A new interview with Johan about HOI4.

[afghanrabbit]

http://www.polygon.com/features/2016/1/25/10806780/hearts-of-iron-4-and-the-hard-work-of-history


"The goal now, representatives tell Polygon, is to have the game out "later this year." I just hope this statement doesn't turn out like the one from 2014.

 

[Sleight of Hand]

@Had a dad can't be happy about this.

 

[grandad1982]

@Had a dad can't be happy about this.

Out of all the interview I thought the most interesting but was about the supplies having such an impact. Shame to OP focused on the most over discussed part. Still fingers crossed

 

[afghanrabbit]

I really like the overview of Johan's role at the company, gives us some more insight into their development process. The supply scenario they gave seemed off. It is hard to understand how a defeat in the desert would render a fleet that is ready to attack useless and make the player lose naval supremacy. Lastly, I focused on the obscure release date mention because this is the 100th time they have done that. They tell us "its ready when its ready" then turn around and give an interview mentioning a time frame. Would have like to heard it hear first since I check these forums several times a day.

 

[Devout]

The supply scenario they gave seemed off. It is hard to understand how a defeat in the desert would render a fleet that is ready to attack useless and make the player lose
naval supremacy.

My theory:
I think the situation was that Japan was pushed to its limits trying to produce the goods for a land war in China and an upcoming air/naval war with USA. The loss of so many motorized units resulted in a resource crisis. He needs to commit oil and rubber to cover those motorized losses. The options are (1) scrap the motorized units and continue the ground war with infantry, (2) reduce plane/ship production and move the resources to the motorized. Fight the USA with reduced reinforcements. or (3) reduce plane/ship production and move the resources to the motorized units, and delay the war with USA. He chose option 3.

 

[mdw1985]

I really like the overview of Johan's role at the company, gives us some more insight into their development process. The supply scenario they gave seemed off. It is hard to understand how a defeat in the desert would render a fleet that is ready to attack useless and make the player lose naval supremacy. Lastly, I focused on the obscure release date mention because this is the 100th time they have done that. They tell us "its ready when its ready" then turn around and give an interview mentioning a time frame. Would have like to heard it hear first since I check these forums several times a day.

"Later this year" can be anything till the end of Q3 (Q4 is not an option for pdx). It is just the same what we knew about the release, since it will be 3-6 months after BETA approval. I would have been upset (and probably happy at the same time ), if they would have said something specific to the interviewer before saying it here, but it wasn't the case. The best thing to do imho is to expect the game in september and be happy, if it is released earlier.

The interview was very cool, but i guess we knew already most of the stuff. Thx for posting it!

 

[mdw1985]

@Had a dad can't be happy about this.

Why?

 

[inteljoe]

I really like the overview of Johan's role at the company, gives us some more insight into their development process. The supply scenario they gave seemed off. It is hard to understand how a defeat in the desert would render a fleet that is ready to attack useless and make the player lose naval supremacy. Lastly, I focused on the obscure release date mention because this is the 100th time they have done that. They tell us "its ready when its ready" then turn around and give an interview mentioning a time frame. Would have like to heard it hear first since I check these forums several times a day.

You have to think if at least from an economic view that they won't want to delay the game years and year unless HoI4 wants to become the next "Duke Nukem". So for a release "later this year" is like saying, it could be December 31st or tomorrow but probably not either.

Plus when being interviewed like this, developers usually shy away from saying things like this. "Our game is great and we love to tease our fanbase with titilating video's every week but the game will be in a preverbal developmental limbo until we say it's done".

 

[Sanny]

Really interesting story as to how Johan landed a job at Paradox, never thought it would happen over a board game

 

[fabius]

Nice Interview= thanks OP

Ok

1. I like to have them (Rocket Artillery) in my motorized divisions. The problem is that they eat up a lot of supplies. Here I was sending them in on an attack into the Gobi desert and it created supply havoc. Basically, I lost the material equivalent of a dozen divisions there.

2. Without the steel and other resources that were lost in the desert he was unable to protect his carriers. His fleets had been crippled, his marines stranded aboard their landing craft unable to launch their assault without being torn to shreds.

Hmm- I did not join the fuel fairy dust rants. But this looks like Rocket artillery uses lots of supply. Great.

That supply is steel and other resources (what oil etc) rather than a tracked ammunition/supply mechanic. If I read it right it's possibly Super Pants that it wold lead to that sort of situation.

Please don't delay the game. But at some point have a heart and make a decent Supply DLC for both the operational and Grand Strategic consequences.

 

[safe-keeper]

I like the statement that it's the biggest global WWII game to date. I never thought of it that way.
And yeah, it's a nice interview. Thanks for posting !

 

[GsusNSV]

Why?

OPs only sentence was about the release date. That is a red rag right now.

About the article:
Nice to see that we can drag the arrows of the battle plan around. Have missed that until now.

 

[Had a dad]

@Had a dad can't be happy about this.

why would I not be happy? It's not like the release date affects me in any way

 

[Had a dad]

Oh wait... actually it does. I don't have to worry about tech support for it until it is released.

 

[Oakfan]

Thanks for the post OP. Looks like we have somewhat of a release time frame. Looking at Q3 or Q4 release would be my prediction.

 

[thexmassteam]

Players looking to micromanage the formation of every single division or battalion had best look elsewhere for their gaming fix.

Oo

So, if you’re doing manual micromanagement you’re not getting that planning bonus.

You gonna use my planner or I shot you down!

Ok, micromanagement's lovers are the nemesis of paradox

 

[mdw1985]

Basically this. The battleplans are not for intricately planning everything. While you technically can, a plan like that will not live long after contact with enemy. Its about broad strokes while you do manual control in cooperation with it where you see locations and situations to exploit.

I'll write a diary on it in the future, but I think its important to get people to think in the right direction.

its not:
- a detailed plan over the whole war where you press a button and sit back with a cup of tea
- an AI that tries to do lots of clever tricks

it is:
- a tool that lets you more easily control lots of units and time attacks.
- handling tedious unit management tasks
- not a one-or-the-other with manual control. manual control is important and fun, why would we remove it completely and its supposed to be used in combination.
- trying to do what you tell it as closely as it can, if you tell it to directly attack the maginot line it will. its not going to hijack your diplomacy, declare war on the dutch and go around automatically.

Oo

You gonna use my planner or I shot you down!

Ok, micromanagement's lovers are the nemesis of paradox

Compare, what Johan said in the interview and what Podcat said at the end of his post? Pretty contradicting points of view...

 

[Will Steel]

Why should the planner give bonus though?

Is it to compensate for the fact that AI will never be as smart as the player who has a few tricks in his pocket to use...and thus the AI gets cheap arbitrary "Hand of God" bonuses to balance it out?

Or is it "hand your troops to the AI or perish!!" thing?

 

[Zaku]

Why should the planner give bonus though?

Is it to compensate for the fact that AI will never be as smart as the player who has a few tricks in his pocket to use...and thus the AI gets cheap arbitrary "Hand of God" bonuses to balance it out?

Or is it "hand your troops to the AI or perish!!" thing?

It's supposed to simulate the pre-planning, and prepraing for an operation, while manual control is an "ad hoc" order without any time to make detailed orders or preparations for the units involved.

 

[fabius]

Oh wait... actually it does. I don't have to worry about tech support for it until it is released.

Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves?
Why don't you dig how beautiful it HoI4 is ? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful about there being no CTDs or game breaking bugs?