- 4
- 1
Good Game, but not a grand strategy.
- Thread starter Kinkness
- Start date
-
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.
- Status
I disagree, no matter how times I tried I couldn't get the enemy general fight my general in Mortal Kombat. Not arcade at all, would not try again. 1/6
- 9
- 3
- 1
Would unleash PanzerBltiz with Guderian all over again. FINISH HIM! 7/6.
- 4
- 2
- 1
I have to admit, I'm not thrilled so far, but it's only 1 day in, so there is still hope (although I suspect it'll be more a matter of waiting for a mod).
The issues for me....
As others have said, what's the point of the NF tree when you're going to do 90% of them by '40 anyway? Really, you're just playing with the order most of the time.
AI seems to need work..Playing as the Germans, the Brits seem to think it's D-Day every day. in the 12 months after the fall of France, I probably stomped on half a dozen invasions and killed 60+ divisions, which leads me to my next point...
Countries seem to build too much. Too many planes, too many divisions, and probably too many ships (although I confess I haven't looked at that closely). After the carnage mentioned, the Brits still have a very healthy army. (yes, they weren't all Brits, but even so..in early 42, the UK has lost 992K men, now I imagine they're not all dead, but considering in the real war they lost 451K total, including civilians, that's a massive number...especially for a country that starts the war throwing thousands of planes around).
Volunteers...Seriously, wow....Seems every war, volunteers are sent by *everyone*, anywhere...If there is a war on, divisions of Volunteers will be sent...Russians in China, the US sending divisions to help the Brits..As Germany, when I attacked Poland, Nat.Spain, Italy, Hungary & VENUZUELA!?! all offered to send troops. I'm sure there would have been more if I'd worked the diplomacy more.
The actual 'land 'war' bit is...just odd...The battle plans need to be carefully setup/watched player to work even roughly as hoped (poor, but useful), but there are way too many units to want to run them yourself, and the middle ground is what we saw in the WWWs, where you run a battleplan, and feverishly pick out units to do the actual work, leaving the plan to do the 'grunt' work of shuffling the bulk of your forces forward (it can't be trusted to do even basic things like maintaining a solid front, or mopping up isolated units/areas).
Lack of messaging controls...Is it really so hard to let me say when a tech/focus/whatever finishes, I want the game to stop and wait for me?
PDX seems to have tried to make all countries 'playable' by buffing up the little ones in order to make them 'equal'...although I really don't think Bhutan should get the same PPs (and a similar number of tech slots) as a country like the UK.
I wouldn't call it an 'arcade' game, and I'm sure a lot of the issues can be worked out, but for now it's a game loosely based on real events rather than a simulation. (and good luck to the people who like that, but I'd rather the other way around).
The issues for me....
As others have said, what's the point of the NF tree when you're going to do 90% of them by '40 anyway? Really, you're just playing with the order most of the time.
AI seems to need work..Playing as the Germans, the Brits seem to think it's D-Day every day. in the 12 months after the fall of France, I probably stomped on half a dozen invasions and killed 60+ divisions, which leads me to my next point...
Countries seem to build too much. Too many planes, too many divisions, and probably too many ships (although I confess I haven't looked at that closely). After the carnage mentioned, the Brits still have a very healthy army. (yes, they weren't all Brits, but even so..in early 42, the UK has lost 992K men, now I imagine they're not all dead, but considering in the real war they lost 451K total, including civilians, that's a massive number...especially for a country that starts the war throwing thousands of planes around).
Volunteers...Seriously, wow....Seems every war, volunteers are sent by *everyone*, anywhere...If there is a war on, divisions of Volunteers will be sent...Russians in China, the US sending divisions to help the Brits..As Germany, when I attacked Poland, Nat.Spain, Italy, Hungary & VENUZUELA!?! all offered to send troops. I'm sure there would have been more if I'd worked the diplomacy more.
The actual 'land 'war' bit is...just odd...The battle plans need to be carefully setup/watched player to work even roughly as hoped (poor, but useful), but there are way too many units to want to run them yourself, and the middle ground is what we saw in the WWWs, where you run a battleplan, and feverishly pick out units to do the actual work, leaving the plan to do the 'grunt' work of shuffling the bulk of your forces forward (it can't be trusted to do even basic things like maintaining a solid front, or mopping up isolated units/areas).
Lack of messaging controls...Is it really so hard to let me say when a tech/focus/whatever finishes, I want the game to stop and wait for me?
PDX seems to have tried to make all countries 'playable' by buffing up the little ones in order to make them 'equal'...although I really don't think Bhutan should get the same PPs (and a similar number of tech slots) as a country like the UK.
I wouldn't call it an 'arcade' game, and I'm sure a lot of the issues can be worked out, but for now it's a game loosely based on real events rather than a simulation. (and good luck to the people who like that, but I'd rather the other way around).
- 20
- 1
After following the devblogs and discussions I wanted to wait for a while to see how it evolves before I buy the game. But I am weak and the love for HOI (especially hoi3) is so strong that I just could not resist.
I bought the cadet version for ~ 39 EU instead of the cadet DE version for ~ 82 EU. Could not find anywhere what differences these packets had so I took the smaller hit. Not a good start.
Played the Tutorial and USA till 1939. So a couple of hours. More than 2 but it is not enough to make a final judgment of the game.
But it is enough for first impressions and what I can say so far:
I was not disappointed to be disappointed.
First impression visuals...mehh.
Next 15 minutes I tried to figure out how to show the minimap. Learned there is non because nobody really needed/used it. WTH? I am already pissed trying to navigate through the world while zooming out, in and dragging the map. It is so much slower I hope the minimap comes back with later patches.
When I first heard about the Battle Plan system I was really excited. I used the HOI3 system extensively to make my plans and always wished I could attach forces to my plans.
Well, the new system is so shallow that it is disgusting. A lot of space to improve.
I won't go into more details (a lot of the stuff I quickly noticed was already posted in this thread: OOB, supply system, political system ...) but I can feel the OP.
Maybe the game will develop into something serious but it does not look like this is the goal right now. I am not sure that patches and mods will make me to enjoy the game in the long run. After the first impression I do not have much trust in paradox to turn the shit around.
OTOH I experienced paradox games evolve from useless garbage to gems over time. Paradox in the past took care of their games in the long run and were giving the modders enough support/free room to not shy them away.
So I am quite unhappy right now with a tiny bit of hope that this will be a good game for me in the long run.
I recently started the first time Black ICE for HOI3 and I think this will give me the hundreds of hours enjoyment I hoped HOI4 would be able to provide.
I bought the cadet version for ~ 39 EU instead of the cadet DE version for ~ 82 EU. Could not find anywhere what differences these packets had so I took the smaller hit. Not a good start.
Played the Tutorial and USA till 1939. So a couple of hours. More than 2 but it is not enough to make a final judgment of the game.
But it is enough for first impressions and what I can say so far:
I was not disappointed to be disappointed.
First impression visuals...mehh.
Next 15 minutes I tried to figure out how to show the minimap. Learned there is non because nobody really needed/used it. WTH? I am already pissed trying to navigate through the world while zooming out, in and dragging the map. It is so much slower I hope the minimap comes back with later patches.
When I first heard about the Battle Plan system I was really excited. I used the HOI3 system extensively to make my plans and always wished I could attach forces to my plans.
Well, the new system is so shallow that it is disgusting. A lot of space to improve.
I won't go into more details (a lot of the stuff I quickly noticed was already posted in this thread: OOB, supply system, political system ...) but I can feel the OP.
Maybe the game will develop into something serious but it does not look like this is the goal right now. I am not sure that patches and mods will make me to enjoy the game in the long run. After the first impression I do not have much trust in paradox to turn the shit around.
OTOH I experienced paradox games evolve from useless garbage to gems over time. Paradox in the past took care of their games in the long run and were giving the modders enough support/free room to not shy them away.
So I am quite unhappy right now with a tiny bit of hope that this will be a good game for me in the long run.
I recently started the first time Black ICE for HOI3 and I think this will give me the hundreds of hours enjoyment I hoped HOI4 would be able to provide.
- 14
- 4
Because no one here is ever going to convince anyone else about their viewpoint. People who like the game will play it and those who think it's bad won't. Life will go on. There is no need to try and justify your like/dislike for a game by arguing about how arcadey it is.
- 4
Paradox are just much better designers now.Older games were just a lot more fiddly for little actual strategic gain.
- 5
- 3
So you don't consider EU3/4 a Grand Strategy either? Because that game was all about taking OPMs and turning them into masters of the world.
I'll agree that the focus trees are OP at the moment (the generic one should have less research focused stuff) but it hardly effects the game to such a degree as to make it not a GSG, unless of course you don't think HoI3 was a GSG?
I have to say that this game has astounded me on how bad it is. It feels so very bare and not immersive at all. I feel sorry for the people who paid $60 or even $90 for a game that's barely worth $20. I don't understand how this could take two years of development. Everything is so bare bones, and battle-plans were horribly executed just like everybody feared. I've been saying this for quite a while, and with more time, the more I'm proved right. Paradox has seen their salad days. They're recent direction has showed that Paradox is no longer what it was. From, Eu4 dlc, City Skylines DlC, Stellaris and now Hoi4, which will incredibly include hundreds of DLC. What a devastating disappointment, just goes to show that no one is immune from selling out.
- 9
- 4
A lot of people in this thread are confusing tedious micro-management with actual depth and don't understand that macro =/= simple. Yes, some things have been removed, and a few of them should be reincluded (resource stockpiles) but most of the removed features like OOB are the kind of thing which
1) use up an enormous amount of time and focus for little gain - you're really just trying not to screw it up
2) the AI will never equal a player at and for players it requires hours of research to learn how to do well
3) a national leader would never personally get involved with
If you want a game to micromanage individual brigades and create your own personal command structure for the soviet union's millions of troops, you have HOI3 or War in the East/West. Many people, myself included, wanted a game where we can make the big decisions and the strategic choices but not fuss over every single brigade. HOI4 is our game, and it is absolutely still grand strategy, just not grand tactics. I think the fact that I can get into a game and actually hit the pause button within 10 minutes to start moving forward is a huge success on Paradox's part.
1) use up an enormous amount of time and focus for little gain - you're really just trying not to screw it up
2) the AI will never equal a player at and for players it requires hours of research to learn how to do well
3) a national leader would never personally get involved with
If you want a game to micromanage individual brigades and create your own personal command structure for the soviet union's millions of troops, you have HOI3 or War in the East/West. Many people, myself included, wanted a game where we can make the big decisions and the strategic choices but not fuss over every single brigade. HOI4 is our game, and it is absolutely still grand strategy, just not grand tactics. I think the fact that I can get into a game and actually hit the pause button within 10 minutes to start moving forward is a huge success on Paradox's part.
- 5
- 4
I think you have a very different definition of expanding.
- 3
CK2 and EU4 have just gotten better and better with each expansion. What is your definition?
- 3
- 2
I am of a mixed opinion about this title.
First, the OP is exaggerating with his Arcade Claims, but I can understand what he means to say and agree to a point.
I wish there was a political system in place, not the dumbed down "thing" we have now complete with choose your own bonus (I can understand superministers or theoreticians or even liaisons with industries, but having no chief or the army and no place for a chief of staff? and let's forget about having a cabinet, if you must have army bonus choice name it something else!)
I wish we had a better trade system, thus far it seems they will always agree, and you pay in "trade goods" now, I like the idea of trade goods and I think that while a % of civie industry needs to be allocated to consumer goods, another % should be to trade goods (which would be traded consumer goods, as I doubt many countries had purely for export productions of non military gear) but unable to pay in spice or in cash?
and while we are at it, the removal of cash from the game, armies need to be paid (not that they were in any previous hoi titles, but...), running a war is expensive and unprofitable in the best of cases, so having a cash value you need to fiddle with was reasonable and expected (never cared much for the hoi implementations, but, again, they should have tried to do better) and research teams need to be paid as well
Speaking of research... it is so dull and lifeless now. slots are arbitrary and seems only enhance-able though national focus tree, a less than ideal proposition, the trees have been pruned down ridiculously and the start date is 1936 (with one exception) this is a problem because it sets the min tech too high and makes the minors far more formidable than what they should have been or could have been (incidentally I've seen no techs that affects trickleback modifiers and the like... whut?) and we have those gems like the Renown and Repulse being Admiral Class BCs!
Diplomacy: again, dumbed down, now we expend points to improve relationships and the like, HOI dimplomacy wasn't very good, but now it is even worse, somehow.
Production screen: now I like the way the game handles production, but when I want to put gear into production I do not see their stats, I need to hover my mouse over it to see the details... the problem is when I have variants of the same model, I can't compare two units, or more, at a glance like in HOI3.
No mimimap
No message settings
No log
No battle sumary
Agreed, and to add insult to injury it railroads your country. while I like a historical bent to the game, I should be able to go ahistorical. the way focus is implemented doesn't allow for it.
First, the OP is exaggerating with his Arcade Claims, but I can understand what he means to say and agree to a point.
I wish there was a political system in place, not the dumbed down "thing" we have now complete with choose your own bonus (I can understand superministers or theoreticians or even liaisons with industries, but having no chief or the army and no place for a chief of staff? and let's forget about having a cabinet, if you must have army bonus choice name it something else!)
I wish we had a better trade system, thus far it seems they will always agree, and you pay in "trade goods" now, I like the idea of trade goods and I think that while a % of civie industry needs to be allocated to consumer goods, another % should be to trade goods (which would be traded consumer goods, as I doubt many countries had purely for export productions of non military gear) but unable to pay in spice or in cash?
and while we are at it, the removal of cash from the game, armies need to be paid (not that they were in any previous hoi titles, but...), running a war is expensive and unprofitable in the best of cases, so having a cash value you need to fiddle with was reasonable and expected (never cared much for the hoi implementations, but, again, they should have tried to do better) and research teams need to be paid as well
Speaking of research... it is so dull and lifeless now. slots are arbitrary and seems only enhance-able though national focus tree, a less than ideal proposition, the trees have been pruned down ridiculously and the start date is 1936 (with one exception) this is a problem because it sets the min tech too high and makes the minors far more formidable than what they should have been or could have been (incidentally I've seen no techs that affects trickleback modifiers and the like... whut?) and we have those gems like the Renown and Repulse being Admiral Class BCs!
Diplomacy: again, dumbed down, now we expend points to improve relationships and the like, HOI dimplomacy wasn't very good, but now it is even worse, somehow.
Production screen: now I like the way the game handles production, but when I want to put gear into production I do not see their stats, I need to hover my mouse over it to see the details... the problem is when I have variants of the same model, I can't compare two units, or more, at a glance like in HOI3.
No mimimap
No message settings
No log
No battle sumary
Agreed, and to add insult to injury it railroads your country. while I like a historical bent to the game, I should be able to go ahistorical. the way focus is implemented doesn't allow for it.
- 4
- 1
Thats your words. I don't play EA games.
One more for the ignore list.
- 1
- 1
You're incredibly flawed logic just got called out, deflect harder. "expanding" lol.
- 1
- 1
I think it's funny. I hang around a few different circles, and they all differ in opinions on strategy games. The Grognards who play GG's WitW think all Paradox games are 'arcady' (if that is the adjective we are choosing to describe it) because they don't simulate every aspect and aren't researched in great detail. I personally am enjoying HoI4 much as I enjoy WitW, they scratch a different itch. WitW I am micro-ing so hard that it is brain burning - a single turn will take an hour or more to pile through and that is early game on a small-medium scenario. This game allows me to branch out into other parts of the war, control the high level and work with the government, control industry, and enjoy the overall aspect of being the leader of a war. I'd argue that if this is too 'arcady' pick up a low to mid complexity operational level wargame, that might sate the appetite.
- 1
- 1
You make a good point, and it's important to realize that Paradox games never reached the same level of simulation as GG. Sure, the trend from HOI1-3 was towards increasing mechanical complexity, but the shift from 3-4 is from "least arcady arcade game" to "somewhat arcady arcade game" while also creating a set of gameplay mechanics which actually fit together and make you feel like a dictator/president/prime minister/king and not a smattering of every type of professional in a single country.
- 1
Johan said something about Risk.
He said that Risk, and Axis & Allies, was at the basis of HOI, in the release stream of HOI IV.
But that was just Johan, what does he know?
- 1
Well how can i put this...
Please stop!!
Do not say "compare this to the previous games state at release" anymore... it is not what this is about.....
HOI III was buggy as H*** and unbalanced like a spitfire with only 1 wing, but the basic GAMEMECHANICS were in place, and could over time be adjusted.
Here we have a lot of dumbed down, really weird mechanics the "superships" being one of the weirdest. Mechanics that remove the essence, immersivenes, logic and scope of Grand Strategy and its HARDCODED into the game engine, if they where to change it, they would have to create an entirely NEW GAME.
The AI is wired into all these strange design choices. The logistics system is the crocked backbone and together with the lack of OOB and a lot of other weird stuff they try and make things more easy for BOTH the AI and the player and then they call it Grand Strategy.
It is a smooth game with nice graphics, the AI is being handfed a lot of gamedesign cornercutting so it might even perform half decent i dunno yet, and the game is worth what i gave for it, BUT to call it a Grand Strategy Successor to HOI III is wrong.
- 11
- 2
- Status