• 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.

HOI4 Dev Diary - War Changes and Game Difficulty

Hello everyone, last week we covered the last of the new focus trees, so from now on we will focus (heh) on new features and changes again. Today we are going to start off by talking about changes to how wars work as well as sharing some very interesting telemetry data!

War Changes
When we planned out Waking the Tiger, we knew that we wanted to solve several issues with wars once and for all. The game wasn’t really set up for 3-way-wars and it tried to stop you from 3-way wars as much as possible, and if it failed some pretty nasty bugs could happen. Wars could in certain cases end up either having to force friends into war, or drop people from wars which usually really messed up both multiplayer and singleplayer when it happened. It was all just a nasty and horrible mess on the code side as well.

Our changes effectively mean that now every two nations at war have their own little war and we instead present wars as a summary of sides that make sense. How you look at a war as a player shouldn't really look any different now. This was a massive change that has taken us a lot of time (and quite a bit of sanity), but I am confident that it will have been worth it with all the issues it has solved and freedom for players it will enable (particularly for mods that like to do a lot of wars from events and focuses where there was a big chance of things working out wrong - not naming any names).

When playing, the biggest changes you will notice is that wars merging now is a lot smoother. War score, casualties and such are properly tracked and retained. Its now also possible to fight 3-way wars (or more) so we can handle Axis vs Comintern vs Allies vs The Japanese co-prosperity sphere etc.

The war interface has also gotten a bunch of changes:
Screenshot_1.jpg

  • You can now filter nations like minors, capitulated, or nations who aren’t called in yet
  • We show nations that could be called in, but aren’t in blue (so you can see that the soviets have not called in Republican Spain yet), this is instead of the old interface where there was separate lists, now a button appears if you yourself have the power to call them.
  • We group up factions and summarize stats for them for easier comparisons
  • The interface lets you pick among your wars, but there is also a War Summary that collects all war allies and enemies in one big page. The interface also scales with your screen size, so it's much easier to get an overview of large complex wars now.
Screenshot_2.jpg


One of my favourite new things is that we show a breakdown of the casualties, so you can see how many casualties you caused for a specific nation:
Untitled-2.jpg


Difficulty Settings
We are slowly building up better and better telemetry on HOI players and I really love to share it with the community when it’s surprising, and this one surprised me a lot actually! It turns out that close to 40% of players prefer to play on the lowest difficulty setting. I would have expected this to be quite a bit less!

difficulty.jpg


As number of hours you play goes up people migrate away from recruit a bit. So for players with less than 50 hours played, 60% of them use Recruit and after playing 200+ hours only about 28% still use Recruit. Veteran shows the largest relative change. For beginners, it is 1.4% who use it and it goes up to 3.5% for 200+ hour players. The vast majority use Regular. It's the difficulty setting that doesn't give you any bonuses or penalties so this is usually what people prefer. My design philosophy is to try and stay away from direct combat bonuses and such that will make you learn the game in the wrong way. I prefer buffing things that allows a player to play more sub-optimal, so faster research (or slower so you must make more optimal choices), smaller losses on efficiency when changing production lines or less impact of lack of resource and such. It's also important to only affect the player as you don't really know which of the nations will end up on their side or as enemies. For example, in HOI3 depending on country it could actually be easier at harder settings, since certain nations were advantaged by that in an allied role.

So what are we doing about this? First of all we are adding two more settings (the gods of symmetry demand it!). A new difficulty before Recruit called Civilian and a new harder difficulty called Elite.
upload_2018-1-24_16-16-49.png


I also thought I would mention that we haven't really analyzed the custom difficulty settings yet but plan to in the future. I always recommend them to tailor your game. Say if you want a particularly strong Soviet to fight as Germany.

See you all again next week! Also don't forget to tune in to World War Wednesday at 16:00 CET where we start a new campaign to show off all the new stuff in Waking the Tiger as a Chinese warlord on the rise!

Rejected diary titles:
  • Dan Lind's "War and Peace (Book One of Four)"
  • War (screen), What is it good for?
  • I guess we don’t need to spend all the work we do on improving the AI after all
  • War. War sometimes changes
  • You can't fight in here. This is a wargame forum.
  • Players online usually lie about the size of their conquests
  • You get a war, and you get a war! Everyone gets a war!
  • Maybe finally Quill18 can now play competitive multiplayer without getting shafted by a war-merge bug!
 
Last edited:
I think most good players are Not playing on Veteran because of the - % that get added.

I would like the hardest possible AI without "cheating" stats for them or me. A fair fight so to speak.
 
I play normal because it's where you can get the achieves. It's like an achievement raid in a MMORPG like WoW - you don't do it on the harder settings, you do it on the easiest one that still allows you to get the achievement.

Also, while I think I understand most of the processes in the game at this point, being older definitely means that my memory and ability to multi-task is no where near what it was 10, 20, 30 years ago. I figure that's a decent handicap on myself anyway.... :).
 
I'm hoping that the changes to wars make capitulation more realistic and non-immersion breaking. In my current campaign I had British India capitulate in my civil war, only to have the remaining territory jump to Italy. Meanwhile Free France was briefly revived then capitulated again, and I got control of a bunch of their territory. I'm not at war with either the Axis or USSR, so it ends up with ridiculous situations where I can't take back Pakistan from Italy (although hopefully I'll get it when they capitulate, while the USSR's advance is essentially halted because they aren't at war with me either.
upload_2018-1-28_16-52-37.png upload_2018-1-28_16-53-9.png
 
While I do think limited wars should be possible in some places, Danzig is not one of them, the traumas of Poland’s partitions made the odds of Poland cedeing Danzig peacefully basically 0.

It seems clear that from the Polish perspective the Allied guarantees enabled the regime to rebuff the Germans with confidence.

Well lets consider that if the Kaiser won the civil war, where would Hitler go? He may commit suicide but he could also flee to a place where the Nazi's currently rule who are currently not at war. The free city is a safe haven of fascism where Hitler could flee to if alt history paths were to happen. Remember though that once the free city is annexed he would no longer have anywhere to flee.
EDIT: Another thing to think about is would Hitler give up so easily, considering its not the entire world coming down on him he could still have a chance to try and take back Germany. Maybe with a little help from Italy.
There is something attractive in having the madman in Danzig spouting propaganda and trying to play with events to stir up trouble.

From the early '30s, the Swiss loathed the Nazis as much as the Nazis loathed them, so a Swiss refuge would be highly unlikely.

--- Before you can walk the tiger, you must wake the podcat. ---
 
Last edited:
As @Markus Marius pointed out, you might be mixing Missouri up with someone else here. Because I'm a little bit crazy, I just looked up the fleet in Sagami Bay for the surrender ceremony and it did include the USS West Virginia, sunk at Pearl Harbor but raised, modernised and put back into service in 1944 - maybe that one? There were a few other older BBs in Sagami, but none in my quick glance that were at Pearl Harbor on 7 Dec '41 (but I was being quick and dirty, so I may well have missed one or two).

Not to take away from the Iowas, they were beautiful ships :).
Considering it was my father who told me that, chances are something got lost in translation.
 
The fact that so few people play veteran should be evidence enough that people don't like to get debuffs/penalties as a compensation for lacking "challenging A.I".
 
The fact that so few people play veteran should be evidence enough that people don't like to get debuffs/penalties as a compensation for lacking "challenging A.I".

I'm much more likely to use the sliders to buff up the enemy countries than I am to play on veteran.
 
My wife and I walked through the USS Alabama in Mobile a few years back. Well, more than a few. Probably more than a decade now. Dang it! Were the kids even with us? Was it that long ago?

baby-impatient.jpg
 
Bright side: you've ostensibly not been in Alabama for over a decade. So you got that goin for you, which is nice.
Careful. My wife's family is from Alabama. They take offense easy and find forgiving hard. :p
 
It wouldn’t be possible to add either in this update or a future update a prisoner of war system where a small percentage of men from encircled divisions could be captured as prisoners pow camps could be built to house the prisoners and said prisoners could be used to aid production in factories and construction
 
It wouldn’t be possible to add either in this update or a future update a prisoner of war system where a small percentage of men from encircled divisions could be captured as prisoners pow camps could be built to house the prisoners and said prisoners could be used to aid production in factories and construction

The impact of POW labour on a strategic level was miniscule. So it's hard to see what the point of simulating this would be.
 
It wouldn’t be possible to add either in this update or a future update a prisoner of war system where a small percentage of men from encircled divisions could be captured as prisoners pow camps could be built to house the prisoners and said prisoners could be used to aid production in factories and construction

Welcome to the forums :). Right up the top of the forums there's a stickied thread by the name of "Forum Rules - Read before you post" - here. Might be worth swinging past, so you don't get caught out in future.