Compared to HoI 3, HoI4 is less of a sandbox because of focus trees
- Never played HoI3 so I can't compare Though the more Google.Sheets I create on HoI4 the more I want to try HoI3 Honestly.
- FTs are uber-mana out of nowhere so it's really difficult to see the problem here. You don't want to use/abuse it in SP? Take a less efficient path and make the game more challenging. I'd understand it as applied to MP yet IMO that's no more than a tiny additional layer of complexity. Guilty as I am - I never play MP myself - yet the way I understand MP you oughtta be able to minmax as a pre-requisite for entering an MP game. So if you can minmax combat stats vs IC vs available manpower vs target terrain vs starting CIC/MIC vs XP vs starting tank designs and plane RnD vs DIV composition then minmaxing FT is a cakewalk.
1. New Focus trees are the MAIN selling point of multiple DLC (DoD, TfW, BftB).
2. Mods prove that the Clausewitz engine can support extended FTs for nearly all tags.
3. Mods can be unreliable, what if the Modder abandons it or needs a time to update after a new version?
- Why do you think wide user audience do not enjoy new FTs? It seems FTs generate a hell of stickiness yet my guess would be it's the cheapest thing in terms of dev resources.
- Again FTs are no more than free mana. In SP you can give as much of it as you see fit through command line. Or you can edit FTs yourself in text files so what's the problem?
- Pavel, Anastasia or whatever you call it are just placeholders for free XP, RnD or free whatever. I'd agree PDX needs to improve how much immersion players get from it. Yet I'd cut some slack as it's no easy job to make FTs immersive to both "native" people with in-depth knowledge of the political history of some specific country and a wider audience that has no idea about it and does not plan to spend days and days on researching one. IMO PDX has found a sweet (selling) spot here. May be they're not perfect at it now but they are definitely trying and not without success. Let's wait.