I think every country should have at least 3-4 base commanders at min., simply so you have something to chose from and use different tactics (enhanced by traits).
- 4
Commanders list, the winners and the losers
- Thread starter Nicolas I
- 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.
It would certainly make the challange of playing as a minor more interesting if every country has 3-4 commanders.
- 1
It remains to be seen how much political power points are needed to create a general.
But political power will probably be a scarce resource because it is needed for many actions. In that sense, a country having to create even a few generals because he begins with only 1 or 2 would be at a disadvantage facing a country having enough commanders at game start.
Yes, it's normal that some countries have a disadvantage if it was historically the case. But in the proposed list some countries have 35% of the commanders they had in HOI3 while others have a meagre 1% to 5%. If they corrected some inaccuracies, they were quite big ones to justify changes of such a magnitude.
- 1
So the main factor to decide the right number of commanders should not be related to gameplay and/or historical accuracy but by the resources needed for the portraits ?
Sorry Mr. president/prime minister/dictator, we lack generals to lead our armies because we lack portraits of them, all the good painters are doing still life painting of chamber pots...
Last edited:
- 2
Lets just say I buy your calculations. Then why some countries have 35% of their HOI3 leaders (10 times what is needed by your standards) while others have 1%, 2%, 3% ?
An expanded and accurate commander list will be the first mod that I will be getting. When I pick my generals I want them to be historical and not some randomly generated person. Also some of the starting skill levels seem to be way off of where they should be such as the example of Walter Model.
- 2
My main point was about the number of commanders varying greatly between countries (more than history warrants), but the skill level of some commanders is also questionable.
I looked at this list, and I think the United States needs more commanders for their army.
- 3
- 1
Can someone explain to me why the metric used here is "percentage of leaders the country had in HoI III" instead of ... you know ... the actual number of leaders the country has in HoI IV? I don't see how HoI III leader counts should be relevant. Looking at the list for this game, Germany, Japan, USSR, UK and USA (obvious choices) are clearly dominating. Canada has only 5 leaders, so I don't see how it really matters that they "lost" fewer leaders, Germany still has a significant advantage.
This just seems like information heavily twisted, using completely irrelevant measurements, to make some unknown point.
Although it does seem like some countries are lacking leaders, especially Nationalist China. Definitely doesn't make sense that one of the most populous nations in history has so few leaders as if they couldn't train enough of them to lead anything besides a small mob.
But then again, where is this information from? I don't recall ever seeing full lists of generals in any WWW, so maybe this is only what was found and there could be plenty more. Not to mention - there is still an option to recruit more generals. The number of starting generals can be used as a balancing mechanism, so that countries that weren't that strong militarily in the time period have to invest more to gain that additional military power, instead of being on par with a military power like Germany from the get-go, instead the weaker nations must make sacrifices (through diverting political capital from other needs).
It also mentions some sort of import from beta wiki in the edit history, so maybe the list is from earlier builds (that both Paradox staff (devs, QA) had access to and spread information from and the few people who got lucky through the sign-up system to be granted beta access).
If you make such a statement, it is customary to present arguments to back it up. Otherwise it's just really meaningless and doesn't promote any further discussion, just you dropping an opinion bomb that is otherwise irrelevant. (no offense meant, just sounds odd and out of place in the thread)
This just seems like information heavily twisted, using completely irrelevant measurements, to make some unknown point.
Although it does seem like some countries are lacking leaders, especially Nationalist China. Definitely doesn't make sense that one of the most populous nations in history has so few leaders as if they couldn't train enough of them to lead anything besides a small mob.
But then again, where is this information from? I don't recall ever seeing full lists of generals in any WWW, so maybe this is only what was found and there could be plenty more. Not to mention - there is still an option to recruit more generals. The number of starting generals can be used as a balancing mechanism, so that countries that weren't that strong militarily in the time period have to invest more to gain that additional military power, instead of being on par with a military power like Germany from the get-go, instead the weaker nations must make sacrifices (through diverting political capital from other needs).
It also mentions some sort of import from beta wiki in the edit history, so maybe the list is from earlier builds (that both Paradox staff (devs, QA) had access to and spread information from and the few people who got lucky through the sign-up system to be granted beta access).
If you make such a statement, it is customary to present arguments to back it up. Otherwise it's just really meaningless and doesn't promote any further discussion, just you dropping an opinion bomb that is otherwise irrelevant. (no offense meant, just sounds odd and out of place in the thread)
- 2
- 1
- 1
Once again, there is no credible confirmation anywhere that the list is actually accurate. Plus, we don't know fully how the general mechanics work. Maybe nations with no pre-determined generals will automatically have generic ones created (which could also be helpful for newly formed states and such).
- 2
- 1
You mean that Paradox got the numbers so completely wrong in HOI3 so it shouldn't be used even as a remote basis for comparison ?
If you compare HOI4 number of commanders with HOI4 number of commanders, all countries have 100%. Very useful comparison.
PS I'm not actually wondering about a particular country. With the new system all countries need a lot less generals, it's OK. I just wonder why the reduction is not about the same magnitude for each country (minus some adjustments for gameplay) ?
- 4
What?
1) They didn't get the "numbers wrong". It's a 7 year old game, the sequel has had the entire OOB system completely overhauled from A to Z. I would say that HoI III heavily lacked generals, especially for minors, as you would end up with entire armies being filled with leaderless divisions due to this heavy micromanagement approach. But it's a different game. Obviously HoI IV is a sequel, but it has taken a whole different approach to that aspect, comparison is a waste of time.
2) Had you actually read what I wrote, I did not ask to compare HoI IV commander numbers to HoI IV commander numbers. I said that instead the actual numbers of HoI IV leaders should be presented and community members could provide their subjective views on whether the number is good enough for what they think would be needed. I was implying that HoI III is absolutely irrelevant at this point, comparisons are pointless because the systems compared have barely any similarities.
So maybe read and interpret correctly before bashing my statements.
3) I do think they got the numbers wrong as there were too few, but that's not important for this game. I don't think HoI III numbers should even remotely be relevant in any discussions about HoI IV, but not for the reason you listed. Balancing a game so different from the previous one (with 7 years of technological, design and company advances) makes zero sense in my view, or even discussing the balance is pointless.
This proposed list lacks even more generals for the minors, now instead of leaderless armies they will have leaderless corps/armies or just have one FM leading all their country troops event if they have numerous fronts.
- 2
If that is not balancing I don't know what is balancing for you ? I though balancing is pointless ?
If balancing is pointless, does it mean you want an unbalanced game ? Or that game balance should only be considered after release ?
PS I will stop here as we seem the have very different and incompatible visions.
- 2
- 1
Political points can be spent to generate new generals. So leaderless armies aren't necessarily going to be a thing.
Also agree that using percentages is nonsense. It treats hearts of iron 3 as a baseline or benchmark. Hoi3 has a certain number of provinces, hoi2 had less, was Hoi3 better than 2? It's totally subjective and in many ways incomparable
Also agree that using percentages is nonsense. It treats hearts of iron 3 as a baseline or benchmark. Hoi3 has a certain number of provinces, hoi2 had less, was Hoi3 better than 2? It's totally subjective and in many ways incomparable
- 2
Political power will probably be a scarce resource because it is needed for many actions. In that sense, a country having to create even a few generals because he begins with only 1 or 2 would be at a disadvantage facing a country having enough commanders at game start.
- 1
- 1
But if they're minors, I don't see that it's a problem they're at a disadvantage.
- 2
Spain had a nice bunch of generals at the period Franco itself was general.
There is also need to consider General Mola although he died during SCW, Queipo de Llano, Vicente Rojo. In fact i don't know who is this general they have included... and i've read some nice amount of bibliography about SCW.
I'm spanish native btw.
There is also need to consider General Mola although he died during SCW, Queipo de Llano, Vicente Rojo. In fact i don't know who is this general they have included... and i've read some nice amount of bibliography about SCW.
I'm spanish native btw.