HEARTS OF IRON 2 CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM
1. I’m a huge fan of HoI 2 and believe this game was a great improvement from the original HoI, which was itself quite a success. However, recent patch and mods have me to reassess, to the point where I’m considering removing the Armageddon expansion and buying World in Flame vice HoI 3. Although I will most likely buy both, you know
Let me explain…
2. The Armageddon Beta patch 1.3 has its flaws (massive global instability due to spying activities, pictures of leaders that disappear upon installation, one more, etc) but it’s a beta so I’ll hold my thoughts until it’s complete. But the Armageddon expansion has me questioning the following:
The spy activities parameters are currently being balanced and will be much better in the final release of the patch. pictures of leaders that disappear upon installation is not a bug at all. This happens only if you load save-games made by previous versions of Armageddon and continuing of old version games with the new patch is not supported and never was in any previous patches AFAIK. (thank you for correcting me on this Martin).
a. Production/Naval Brigades. Are naval brigades a real improvement that brings something to the game or is it just one more thing to spend time and resources on? The idea that you can attach brigades to naval unit to “improve them” might sound like a novel but since you can attach the same brigades to more modern units, you end up with the same balance of strength, with more micro management and more resources spent on the Navy. If you’re into gadget that’s fine but I like it when decision I am forced to make are relevant and actually have an impact on the game. This is obviously not the case and I would prefer reverting back to the original HoI upgrade system.
I am confused with your statement here. Are you adovcating returning to the system where no Naval brigades exist and that Naval ships can be upgraded by model? If so that is not going to be possible with the current mandate that the HOI2 Arma Patch Project has.
b. Diplomacy/Alliance Mechanics. Allied countries and puppets are declaring war to major countries just after they were forced into submission. I had that game where Italy declared war to Russia in 46 after they surrendered! I acknowledge it spiced up the game but wow! There should be a better system to manage alliances, not unlike the one in EU2 where all alliance members are given a chance to join or not. That would reflect reality better by allowing Germany-Japan to be allied while Japan is not at war with Russia and Germany has to declare war to US, like it was the case historically. On the other hand it might lead to a more convoluted alliance system. Bottom line is I should have a say in who I go to war with and against.
I think everyone would agree with you that the current diplomatic system in HOI2 is not all encompassing. This is being addressed in HOI3. We do not have the mandate to correct this in HOI2.
3. For the overall HoI 2 mechanic, there a couple things that make this game more a game then it should be. By that I mean fundamental stuff that needs to be changed IOT create a more realistic system:
a. Diplomacy/Puppets. The Idea that you can just conquer any country and release them as a puppet that will support your war effort is practical but unconceivable in reality. In one of my games, I conquered everything just to release them as puppets (Poland, Spain, Scandinavia, Romania, Turkey, Flanders, Serbia, Croatia, and later on Ukraine) It solved all of my natural resources problems while providing me with over 300 high tech divisions! But I just can’t imagine Serbia and Poland fighting along Germans… I believe you should only be allowed to create a puppet when you liberate a “possible” country from another “occupying” nation (Ukraine from Russia, Scotland from England, Quebec from Canada, Bavaria from Germany, Croatia from Yugoslavia, etc) Otherwise you just occupy them or sign a peace treaty with them (Only one country surrendered to Germany in WW2 and that was France) Necessarily, peace treaty would need to be imposed through events, like it is already the case for Russia, France, UK, Italy and even Germany, to prevent a never ending war. That would create a new dynamic to the game that would be closer to reality and have empires crumbling from within, as post war time have demonstrated.
Again i think you are asking too much of the HOI2 Diplomatic system. HOI3 should model this better.
b. Intelligence. Spying is a welcome addition but need work. The current system where you can just punctually cash purchase a coup d’état is more along the lines of a Red Alert type of game. There should be a “mission” concept where you assign spies (a bit like tech teams) to a particular mission in a selected country. Some mission would take more time then others to complete and they might have an impact on trade or relations. That way you have to plan ahead and have a limited amount of resources to allocate. I like that.
We have already redesigned the Intelligence system once and unfortunately we do not have the madate to change it any more.
c. Research/Tech Trees. I’ve mentioned before that I like it when decisions I make are relevant and actually have an impact on the game. Most tech trees are brainless; you just research everything and focus on important stuff. In the original HoI, you just needed to research everything to keep your troops up to date. It was micro management heavy and did not require thinking. In HoI 2 this was partially addressed by introducing mutually exclusive doctrines and “specializing” techs (TD development has no impact if you’re not producing TD brigades) although I like the doctrine system and the tech team system, I believe the original HoI system was more realistic. Therefore (and this is where I might loose you) I would propose a system where you have more mutually exclusive doctrines to chose rather then research (which can be done by selecting the proper “minister”) The doctrine you have would determine what you can produce and research (Blitzkrieg would mean lighter and faster tanks while elastic defense would allow Assault guns, indirect approach would mean subs and Pocket Battle ships while Open seas would allow carriers, Army aviations would allow dive bombers while some other doctrine allow level bombers) Research would follow the original HoI tech tree but would be automatic; It would be determined by your doctrine, size of your economy, size of your Army, what armament you produce, battles you win/loose and ministers. This eliminate micro management but require careful planning and thinking in selection of leaders and doctrines.
We do not have the madate to make these types of changes.
d. Graphic/Map. I have nothing against 3D, but I find maps are not getting any prettier these days. If HoI 3 is going 3D, I hope they do better then EU3. I even find Victoria’s map more pleasing then HoI 2. What’s up with that? Seriously, if I’m to stare at this hours in a row, better look good or I’ll have a seizure.
The graphics are what they are and we do not have the mandate to change this. There are numerous mods out there that change the graphics of the game and i invite you to explore them.
e. Flat Tops and Panzers. Finally, every gamers knows that WW2 is all about carriers and armored breakthrough (as far as gaming is concerned) and game mechanic should consider that. It was the basis of Avalon Hill’s Third Reich success and is somewhat neglected in HoI. Appreciate if you can think of a better system, I’m getting low on ideas. If not, it doesn’t matter I’ll buy what you have, dedicate an insane amount of time to it and I’ll enjoy it.
4. That’s all I had to say about this great game and I’m looking forward to HoI 3 while playing DD (without Armageddon) Cheers!
B.D.
