Biggest issues when playing hoi

ArcticFox · 30-07-2007, 12:45

This is just a list of issues that complicates the game needlessly imo and how I consider they can be resolved in hoi3. Please note I´m just rambling without thinking too much about the problems/solutions. Also: please do ramble in here yourself

COMBAT
All units behave the same, meaning the combat principles are based on landcombat. The solution: break up everything and introduce various sets of rules. Naval versus naval, naval versus air, air versus air etc.
For instance get in a general hit percentage and damage for battleships and chances for a critical hit. Battleships didn´t always get in heavy hits, mostly it´s just hits on the armour belt or superstructure causing fires and havoc. And occasionally you could get in a real boom that crippled a ship. Look at Bismarck: PoW got in some hits but it didn´t do much except ruin a boiler room that cut Bismarcks trip short. In hoi2 PoW versus Bismarck would result in the ships going down to 30-50% health or one of them even sinks. Blah!
Same goes for carriers, their planes didn´t always get through and the bombs that did hit just caused a fire and some damage that could be patched up relatively quick. In hoi2 again: cv versus cv will result in both carriers being muy low on health... blah! (again). This would also help with subs: low chance to hit something but when they do: zomg! Necessary with this concept is of course number of shots a unit has. Subs: few (but high percentage on unprotected convoys) and battleships many many shots (but not infinte based on org like it is now.)
Would also be nice to introduce systems. A ship has a hull (enough damage to it and it will sink) propulsion (enough damage cripple a ship) guns (enough damage and poof: you´re toothless) or flightdeck (self explanatory) and systems (radar, communications and so forth. Damage: less combat efficiency)

EDIT - an example of specialised unit stats.

Unit - HMS King George V, bb4tech
vs BB/BC attack: 3 @ 30%
critical: 15-25 @ 2%
vs CA/CL attack: 9 @ 10% (one hit would basically blow it out of the water or atleast cripple it)
critical 15-25 @ 10% (definite destruction)

and so on... you get the idea.

MAP
The whole province deal is just contrived. "Layers" like in photoshop would help. Sure keep provinces and their IC and whatnot. But have a dynamic battlemap over it where opposing corps decide the frontline or something. Attack a litte at a time: less org wasted. Take a chance and order a long drive into the enemy: risky but highly effective if successful. And once a full province in the province layer is behind the front line: switches ownership! "Simple" as that

INDUSTRY
It seriously needs to be divided up. Consumer goods, Army, Airplane factories, Naval yards.

UNITS/RESEARCH
Customisation is the key. Go for a well armoured and fast battleship with short range (HMS King George V anyone?) or a well armed/armoured long range one at higher cost (Bismarck anyone?)
Same for tanks: better more expensive ones (Panzers) or mediocre and dirt-cheap ones (Shermans... sorry Yanks: but come on they sucked)

COMBAT OPTIONS
MOAR! As is you have absolutely no possibilities to play the very important convoy battles. More management? Bah, not at all. Instead of just having the AI set to "launch your bb fleet for no good reason" you can have them fight for a dang reason instead! Same goes for you: instead of just generally patrolling looking for a fight you assign... say a squadron of the home fleet to escort an important convoy (Malta anyone?)

ORGANISATION
This is also muy important. Keeping track of your all your units is just.... *ugh! Introduce a screen where you can from armies/fleets/air commands and assign leaders & corps and whatnot. Just the whole pgup/pgdown deal isn´t working well since it´s based on ID number. In turn the ID number is based on the latest grouping so you go: ship, ship, air group, corps which is seriously difficult to use.

OK that´s what I had to say... christ this is my most poorly written and organised post ever.

{LD}Firestorm · 31-07-2007, 05:12

Well, I got a 'solution' to provinceless combat, theoretically.

Hellfish's provinceless combat ideas are good, but for resource control and contruction, couldnt you still have 'provinces' (which would be seen under a diferent map view, sorta like resources, weather, partisan, ect. is right now, occupying more then 75% of the province gives you control of the resources + ic?

DanDaMan · 31-07-2007, 08:46

Put resource and IC production as specific points on the map, where the mines and factories are. If the specific point is inside your control, then you control it. Same for AA, air bases, radar, and all the other things. Forts should be lines built along rivers, borders, or player drawn points. Populations can be represented as specific values for each city as well as a density gradient over provinces.

I think oil refining should be included or abstracted in some way. You can't run modern ships on crude oil. This was a big deal for Japan. I also wouldn't mind realistic units. 52 389 000 dollars means more to me than 97 units of money. Same for other resources.

ArcticFox · 31-07-2007, 12:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by {LD}Firestorm

Well, I got a 'solution' to provinceless combat, theoretically.

Hellfish's provinceless combat ideas are good, but for resource control and contruction, couldnt you still have 'provinces' (which would be seen under a diferent map view, sorta like resources, weather, partisan, ect. is right now, occupying more then 75% of the province gives you control of the resources + ic?

Sorry I wrote this so fast: that´s what I meant by "photoshop layers". The provinces are still there. Once a frontline on the "clear" map moves a province switches ownership!

Also one more suggestion:

ALL UNITS NEED NOT BE UNITS!
I´ve seen requests for patrolboats and the like. Those are units are too small for a game like HOI and adds to unnecessary micro management. Instead: give us a possibility to construct something like patrol bases (both naval and aerial) which gives a circular range of patrol and you can spot ships and planes and whatnot by just haveing the patrol base. This idea that not all units need be units can be further built upon in a pretty simple way as I see it. Garrissons as "non-units" would be a really nice welcome too.

DanDaMan · 31-07-2007, 21:09

I think that air bases should have the option of automatically flying recon missions to see what the enemy is up to.

Balesir · 01-08-2007, 13:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcticFox

ALL UNITS NEED NOT BE UNITS!
I´ve seen requests for patrolboats and the like. Those are units are too small for a game like HOI and adds to unnecessary micro management. Instead: give us a possibility to construct something like patrol bases (both naval and aerial) which gives a circular range of patrol and you can spot ships and planes and whatnot by just haveing the patrol base. This idea that not all units need be units can be further built upon in a pretty simple way as I see it. Garrissons as "non-units" would be a really nice welcome too.

I'm not sure that this should mean they are not 'units' (what is a 'patrol base' if it's not a unit?), but several things could be handled by a 'radius' or 'area' effect rather than a wandering horde of aircraft or whatever, I think. I just posted to another thread (about MTBs etc.) that all 'patrol' or 'opportunistic' mission types where small patrols scouted about and were directed onto identified targets by each other or by controllers could be represented by 'area of effect' effects rather than having the unit itself wander about.

30-07-2007, 12:45	#1
ArcticFox BB lover Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: province #97 Posts: 537	Biggest issues when playing hoi This is just a list of issues that complicates the game needlessly imo and how I consider they can be resolved in hoi3. Please note I´m just rambling without thinking too much about the problems/solutions. Also: please do ramble in here yourself COMBAT All units behave the same, meaning the combat principles are based on landcombat. The solution: break up everything and introduce various sets of rules. Naval versus naval, naval versus air, air versus air etc. For instance get in a general hit percentage and damage for battleships and chances for a critical hit. Battleships didn´t always get in heavy hits, mostly it´s just hits on the armour belt or superstructure causing fires and havoc. And occasionally you could get in a real boom that crippled a ship. Look at Bismarck: PoW got in some hits but it didn´t do much except ruin a boiler room that cut Bismarcks trip short. In hoi2 PoW versus Bismarck would result in the ships going down to 30-50% health or one of them even sinks. Blah! Same goes for carriers, their planes didn´t always get through and the bombs that did hit just caused a fire and some damage that could be patched up relatively quick. In hoi2 again: cv versus cv will result in both carriers being muy low on health... blah! (again). This would also help with subs: low chance to hit something but when they do: zomg! Necessary with this concept is of course number of shots a unit has. Subs: few (but high percentage on unprotected convoys) and battleships many many shots (but not infinte based on org like it is now.) Would also be nice to introduce systems. A ship has a hull (enough damage to it and it will sink) propulsion (enough damage cripple a ship) guns (enough damage and poof: you´re toothless) or flightdeck (self explanatory) and systems (radar, communications and so forth. Damage: less combat efficiency) EDIT - an example of specialised unit stats. Unit - HMS King George V, bb4tech vs BB/BC attack: 3 @ 30% critical: 15-25 @ 2% vs CA/CL attack: 9 @ 10% (one hit would basically blow it out of the water or atleast cripple it) critical 15-25 @ 10% (definite destruction) and so on... you get the idea. MAP The whole province deal is just contrived. "Layers" like in photoshop would help. Sure keep provinces and their IC and whatnot. But have a dynamic battlemap over it where opposing corps decide the frontline or something. Attack a litte at a time: less org wasted. Take a chance and order a long drive into the enemy: risky but highly effective if successful. And once a full province in the province layer is behind the front line: switches ownership! "Simple" as that INDUSTRY It seriously needs to be divided up. Consumer goods, Army, Airplane factories, Naval yards. UNITS/RESEARCH Customisation is the key. Go for a well armoured and fast battleship with short range (HMS King George V anyone?) or a well armed/armoured long range one at higher cost (Bismarck anyone?) Same for tanks: better more expensive ones (Panzers) or mediocre and dirt-cheap ones (Shermans... sorry Yanks: but come on they sucked) COMBAT OPTIONS MOAR! As is you have absolutely no possibilities to play the very important convoy battles. More management? Bah, not at all. Instead of just having the AI set to "launch your bb fleet for no good reason" you can have them fight for a dang reason instead! Same goes for you: instead of just generally patrolling looking for a fight you assign... say a squadron of the home fleet to escort an important convoy (Malta anyone?) ORGANISATION This is also muy important. Keeping track of your all your units is just.... ugh! Introduce a screen where you can from armies/fleets/air commands and assign leaders & corps and whatnot. Just the whole pgup/pgdown deal isn´t working well since it´s based on ID number. In turn the ID number is based on the latest grouping so you go: ship, ship, air group, corps which is seriously difficult to use. OK that´s what I had to say... christ this is my most poorly written and organised post ever. __________________ Member of the Ahistoric Association Last edited by ArcticFox; 30-07-2007 at 12:52.*

31-07-2007, 05:12	#2
{LD}Firestorm Defender of Democracy Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Alberta, Canada Posts: 1,290	Well, I got a 'solution' to provinceless combat, theoretically. Hellfish's provinceless combat ideas are good, but for resource control and contruction, couldnt you still have 'provinces' (which would be seen under a diferent map view, sorta like resources, weather, partisan, ect. is right now, occupying more then 75% of the province gives you control of the resources + ic?

31-07-2007, 08:46	#3
DanDaMan Colonel Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 940	Put resource and IC production as specific points on the map, where the mines and factories are. If the specific point is inside your control, then you control it. Same for AA, air bases, radar, and all the other things. Forts should be lines built along rivers, borders, or player drawn points. Populations can be represented as specific values for each city as well as a density gradient over provinces. I think oil refining should be included or abstracted in some way. You can't run modern ships on crude oil. This was a big deal for Japan. I also wouldn't mind realistic units. 52 389 000 dollars means more to me than 97 units of money. Same for other resources.

31-07-2007, 21:09	#5
DanDaMan Colonel Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 940	I think that air bases should have the option of automatically flying recon missions to see what the enemy is up to.