HOI4 Dev Diary - Fuel

[Aodhan_]

The argument is that the owner would have just destroyed or moved it if it got too close to the front, so it makes more sense to me to have the capture on capitulate like other stuff

I think it would lead to more interesting game play, and put more importance on capturing province's with fuel silo's (and also having to defend them if your going to loose a portion of that silo's fuel) especially countries that would be short on fuel.

Maybe even if you where too capture a certain proportion of the silo's fuel.

 

[Zwirbaum]

Different topic:
Also whats up with the SA nerf last patch?
Do you have statistics how this has has influenced the game? If you have these can you publish them please?

Nerf of base SA was needed, otherwise you would get ultra silly values of Soft Attack.

And tbh SA is not nerfed in the end.

 

[Axe99]

Being able to capture some of the fuel when taking over a storage building could lead to some cool historical stuff like battle of the bulge where your Panzers don't got enough fuel to reach the objectives but there are fuel you can capture on the way.

I think both approaches could have some merits worth considering.

If all buildings were gradually damaged by combat instead of just infrastructure it would also work to have you capture a portion based on it's damage so drawn out battles see most of the fuel destroyed before capture.

In terms of tactical/operational capturing of fuel, it's kind of second-hand, one-party removed, but when I was reading Oil: A Study of Wartime Policy and Administration it made a point of noting that Britain changed the way it stockpiled its fuel in the South-East of England to prevent Germany being able to take advantage of stocks, like it had when it had invaded France. At least in the British case, there was always a tension between having fuel kept close enough to the front and spread out enough to respond in good time to needs, and more secure but less accessible locations (so, and this is going from memory, but I think I remember it right - the British kind of accepted that a little bit would still get captured, but worked hard to minimise it so it wouldn't be enough to cause trouble).

 

[Darth_Siddius]

Will this neat addition make you give Bessarabia the strategical significance it had in WW2?
The Soviet Union seized it because of the Oil Fields there, those were vital for them, as well as for Germany. That's why Hitler was so keen in retaking it as fast as possible.
Sadly right now Bessarabia holds no Oil as ressource.

Maybe considering giving it a nice big Oil-boost to make it really an important decision to secure it as either sides of the war ?

 

[Dalwin]

Will this neat addition make you give Bessarabia the strategical significance it had in WW2?
The Soviet Union seized it because of the Oil Fields there, those were vital for them, as well as for Germany. That's why Hitler was so keen in retaking it as fast as possible.
Sadly right now Bessarabia holds no Oil as ressource.

Maybe considering giving it a nice big Oil-boost to make it really an important decision to secure it as either sides of the war ?

As far as I know, the only thing strategic about Bessarabia in HOI4 is that is means one more river to cross.

 

[Ostovar Hossein]

I think it is pretty clear from the DD that both of those already exist. Capturing a state which contains a silo is one obvious example but probably not the only one.

And what did you think all that gobbledygook about number of states and infrastructure level etc. etc. was at the beginning? That was clearly allowing (in an abstract manner requiring no micro) how much of your oil was being used by the civilian economy.

Ye but I am pretty sure he said that you get no oil immidietly for capturing province with silo only on surrender do you get the fuel, which is fine.
As for the second part thanks for clarifying I didnot see that.

 

[pkunk]

Being able to capture some of the fuel when taking over a storage building could lead to some cool historical stuff like battle of the bulge where your Panzers don't got enough fuel to reach the objectives but there are fuel you can capture on the way.

I think both approaches could have some merits worth considering.

If all buildings were gradually damaged by combat instead of just infrastructure it would also work to have you capture a portion based on it's damage so drawn out battles see most of the fuel destroyed before capture.

I think, issue here that game doesn't actually store fuel in buildings, they just define cap. So you don't know which building is empty and which is full.

 

[Ostovar Hossein]

Will this neat addition make you give Bessarabia the strategical significance it had in WW2?
The Soviet Union seized it because of the Oil Fields there, those were vital for them, as well as for Germany. That's why Hitler was so keen in retaking it as fast as possible.
Sadly right now Bessarabia holds no Oil as ressource.

Maybe considering giving it a nice big Oil-boost to make it really an important decision to secure it as either sides of the war ?

Can you give a source I am looking into ussr occupation of that area in 1940 but no where it talks about oil fields thank you.

 

[Alex_brunius]

I think, issue here that game doesn't actually store fuel in buildings, they just define cap. So you don't know which building is empty and which is full.

Yeah, I agree. But it still might be possible to use an average value.

For example if you would capture say 50% of remaining fuel in a building and a nation have 50% of their stockpile full you would capture 25% of the full capacity of a building when taking it. ( Basically assume it's evenly distributed ).

I have no idea how much extra work it would be to code though.

 

[Gruni87]

In addition to fuel you could introduce grain/food/field ration which could be stockpiled. This could limit the amount of infantry spamed out, just like fuel limits the number of tanks

 

[Alex_brunius]

In addition to fuel you could introduce grain/food/field ration which could be stockpiled. This could limit the amount of infantry spamed out, just like fuel limits the number of tanks

How many real WW2 countries were limited in the forces they could field or had to disband divisions based on by how much food they could produce?

None as far as I am aware. ( Maybe nations like India and China? I don't know ).

 

[podcat]

How many real WW2 countries were limited in the forces they could field by how much food they could produce?

None as far as I am aware. ( Maybe nations like India and China? I don't know ).

I think it was quite a challenge in China. but from what I gather its the kind of thing that has a lot less impact on the armed forces. So you'd potentially have civilian grumbling and revolts, but not surrendering soldiers.

 

[podcat]

In addition to fuel you could introduce grain/food/field ration which could be stockpiled. This could limit the amount of infantry spamed out, just like fuel limits the number of tanks

if you want to try that kind of thing there is a mod called the Resource War on the workshop that adds food and such.

 

[DrBolle]

Nerf of base SA was needed, otherwise you would get ultra silly values of Soft Attack.

And tbh SA is not nerfed in the end.

I do not say a SA nerf wasnt needed but I cant ignore that it was too much.
With the current system all you do is: Mass Assault 10w Inf, Fighter and CAS spam and it is super effective.
Entrenchment wasnt touched, we have ridiculous boni on entrechmentspeed, entrenchment, division defense in combat and infantry (look at da generals) and now we have a WW1 simulator where tanks can get stalled easily and all you really need to produce to be effective:
Some trucks, guns, supportequipment, fighters and close air support and tns of manpower. Maybe some Strats too if you want to damage the enmies infrastructure and buildings when they are not banned.

Therefore I like to see statistics about the game which compare prenerf and nerf.

 

[Tavior]

@podcat

What happens to regiments that has "tank/truck/etc..." and infantry and horse whose fuel has ran out? Will the lack of fuel completely stall infantry/horse?

Edited: Nevermind already answered. Will move very slowly.

 

[Alex_brunius]

I think it was quite a challenge in China. but from what I gather its the kind of thing that has a lot less impact on the armed forces. So you'd potentially have civilian grumbling and revolts, but not surrendering soldiers.

Yes I agree. I think it would be better to add some sort of maintenance cost for large forces to limit the numbers both in peacetime and in war. Like existed in HoI2 and HoI3 where supply costed industry to produce.

IRL having a massive Army, Airforce and Navy was a big cost that limited how much new units that could be fielded.

 

[Alex_brunius]

I do not say a SA nerf wasnt needed but I cant ignore that it was too much.
With the current system all you do is: Mass Assault 10w Inf, Fighter and CAS spam and it is super effective.
Entrenchment wasnt touched, we have ridiculous boni on entrechmentspeed, entrenchment, division defense in combat and infantry (look at da generals) and now we have a WW1 simulator where tanks can get stalled easily and all you really need to produce to be effective:
Some trucks, guns, supportequipment, fighters and close air support and tns of manpower. Maybe some Strats too if you want to damage the enmies infrastructure and buildings when they are not banned.

Therefore I like to see statistics about the game which compare prenerf and nerf.

If you play in Multiplayer and build neither tanks nor AT weapons that can counter them you will lose any war that's not fought in mountains or rivers/forts.

In my last MP game in 1.5 we inflicted 10 million casualties on the Soviet despite them following exactly this strategy above, mainly by using divisions with Tanks / SPGs / SPAA. In some key battles we defeated over 50 Soviet divisions before winning ( with same tanks that started the battle ), since the infantry was unable to inflict damage to the tanks, and since SPAA now reduce damage they take from air.

 

[Gruni87]

Not in real, but use the idea as an abstract. During war Germany e.g. was very limited in foodsupply. The population had to suffer from hunger cause nearly no one was interested in trade any longer and the domestic production wasn´t able to compensate the loss of trade. If the german staff would have conscripted more farmers, the foodsupply would have collapsed completely. So in my mind the idea of introducing food as a limiting factor seems valid.

 

[Zwirbaum]

I do not say a SA nerf wasnt needed but I cant ignore that it was too much.
With the current system all you do is: Mass Assault 10w Inf, Fighter and CAS spam and it is super effective.
Entrenchment wasnt touched, we have ridiculous boni on entrechmentspeed, entrenchment, division defense in combat and infantry (look at da generals) and now we have a WW1 simulator where tanks can get stalled easily and all you really need to produce to be effective:
Some trucks, guns, supportequipment, fighters and close air support and tns of manpower. Maybe some Strats too if you want to damage the enmies infrastructure and buildings when they are not banned.

Therefore I like to see statistics about the game which compare prenerf and nerf.

Notice how I said that 'base SA was nerfed' - end result of SA is quite often higher than it used to be (Panzer Divisions usually will end up with more SA than they used, DESPITE base nerf of SA to some of it's components). People will often hear 'trench simulator' and instead of looking at the bigger picture/adapting to the changes they repeat with what they've just heard.

 

[valrossenOliver]

Not in real, but use the idea as an abstract. During war Germany e.g. was very limited in foodsupply. The population had to suffer from hunger cause nearly no one was interested in trade any longer and the domestic production wasn´t able to compensate the loss of trade. If the german staff would have conscripted more farmers, the foodsupply would have collapsed completely. So in my mind the idea of introducing food as a limiting factor seems valid.

Podcat mentioned a mod on the workshop which adds this, sadly no achievments which is one reason why it should be part of main-game, but then, is it a priority of development right now? Either way, here's podcats response.

if you want to try that kind of thing there is a mod called the Resource War on the workshop that adds food and such.