo's stuff, maybe...)
-More generic events
Click to expand...

Francesco's models will be included in the next patch
 
-more political depth: parties, elections, alliances
-A link between 1914 scenario, AAR and 1936 ones
-Cold war extension with political and diplomatic struggle, instead of warfare
 
1. Much more TECH to research. The amount of Tech available to research and apply to AoD was one of it's greatest assets !

2. A better inter-war scenario.

3. i forget what it was called, but that slider for the province building was very cool in AOD. I never know what my progress on province building is in DH.
 
Last edited:
Easy1 said:
* A less IC-centric game. Countries with no or little IC henceforth better reflected (crucial in a post 1945 context). Different appraoces to this must be discussed
Click to expand...
I strongly disagree to change the game concept, at least until ww2 is over. Hoi2/DH is more or less a war simulator and minors didn't play an important role in it.
 
I don't know if that's possible, but shortcut for

- selecting only inft units
-selecting commando units
-selecting armor/mech/mot units only.

Would make menaging 60 div stack easier to menage and would make mp game more fluent.

Forgot to add,

make panzer divisions really scarry and strong, right now their only advantage is speed, in HoI 3 you could feel really that they are your fist made of steel.

Another addition:

If possible to code. Very usefull idea.

On economic map, if IC in a province is below 75% make it yellow

50% orange

under 25% red.
 
Last edited:
Westphalian said:
I strongly disagree to change the game concept, at least until ww2 is over. Hoi2/DH is more or less a war simulator and minors didn't play an important role in it.
Click to expand...

A less IC-centric game doesn't mean the game concept needs to be changed. Its more about balancing the role of IC when it comes to creating armies, which in turn will make a more realistic game. Less industrialized countries like China and Soviet are the ones most affected by the current system, not minors. The IC centricity is not only something that affects minors and less industralized countries either. It is simply not realistic that let's say France or the US will have a bigger army in 1940 if they started building it in 1930. They can have as big an army if they start building it in 1938, but it will not be as professional and not have the same amount of equipment.

As for the size of an army, it is IRL only limited by the size of the population and political matters, not industry. The accumulation of quantity is the flawish system that comes with a game that is based too much on heavy industry.

Several meassures can be taken to balance the dominance of IC

  • Dividing IC into several qualities (light, heavy etc.). Most regions will have IC and all of them can produce bullets and rifles if not tanks and battleships.
  • Including more resources (food). The dependency upon IC for upkeeping an army declines.
  • Make selling and giving away of military material possible. Less industrialized countries can have the material they historically had and never themselves had the industrial capacity to produce
  • Dividing manpower into several qualities (unprofessional/conscrpited, professional etc.). Magnifies the trade off between quality and quantity - quantity can be produced at the price of quality for less industrilized countries
  • Splitting material and men. The economic burden of creating armies is relativized and hence balanced
 
As for the size of an army, it is IRL only limited by the size of the population and political matters, not industry.
Click to expand...
Yes, but this only concerns low- to medium-quality infantry, not tanks, aircraft, artillery etc. Also, many minor countries received much equipment from one of the major powers IRL (Spain, China, Romania, Hungary etc.), so it can be misleading to just look at their army size and say "Hey, I should be able to have so many divisions, too!" without taking context into account.

Moreover, IRL a balanced ratio of workers-to-soldiers was extremely important.
 
Cybvep said:
Yes, but this only concerns low- to medium-quality infantry, not tanks, aircraft, artillery etc. Also, many minor countries received much equipment from one of the major powers IRL (Spain, China, Romania, Hungary etc.), so it can be misleading to just look at their army size and say "Hey, I should be able to have so many divisions, too!" without taking context into account.

Moreover, IRL a balanced ratio of workers-to-soldiers was extremely important.
Click to expand...

Yes, the quantity of all material that needs heavy industry to materialize is of course limited by heavy industry. That is not however true for men simply armed with a rifle and a handfull of bullets.

As I said, selling and giving away of military material is something that would make the dependency upon IC smaller, most importantly for countries that did not have much of it.

The worker vs solder ratio is indeed very important. Key to reflect this is a proper homefront economy. This is a different matter though
 
My 2 cents in ww2 food was seen as strategic resource, heck it was one of the reason why Barbarossa started.

To don't get into details (about murdering 30 millions civilians with famine, which was planned if Barbarossa was sucesful), after Bitter Peace there should be a colossal dissent hit in german occupied provinces on the east.
 
Easy1 said:
Yes, the quantity of all material that needs heavy industry to materialize is of course limited by heavy industry. That is not however true for men simply armed with a rifle and a handfull of bullets.

As I said, selling and giving away of military material is something that would make the dependency upon IC smaller, most importantly for countries that did not have much of it.

The worker vs solder ratio is indeed very important. Key to reflect this is a proper homefront economy. This is a different matter though
Click to expand...
The point is that it should be rather easy to mobilise vast numbers of militia and low quality infantry when necessary, but it should be difficult to bring them to full strength and supply them with modern equipment (artillery, AT guns, armoured cars, mortars, grenades, submachineguns etc.). Vicky2-style mobilisation system could work well here, as the player/AI would be able to "spawn" many units at once (without additional brigades) with low strength and very low ORG. Building things like tanks, aircraft or ships would be a completely different story, though.
 
Loss statistics and that's all I can think of right now.
 
- the ability to lose a claim (when you want to release a puppet there)
- loss statistics per war and per time (example you lost a hundred thousand man and 2500 tanks in august 1942 against the soviet union)
- timeline with important events
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back