As a (game) designer exercise, I want to point out some design flaws.
I want to say from the start, that this is my own opinion, and I would like to have your opinion on the topic. So I would like you to answer, before talking or discussing about antyhing, with a yes or a no and some sort of a motivation, to each point, before going in a deeper discussion, with anybody else.
This would help me to take some insight from differents mind, and not like only discussing about one of the 10 points that I will propose.
Thanks
Let's Start!
1&2. BASIC RESOURCES(INDUSTRAIL RESOURCES) ON TRADE LAWS
In HOI3 you had a sort of basic resources and basic industries. The major reason, after TFH, was that with time, would have allowed a country to spawn up " some rebels" inside your occupied territories. ( I think)
For now, how HOI4 and Trade Laws are designed, if you don't need resources, the best Trade Law is Free Trade.
Spicing up, and having a deeper meaning on the choice of the trade laws, could been pretty good in my own opinion.
Less Basic Resources more your economy it's closed, as more CIC(flat bonus), more your economy it's closed.
This could give a reason to the minors, to close their economies, meanwhile doesn't represent a big buff for the axis majors.
So you trade off, more factory outpot, construction speed, research time, for a CIC FLAT BONUS. Maybe the equivalent could be the resources to buy one or two license productions?
3. LICENSE PRODUCTION ON TRADE LAWS!
Oak it's not even comed out, but meanwhile I was writing point 1&2, I saw somehow the connection, between trade laws and license production, why don't open the point in a different point! Maybe this could raise some confrontantion inside this topic
My proposal would be a lesser cost for license production in CIC ( or less malus in production) more your country is open towards free trade!
4. MORE RECRUITABLE POPULATION!
http://prnt.sc/eyl2f5 fast screenshoot Germany 1st January 1939
I have a Total Manpower of 1.98M, but each month, I recruit only 2420 guys. My personal feel it's that somehow it's pretty unrealistic.
OR
http://prnt.sc/eylxyn 7.93Milion of people, but only 9680 each month that grow up and will serve the country.
add like at least a x10-x25 numbers of times, to this numbers, wouldn't be that wrong in my own opinion!? ( and maybe difference so x5 if you do volunteers, x15 if you do scrap the barrel and so go on).
5. TRADE INFLUENCE!
I don't understand why the system now works ( with the AI) that if a country start to trade with a country, will keep trading no matter what happens in their relationship.
I mean shouldn't the best partner, the one that you are going to trade with? Should not the CIC of the AI be contested in each game, between axis or allied countried, thanks to the use of political power, (ministers, coup and relationship) that assigned in predefined ways.
And plenty of times as been reported as a bug on the forum, but really it is, or the system it's supposed to work this way?
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...irrational-v1-3-3-2dd2.1001176/#post-22662312
Sorry but I can't stand a Japan buying resources from the USA, when they could trade with Germany! ( they help a future enemy! giving them CIC) Or if not Japan because it really happened to trade with the USA, at least ITALY should buy resources from Germany!
6. ASSIGN AIRFORCES TO THE ARMIES!
We had in hoi3, a increndible sequel of corps-army-armygroup and then finally the theathre. In the theather or how was called, you could assign army group. And then paint the zones of interest.
You could even add airplanes or navy, and set their aggression ( passive, defensive or aggressive)
Despite that, why we need to go with F3, create the wing, select the quantity, assign the wing to the airport, and then after the airport, we need to give them the region, and then they need to support the fight, when we could just add the airplanes or wings, to the army, and then meanwhile they advance, the IA takes places, and puts like CAS in airports more near the front, and ecc..ecc.., don't wasting our times, in useless clicks?
Wouldn't be the best? ( even putting aggressivness, so like if don't want my cas die like mosquitos, i choose that they can only aggro province where the battle will not make me loose them in number of thousands?)
7. STRATEGIC BOMBING
Why when there is strategic bombing, airplanes destroy just EVERTHING AND EVERYWHERE. I mean, what IF I would like to see them only destroying forts, and no industries, road and ecc..ecc...
The strategical importance, of Strategic Bombing should me allow to decide what I want to bomb? Ok maybe can happen that the bombing misses, and they take out the infrastructure.
But maybe I am not interesting of bombing like a road that is futher away, from my "goal object"
I mean, maybe I would not glad to bomb roads or aiports, that maybe I would need to use later?
8. NAVAL COMBAT
I can't really stand, in seeing one convoy ( or X) keeping busy an entire fleet blob, for days and days. ( But only one moment if you have a carrier in your fleet)
Would be the best add sort some of " Convoy attrition" to the naval map, so you loose convoy if you don't have enough naval superiority, meanwhile the enemy has? ( of course you loose 0 if it's neutral).
I mean we have already " resources attrition" why we can't have " convoy attrition"Concept? so we avoid the need of seeing fleets sunking convoy?
I would like to sunk a convoy, if that convoy was a moving division. But should open differents battle. I can't really stand, of seeing one fleet, chasing one cavalary division inside a convoy, meanwhile an army passes trough.. makes me cringe for immertion breaking!
9. NAVAL COMPOSITION
Wasn't better the system of hoi3?
There was a "composition" of fleet, and this composition of fleet made you think about differents fleet ( basic where two.. SAG or CTF, but what you were putting inside, was going to make hell of a difference)
Why we are "similar to stellaris" in this case? I mean wouldn't be better to change the meta, and allow actualy fleet composition with malus that reach 100% for overcrowding? And not like 80% and reach gamey situation? where the immertion of being in the game, actually brokes? Because I don't see what is the tactical part of putting 200 vs 200 is or twelve carries together in one fleet. Yes they receive a MALUS, but they keep to being operative.
and the last one
10. PLANS CHARGING
I mean, why we can charge our plans, only if we are on the front with a country.
Would not be better like allow, the troops to charge like 25%-50% of the value, before being in border with the country ( even if like 15 province away) and then like the rest, near the border? but only if assigned?
Make them loose all the bonus if they switch the battleplans? I mean it's not like I charge myself in invading a country and then put myself in a battle with another country, or in a naval invasion against another country, allowed to keep the bonus.
As I should not be allowed to keep the bonus, if i do experditionary force to a nation, and then receive the troops back.
It's something that of course, players can make rules against, but why, we are supposed even to make rules against something like that?
I want to say from the start, that this is my own opinion, and I would like to have your opinion on the topic. So I would like you to answer, before talking or discussing about antyhing, with a yes or a no and some sort of a motivation, to each point, before going in a deeper discussion, with anybody else.
This would help me to take some insight from differents mind, and not like only discussing about one of the 10 points that I will propose.
Thanks
Let's Start!
1&2. BASIC RESOURCES(INDUSTRAIL RESOURCES) ON TRADE LAWS
In HOI3 you had a sort of basic resources and basic industries. The major reason, after TFH, was that with time, would have allowed a country to spawn up " some rebels" inside your occupied territories. ( I think)
For now, how HOI4 and Trade Laws are designed, if you don't need resources, the best Trade Law is Free Trade.
Spicing up, and having a deeper meaning on the choice of the trade laws, could been pretty good in my own opinion.
Less Basic Resources more your economy it's closed, as more CIC(flat bonus), more your economy it's closed.
This could give a reason to the minors, to close their economies, meanwhile doesn't represent a big buff for the axis majors.
So you trade off, more factory outpot, construction speed, research time, for a CIC FLAT BONUS. Maybe the equivalent could be the resources to buy one or two license productions?
3. LICENSE PRODUCTION ON TRADE LAWS!
Oak it's not even comed out, but meanwhile I was writing point 1&2, I saw somehow the connection, between trade laws and license production, why don't open the point in a different point! Maybe this could raise some confrontantion inside this topic
My proposal would be a lesser cost for license production in CIC ( or less malus in production) more your country is open towards free trade!
4. MORE RECRUITABLE POPULATION!
http://prnt.sc/eyl2f5 fast screenshoot Germany 1st January 1939
I have a Total Manpower of 1.98M, but each month, I recruit only 2420 guys. My personal feel it's that somehow it's pretty unrealistic.
OR
http://prnt.sc/eylxyn 7.93Milion of people, but only 9680 each month that grow up and will serve the country.
add like at least a x10-x25 numbers of times, to this numbers, wouldn't be that wrong in my own opinion!? ( and maybe difference so x5 if you do volunteers, x15 if you do scrap the barrel and so go on).
5. TRADE INFLUENCE!
I don't understand why the system now works ( with the AI) that if a country start to trade with a country, will keep trading no matter what happens in their relationship.
I mean shouldn't the best partner, the one that you are going to trade with? Should not the CIC of the AI be contested in each game, between axis or allied countried, thanks to the use of political power, (ministers, coup and relationship) that assigned in predefined ways.
And plenty of times as been reported as a bug on the forum, but really it is, or the system it's supposed to work this way?
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...irrational-v1-3-3-2dd2.1001176/#post-22662312
Sorry but I can't stand a Japan buying resources from the USA, when they could trade with Germany! ( they help a future enemy! giving them CIC) Or if not Japan because it really happened to trade with the USA, at least ITALY should buy resources from Germany!
6. ASSIGN AIRFORCES TO THE ARMIES!
We had in hoi3, a increndible sequel of corps-army-armygroup and then finally the theathre. In the theather or how was called, you could assign army group. And then paint the zones of interest.
You could even add airplanes or navy, and set their aggression ( passive, defensive or aggressive)
Despite that, why we need to go with F3, create the wing, select the quantity, assign the wing to the airport, and then after the airport, we need to give them the region, and then they need to support the fight, when we could just add the airplanes or wings, to the army, and then meanwhile they advance, the IA takes places, and puts like CAS in airports more near the front, and ecc..ecc.., don't wasting our times, in useless clicks?
Wouldn't be the best? ( even putting aggressivness, so like if don't want my cas die like mosquitos, i choose that they can only aggro province where the battle will not make me loose them in number of thousands?)
7. STRATEGIC BOMBING
Why when there is strategic bombing, airplanes destroy just EVERTHING AND EVERYWHERE. I mean, what IF I would like to see them only destroying forts, and no industries, road and ecc..ecc...
The strategical importance, of Strategic Bombing should me allow to decide what I want to bomb? Ok maybe can happen that the bombing misses, and they take out the infrastructure.
But maybe I am not interesting of bombing like a road that is futher away, from my "goal object"
I mean, maybe I would not glad to bomb roads or aiports, that maybe I would need to use later?
8. NAVAL COMBAT
I can't really stand, in seeing one convoy ( or X) keeping busy an entire fleet blob, for days and days. ( But only one moment if you have a carrier in your fleet)
Would be the best add sort some of " Convoy attrition" to the naval map, so you loose convoy if you don't have enough naval superiority, meanwhile the enemy has? ( of course you loose 0 if it's neutral).
I mean we have already " resources attrition" why we can't have " convoy attrition"Concept? so we avoid the need of seeing fleets sunking convoy?
I would like to sunk a convoy, if that convoy was a moving division. But should open differents battle. I can't really stand, of seeing one fleet, chasing one cavalary division inside a convoy, meanwhile an army passes trough.. makes me cringe for immertion breaking!
9. NAVAL COMPOSITION
Wasn't better the system of hoi3?
There was a "composition" of fleet, and this composition of fleet made you think about differents fleet ( basic where two.. SAG or CTF, but what you were putting inside, was going to make hell of a difference)
Why we are "similar to stellaris" in this case? I mean wouldn't be better to change the meta, and allow actualy fleet composition with malus that reach 100% for overcrowding? And not like 80% and reach gamey situation? where the immertion of being in the game, actually brokes? Because I don't see what is the tactical part of putting 200 vs 200 is or twelve carries together in one fleet. Yes they receive a MALUS, but they keep to being operative.
and the last one
10. PLANS CHARGING
I mean, why we can charge our plans, only if we are on the front with a country.
Would not be better like allow, the troops to charge like 25%-50% of the value, before being in border with the country ( even if like 15 province away) and then like the rest, near the border? but only if assigned?
Make them loose all the bonus if they switch the battleplans? I mean it's not like I charge myself in invading a country and then put myself in a battle with another country, or in a naval invasion against another country, allowed to keep the bonus.
As I should not be allowed to keep the bonus, if i do experditionary force to a nation, and then receive the troops back.
It's something that of course, players can make rules against, but why, we are supposed even to make rules against something like that?
Last edited:
