Here's hoping that radar will get a better treatment in HoI 3.
Nah, he'll just come up with an extremely detailed game where you can name every soldier's grandma. And it will be great - if you can spare the time.
-
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.
well, Tibet is only designed for being annexed right? who cares. it got too many manpower either.
Here's hoping that radar will get a better treatment in HoI 3.
Hear! Hear! Radar was an absolute critical element of the naval and air campaigns in WW2.
Some people are very detail oriented. Much more than I.
The naval ships 3D sprites look great! They are now on my desktop background on the PC. I can hardly wait until late 2009 when the game is released. Congrats on the team's hard and excellent work so far on this. Also, thank you for giving us info. in the development diary during the whole development process. It is much appreciated.
Last edited:
Why?
Although older, Hood has significant advantages over G and S, notably in hitting power and gunnery tech. In terms of armour, belt thickness for Hood was 5-12", G and S had 5-13" and turret armour`was pretty much the same. The only appreciable armour advantage was deck armour, with the Hood managing only half the thickness of the German ships.
Unlike the tried and tested powerplant of Hood, the German ships were constantly bedevilled by their high pressure steam installation, and inadequate bunkerage meant poorer range. The decision to arm them with 280mm rather than 380mm was not a political decision: German industry simply could not produce the 380mm guns at the time.
Personally, I'd back Hood against either of them. The fact that both G and S ran away from the much weaker Renown in 1940 in a snowstorm (which would have evened the range odds) may be an indicator.
K
Wow, great preview. Very nice improvements for naval combat indeed. Love the new upgrade system
One thing I'd ask for: in recent Hoi2 versions, esp. in Arma many naval engagements are often extremely short (subs are often wiped out in no time, same with small ship - mostly ASW - groups meeting SAGs or CTFs). This should IMO be changed somewhat. Small groups could be given a chance to escape (depending on techs, leaders, doctrines, ship model) when being attacked by superior forces, esp. when they are subs, or have a clear speed advantage (DD vs. old capital ships).
Since the OP mentioned the aspect of different detection levels, and that a fleet can "force" its "shadow" into combat, I wonder how this will be balanced, and what exactly influences if the patrol group gets enganged by the fleet it is following.
One thing I'd ask for: in recent Hoi2 versions, esp. in Arma many naval engagements are often extremely short (subs are often wiped out in no time, same with small ship - mostly ASW - groups meeting SAGs or CTFs). This should IMO be changed somewhat. Small groups could be given a chance to escape (depending on techs, leaders, doctrines, ship model) when being attacked by superior forces, esp. when they are subs, or have a clear speed advantage (DD vs. old capital ships).
Since the OP mentioned the aspect of different detection levels, and that a fleet can "force" its "shadow" into combat, I wonder how this will be balanced, and what exactly influences if the patrol group gets enganged by the fleet it is following.
Is it really so important if the Hood were BC 2 or 3?
Especially in the case that we won't have these models anymore in HoI3
I don't know exactly the historical stats of these ships but i am quite sure it won't be possible to simulate them with 100% accuracy in a game...
So who cares on such details?
I think it is very more important that the differents of the ships will be used in the game to simulate the outcomes of battles.
If speed will influence the result of a battle, speed should be in!
If max range will influence it must be in etc.
But i am quite sure some details like the colour of the painted whore in front of cannon 3 is black or blue won't influence battle results...so who cares?
Especially in the case that we won't have these models anymore in HoI3
I don't know exactly the historical stats of these ships but i am quite sure it won't be possible to simulate them with 100% accuracy in a game...
So who cares on such details?
I think it is very more important that the differents of the ships will be used in the game to simulate the outcomes of battles.
If speed will influence the result of a battle, speed should be in!
If max range will influence it must be in etc.
But i am quite sure some details like the colour of the painted whore in front of cannon 3 is black or blue won't influence battle results...so who cares?
Is it really so important if the Hood were BC 2 or 3?
Especially in the case that we won't have these models anymore in HoI3
I don't know exactly the historical stats of these ships but i am quite sure it won't be possible to simulate them with 100% accuracy in a game...
So who cares on such details?
I think it is very more important that the differents of the ships will be used in the game to simulate the outcomes of battles.
If speed will influence the result of a battle, speed should be in!
If max range will influence it must be in etc.
But i am quite sure some details like the colour of the painted whore in front of cannon 3 is black or blue won't influence battle results...so who cares?
Deck armor is important
Side armor is important
Quality of guns is important (some of them might be shoot no more than 50 times)
As i said, whatever influenced the result of a battle should be in and i am quite sure these points will be in as air defens sea-defense and possible sub/torpedo-defense...
The quality of guns i doubt cannot be simulated as ship-stats.
I think this be be one point in the naval research tree
So better quality guns could give a X% bonus in battle as it is simulated with the commando-skill...
Q1 vs Q3 gives 10% bonus for 3 etc.
5% per step
But all these minor differents between the ships, i am afraid, will be as useful for calculation as the colour of the painted cannon-whore
So whatever is used for calculation is a "must-have" but rest is just spam which will lead a moderator to close this thread...
(same as the ALPHA-amount of fuel for tibet)
@Johan:
When Division can be designed out of Brigades and Ships can be designed out of diverent components, will there be something similar for aircrafts? *hope*
When Division can be designed out of Brigades and Ships can be designed out of diverent components, will there be something similar for aircrafts? *hope*
Very nice all!
One thing that sprung to my mind are the standard mission types available to all units. A bomber can fly air superiority, a naval bomber can bomb enemy troops, etc. Not all missions are available to all units over the entire line, I know, a fighter can not paradrop, but, is it intended in HOI3 to really stick to specific unit missions ONLY, reducing the chance the AI chooses something really stupid, which I have seen on numerous occasions.
Second, is it intended to write an intelligent code to have the AI combine in one group an intelligent and maximised use of units? i.e. now we see bombers and fighters combined, naval bombers and stukas, battleships and submarines with the obvious very incorrect leader on top.
Thanks and a merry Christmas to all, work on HOI3 looking excellent!
One thing that sprung to my mind are the standard mission types available to all units. A bomber can fly air superiority, a naval bomber can bomb enemy troops, etc. Not all missions are available to all units over the entire line, I know, a fighter can not paradrop, but, is it intended in HOI3 to really stick to specific unit missions ONLY, reducing the chance the AI chooses something really stupid, which I have seen on numerous occasions.
Second, is it intended to write an intelligent code to have the AI combine in one group an intelligent and maximised use of units? i.e. now we see bombers and fighters combined, naval bombers and stukas, battleships and submarines with the obvious very incorrect leader on top.
Thanks and a merry Christmas to all, work on HOI3 looking excellent!
What about "blockade" mission type? Will it be possible to block a sea-zone for any type of enemy units including convoys? Or will a fleet automatically attack convoys passing throught (like other fleets), too?
And what about starving out enemy by destroying it's convoys. Lot's of people would like to see this, especially for Africa...
And what about starving out enemy by destroying it's convoys. Lot's of people would like to see this, especially for Africa...
In one of the early diary entries, Johan said something like "yes, you can choose Merlin engines for your Lancaster bombers," so I'd say the answer is yes.
Sure, if you are playing at the tactical level of a FPS WWII game, loading the actual shells into the guns to fire at the enemy who is firing back at you.
At the grand strategic level, which is what Hearts of Iron is all about, where you're supposed to be sitting in the war ministry offices planning the course of conflict, you want your ships to have deck armor, but fetishizing exact details between individual ships is not really the purview of the job and is more likely going to make you take your eyes off the overall picture to focus on one tiny component.
Hearts of Iron is supposed to be a "whole forest" view of the war, focusing on the minutiae as to whether a single tree's individual characteristics is not, in the end, the major focus of the title. Frankly this whole discussion of whether a certain ship should be class 2 or class 3 with x thickness armour and y version guns is focusing a lot of attention on one or two trees at the likely expense of ensuring the whole forest of how properly the naval combat system of the game works.
In a game like this it is more important that the overall naval combat system works properly rather than worrying whether a single ship is "properly depicted" as having a certain thickness of deck armor or not compared to other individual ships. Really, too much focus on the trees, for what in the end will be a very minor impact on the whole course of the game. A better focus would be to make sure that the calculations of the impact of ship armor for all ships are properly balanced so that the in-game battles make sense and one is not giving too much or too little weight to the value of armour in the damage calculation algorhythms.
OHgamer, with whole respect but there was no single word about naval combat system. It was about naval orders, naval operations and ship's design.
So if we can decide what kind of guns our ship will use, then we should be able to decide what kind of armor she will be covered with. 15’’ guns on wooden deck are rather useless.
I think that there is more than two trees in the forest which can spread the disease.
So if we can decide what kind of guns our ship will use, then we should be able to decide what kind of armor she will be covered with. 15’’ guns on wooden deck are rather useless.
I think that there is more than two trees in the forest which can spread the disease.
Excellent stuff!
I love the reserve commands and the different layers of intelligence and interdiction commands available. Very handy and realistic.
I hope this will aid the AI to replace and repair damaged ships in fleets instead of sending them out with nearly zero strength to sink needlessly. Something the HOI2 AI was extremely eager at doing.
I hope that the AI won't send unescorted transports to attempt suicidal landings anymore with this new system.
I'm also hoping that AI allied invasions (read trying to get Italy landing on crete to annex Greece when playing Germany) will not be interrupted quite as often. (Although I'm afraid this is primarily an AI issue and not so much about the naval system. Still it's one of my major complaints about the naval warfare so I like to mention it as often as possible.)
I also hope this will allow for an interesting battle of the atlantic, something I'm afriad neither vanilla HOI2 of any mod I played has been able to simulate satisfyingly yet.
In concusion I guess I'm saying it's great with new naval features but it's equally important to teach the AI to behave in accordance with them to avoid suicidal and moronic behaviour from it.
I love the reserve commands and the different layers of intelligence and interdiction commands available. Very handy and realistic.
I hope this will aid the AI to replace and repair damaged ships in fleets instead of sending them out with nearly zero strength to sink needlessly. Something the HOI2 AI was extremely eager at doing.
I hope that the AI won't send unescorted transports to attempt suicidal landings anymore with this new system.
I'm also hoping that AI allied invasions (read trying to get Italy landing on crete to annex Greece when playing Germany) will not be interrupted quite as often. (Although I'm afraid this is primarily an AI issue and not so much about the naval system. Still it's one of my major complaints about the naval warfare so I like to mention it as often as possible.)
I also hope this will allow for an interesting battle of the atlantic, something I'm afriad neither vanilla HOI2 of any mod I played has been able to simulate satisfyingly yet.
In concusion I guess I'm saying it's great with new naval features but it's equally important to teach the AI to behave in accordance with them to avoid suicidal and moronic behaviour from it.
I agree. Make the game fun to play from a strategic level, then add the ability to recreate the Hood or the Bismark in detail later, because while some will love to recreate specific battles/engagements in the war, everyone will appreciate if the naval combat system was more balanced.
I have to disagree here. Those things are important, but no more important than 88mm gun vs a 76mm gun, sloped armor vs non-sloped. Semi-Automatic rifle vs bolt action, having winter gear vs not having winter gear. The that that the details doesnt matter was not the point of OHgamer's argument. It was that at some point you have to draw the line on detail. If you do not draw the line on detail, you end up with a game that simply just isnt playable except to a very small collection of semi-genius armchair generals around the globe, and even then they might not find the game fun. If you want extremely detailed naval games, there are other games you can play to satisfy that lust.
Those who don't like the details migh use standard settings.
Of course there are other games, but you know, I would like the best release of 2009 to be as good as possible.
Of course there are other games, but you know, I would like the best release of 2009 to be as good as possible.