• 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.
Dec 21, 2000
689
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Marty
[BI think it is fun and don't feel like I've been taken but the game is not what I expected. I guess I expected a game more like the boardgame World in Flames. Instead it seems more like Axis and Allies.[/B]

Unfortunately I would say that I have been done over. Yes it isn't what I expected. I expected the very basic elements of WW2 to exist. Limited percentages of intercepting naval units is one of those. I don't feel I'm asking for blood here, and if I am being unreasonable then I would welcome those who think so to give their reasoning. I would just like my ships to act as though they're travelling across huge stretches of water, rather than crossing an area 1 square mile and 20 feet deep.
 
Mar 7, 2002
688
0
Visit site
Originally posted by whyamihere
Yep and it was damn lame. The German player invested a large amount into submarine combat forgetting that his subs were so easy to spot and intercept. The British player tracking every one down and wiping it off the face of the planet - although he had a few problems because ships can retreat from battles whenever they want and do so at the same rate whether they're damaged or not (another problem with naval combat). But he still managed it.

The result? Well it was impossible for the German player to starve the British economy (planes can't even target convoys) and he

I see. Obviously this player didn't understand the Hoi game mechanics. Traveling around with single subs is pointless.

Try this: Build some subs and put them all in one stack. Now attack a fleet of the same size with these subs.
After the fleet got blasted away, check build cost for subs and ships.
 

unmerged(13293)

Second Lieutenant
Dec 30, 2002
139
0
Visit site
umm, the way to defeat u-boats is with destroyers and carriers. Battleships and Cruisers are just gonna die going toe to toe with subs. Lets see,10 improved destroyers and 2 carriers with nav bombers should be enuff.I have yet to see the AI form hunter/killer groups to defend against subs. So you here stories of coastal subs being very effective.Just my opinion.
 

Dinsdale

Field Marshal
18 Badges
Dec 10, 2002
2.661
0
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • 500k Club
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Deus Vult
Well, despite being initially disapointed, I don't think this is as major as is being posted;

This is a province based divisional/flotilla game. The likelihood of an entire flotilla of submarines being invisible in the North Atlantic is pretty slim. The area where those subs are would be known, then it's just a matter of hunting and either destroying them, or not.

If the detection techs are part of the combat equation, then "visible" subs doesn't completely contradict this. One knows where they are, sends out destroyers, and an abstract battle ensues.

What I would like to know, is are those detection techs included; land, sea and air, or are they a dead fruit on the tech tree?
 

unmerged(7638)

Second Lieutenant
Feb 5, 2002
190
0
Visit site
Originally posted by whyamihere
Unfortunately I would say that I have been done over. Yes it isn't what I expected. I expected the very basic elements of WW2 to exist. Limited percentages of intercepting naval units is one of those. I don't feel I'm asking for blood here, and if I am being unreasonable then I would welcome those who think so to give their reasoning. I would just like my ships to act as though they're travelling across huge stretches of water, rather than crossing an area 1 square mile and 20 feet deep.

As I said, I'm no programmer but I do know that fixing a computer game is far more difficult than fixing a boardgame. Hopefully the main problems can be fixed at least to the point where they actually have some impact on the game and bearing on real life. While I was expecting a World in Flames type game I'd be satisfied with a World That Smolders type game :)
 

unmerged(1357)

Sergeant
Mar 1, 2001
61
0
Visit site
Originally posted by whyamihere
Bug 4567
Submarines intercepted 100% of the time

Severity: Normal
Status: Won't fix



What??? Is it a joke? A few days ago I wrote a post telling how happy I am that Paradox is going to fix everything. This changes it all. There's no meaning at all in having subs if they can be intercepted 100% of the time. For god's sake, how do you suppose Germany is going to play?? The U-boot campaign is one of the most fascinating pages of WW2 and Paradox has simply canceled it. I noticed that my U-boots were intercepted all the time, but I was certain that a patch would correct such an obvious blunder. The manual tells that the ships are not going to be spotted all the time! The manual was not written by the players, but by the developers. There's no excuse at all! This BUG (it's NOT a feature, it simply can't be if this game is about WW2) simply has to be corrected, even if it takes a whole year of work for Paradox. By the way, what do you mean with "severity:normal"? This is a game killing bug! The whole Kriegsmarine strategy is nothing but a joke. I'm offended as a costumer and I'm offended as a WW2 gamer.

Filippo
 

unmerged(13293)

Second Lieutenant
Dec 30, 2002
139
0
Visit site
The way i see it, the problem isnt 100% interception,it is 100% detection. All units detect all units. So Surprise will never work. If you read the combat section it says that surprise is determined by number of units not detected. There it is. So surprise will not happen at sea(Tricksters might allow it in land combat). I think this why nothing dies in sea battles. Detection is woven through out this game.
 
Dec 21, 2000
689
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Isebrand
I see. Obviously this player didn't understand the Hoi game mechanics. Traveling around with single subs is pointless.

Try this: Build some subs and put them all in one stack. Now attack a fleet of the same size with these subs.
After the fleet got blasted away, check build cost for subs and ships.

Why should he have to build stacks? Firstly, I want to be able to tell my units to engage convoys and NOT allied military ships (like history). Are my commanders that dense that they engage (cos let's not forget that subs always attack when they enter a province too. This is a naval issue, not just a sub one) huge blocks of enemy ships?

I also want to be able to run into the Atlantic without being seen. I find it absurd that right now everytime I leave port my sub gets taken out.

Finally I don't want units to be able to see whats in a neighbouring sea province. Hell i don't want them to automatically see what's in their own province. There needs to be percentages for them and they should be very low with the early tech.

Originally posted by Dinsdale
This is a province based divisional/flotilla game. The likelihood of an entire flotilla of submarines being invisible in the North Atlantic is pretty slim. The area where those subs are would be known, then it's just a matter of hunting and either destroying them, or not.

No, not at all. At the start of the war it was very hard to track a sub, virtually impossible. You had to wait until they made the move and then go after them. As it is now that doesn't happen. 100% interception is completely unrealistic, especially if I wanted my subs to just lurk and pick off convoys. But I'm also complaining about them getting intercepted when they try to sneak out of port, even in the dead of night.

Even if you become aware of a group of subs operating in an area there is no way you could just waltz in and find them. This is thousands of miles of water we're talking about. Its like a needle in a haystack until you get better tech and aircraft support.

What should happen is that an allied player suspects subs or surface ships, either one, working in a region - due to the info on convoys being lost (you wouldn't see the fleet icons unless you spotted them) - and so sends a fleet into the region. Now both sides wait. The German player doesn't see them coming immediately, but chances are he'll be the first to spot (all this depends on tech, of course). So what does he do? Well he can either order his sub to stop attacking and see if he gets spotted. The allied player may find nothing and so move on, or the German quietly moves his subs out. If the Allied player does find him, then, and only then, can he engage, and if the sub is on the defensive side, because it has elected to hide, rather than attack, then it should stand virtually no chance of sinking a ship, and hope only that it can sneak away from the bombardment. Obviosuly if its a surface vessel (e.g. the Bismarck) we're talking about, it would have a greater chance of inflicting damage.

Now that would be interesting. It'd be a cat and mouse game as the allied player tries to find the bastard sinking his ships while the German sees how far he can push his luck.

This would require new order types, but that's no surprise. To use the ground structure for naval combat is... well let's face it, retarded. I would, off the top of my head, have:

All naval units
- Evade. Avoid all combat and hide from the enemy.
- Attack convoys. Searches only for convoys and tries to engage them
- Attack all. Searches for all enemy ships and tries to engage them.

These can be given as orders moving along a line, or orders for operating in a region. Ideally you'd even be able to add enemy fleet size restrictions to these (i.e. engage a stack of only x strength), but that, I know, will never happen.

As a final thought, imagine Germany with nuclear subs and the Brits with pre-war dreadnaughts still managing to detect them. Its laughable.
 
Last edited:

Dinsdale

Field Marshal
18 Badges
Dec 10, 2002
2.661
0
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • 500k Club
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Deus Vult
Originally posted by whyamihere
No, not at all. At the start of the war it was very hard to track a sub, virtually impossible. You had to wait until they made the move and then go after them. As it is now that doesn't happen. 100% interception is completely unrealistic, especially if I wanted my subs to just lurk and pick off convoys. But I'm also complaining about them getting intercepted when they try to sneak out of port, even in the dead of night.

But this is what is being abstracted. You move a fleet to a sea zone, the submarines begin offensive operations. Move a fleet to the same sea zone and an abstract engagement takes place.

The Naval engine is a vast oversimplification, for instance the sea zones are huge, yet time ticks down at an operational level. How can it bo so simple to accept surface v surface and air v surface 100% detection, yet jump on sub detection?

Within the pattern of HOI naval warfare I just don't see this as being such a dramatic problem.
 
Dec 21, 2000
689
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Dinsdale
But this is what is being abstracted. You move a fleet to a sea zone, the submarines begin offensive operations. Move a fleet to the same sea zone and an abstract engagement takes place.

So where is the abstract representation of hiding from fleets? Where is sneaking out into the Atlantic being represented? Where does only targeting convoys come into play? It doesn't. I don't think you understand. Subs at the start of WW2 could not be caught. There's a reason why the Germans came close to bringing Britain to its knees and it had little to do with the Wehrmacht or even the Luftwaffee. Submariners were the key part and, as you should know, they didn't achieve this through targeting or getting involved in engagements with enemy military ships. As it stands subs do not stand a chance.

How can it bo so simple to accept surface v surface and air v surface 100% detection, yet jump on sub detection?

Arhh, no. Have you been reading my posts? I doubt you have because I've made it very clear that I'm not happy with surface or air detection. This is a universal compliant. My suggestion clearly stated that I wanted changes to all naval combat, I even mentioned the Bismarck earlier on. The reason I have quoted "subs" more than anything else is to highlight the importance of evading combat in WW2; I'm providing a historical example.

Within the pattern of HOI naval warfare I just don't see this as being such a dramatic problem.

Each to their own. As far as I'm concerned the naval aspect is awful in this game.

Nothing is being abstracted here because nothing is being represented. Naval combat is being treated just as if it were taking place on land.
 
Last edited:
Dec 21, 2000
689
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Patrick Yarnell
Hmmm, no comments on our observation\concerns. I wonder, does theN.D.A prevent comment?:(

Is there an NDA still surrounding this game? I would've thought that ended once the game hit the shops.

I think the answer is simple. This will not change. We'll have to wait for HoI2. If that comes out I'll be asking for a part exchange for my copy of HoI1.
 

Dinsdale

Field Marshal
18 Badges
Dec 10, 2002
2.661
0
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Europa Universalis IV: Golden Century
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Pride of Nations
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • 500k Club
  • Rome: Vae Victis
  • Victoria 2
  • Semper Fi
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis III Complete
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Deus Vult
Originally posted by whyamihere
Arhh, no. Have you been reading my posts? I doubt you have because I've made it very clear that I'm not happy with surface or air detection. This is a universal compliant.
With so many bugs in the features out at release time, do you think they will get around to implementing improvements?

Nothing is being abstracted here because nothing is being represented. Naval combat is being treated just as if it were taking place on land.
Yes, I agree, and would add the same with air power too. But the thing is.....this is the game that is being sold. It's not going to magically transform itself into a simulation of greater complexity. I'm not sure why so many reviews claim the game to be complex; it really is far from that. A3R and WIF board games were detailed, this game is not even close to matching their level of complexity in any area except land combat. Even if that were so, we don't know how complex land combat really is because no one knows whether leader bonuses and detection works. With such little feedback who knows what modifiers are really being considered.

Currently, if one was looking for a complex simulation, HOI has;

no diplomacy
no air war which works
no functioning naval warfare of any kind, bugged or featured.
no logistics
no strategic warfare
no trade model
no functioning AI

For me, sub warfare fits in with the other abstractions which have no meaning, and is no big deal in light of all the other problems out there.

Having said that, the game is fun, but it's about as far from "grand strategic simulation" of WW2 as Panzer Leader was to Operational Art of War.

Maybe someday a real simulation will be released, until then HOI isn't much to get worked up at, it is what it is; a fun distraction.
 

unmerged(12746)

Yon Dan
Dec 15, 2002
1.386
0
Visit site
Here Here Dinsdale

Coming in after most of the points have been made.

****************************************************
" Yes, I agree, and would add the same with air power too. But the thing is.....this is the game that is being sold. It's not going to magically transform itself into a simulation of greater complexity. I'm not sure why so many reviews claim the game to be complex; it really is far from that. A3R and WIF board games were detailed, this game is not even close to matching their level of complexity in any area except land combat. Even if that were so, we don't know how complex land combat really is because no one knows whether leader bonuses and detection works. With such little feedback who knows what modifiers are really being considered.

Currently, if one was looking for a complex simulation, HOI has;

no diplomacy
no air war which works
no functioning naval warfare of any kind, bugged or featured.
no logistics
no strategic warfare
no trade model
no functioning AI

For me, sub warfare fits in with the other abstractions which have no meaning, and is no big deal in light of all the other problems out there.

Having said that, the game is fun, but it's about as far from "grand strategic simulation" of WW2 as Panzer Leader was to Operational Art of War.

Maybe someday a real simulation will be released, until then HOI isn't much to get worked up at, it is what it is; a fun distraction."

****************************************************
That sums it up in such a simplistic manner that how else can you add to it?

Dinsdale hits it perfectly here IMHO, as to the "stacks of Subs" theory? It works in MP I have done it. Yep works just like land combat, yep your going to be detected as a sub, yep you can go toe to toe based on numbers not ship types, completely unreaslistic as to actual military events in WWII naval combat yep.

Bottom line is HOI is a very simplistic combat engine, the tech tree I think fools a lot of people into thinking that the battle mode is somehow complex that actual tactical superiority of fleets and troops amount to a signifigant part of the game. The creation and research of those troops is a signifigante part of the game, the combat piece and actually using them isnt very complex at all and dosent account for many historical accuracies or researchs done.

At least thats my expirence, could be wrong though.

Odin
 
Dec 21, 2000
689
0
Visit site
Originally posted by Dinsdale
With so many bugs in the features out at release time, do you think they will get around to implementing improvements?

But this isn't an improvement. As someone pointed out, its a bug, plain and simple. It would be like land units ignoring rules of supply or being able to waltz through provinces containing enemy forces or not being allowed to retreat or not taking into acccount terrain, force size, tech when fighting. This is what I'm getting at, the naval element does not exist in this game. Its like moving different looking land units across what, might as well be, blue countryside.

Yes, I agree, and would add the same with air power too. But the thing is.....this is the game that is being sold.

Nope. This is not the game that is being sold. HoI is advertised as a WW2 grand-strategy game. Do you really call it WW2 when you can't even simulate the Battle of the Atlantic or Pearl Harbour (the naval issue - hiding the fleet - and bombing harbours are required for that)? Now I know that people will say that the game isn't supposed to follow history, but shouldn't it be able to recreate these events if we want it to?

It's not going to magically transform itself into a simulation of greater complexity. I'm not sure why so many reviews claim the game to be complex; it really is far from that.

I think this game has got the high reviews it has because they were written in a short space of time. The reviewers weren't able to pull the entire product apart. As I said, I thought I could put these things aside and assumed they'd be corrected. Then I see the announcement that they have no intention of having (WW2) naval combat in this game.

no diplomacy
no air war which works
no functioning naval warfare of any kind, bugged or featured.
no logistics
no strategic warfare
no trade model
no functioning AI

I agree.

For me, sub warfare fits in with the other abstractions which have no meaning, and is no big deal in light of all the other problems out there.

We're not just talking sub warfare, we're talking the entire naval element. Add that to your list and the most important ones, I see, for this to be a WW2 game are:

Naval warfare
Air warfare (which works better than the naval combat does)
Logistics

Now the rest are important, don't get me wrong, but diplomacy, in theory, does not have to be in this game, neither does the trade model, because we could just assume that the countries are going to war over these anyway, you don't need to encourage the player to search for resources. One could just have the province VP system.

That is not to say I don't enjoy those features, I do. I think they're great ideas, even if they don't work, but they play second fiddle to land, air, naval combat and logistics.

To say that the sub/naval element is not as important as some of the others is to deny how big a role it played in WW2... again, the BoA and Pacific campaign.

Maybe someday a real simulation will be released, until then HOI isn't much to get worked up at, it is what it is; a fun distraction. [/B]

Well then it would have been nice if they hadn't advertised it as being the definitive WW2 strategy game? Do you think it is?

I'm making such a fuss, not because of the way it is - I can accept games, especially of this scope, will have bugs - but because of the way it is going to be. I've yet to see Paradox announce that they're not going to try and fix the AI or aircombat or logistics, but this little print in a thread tucked away condemns the entire naval element to the trash can.

I've underlined this because this is exactly why I started the thread.

As a note to the moderators, would it be possible to have a seperate thread which tells us what won't be "fixed" or is "part of the design"?
 
Last edited: