I think units don't reinforce when in battle and I had a bad tendency to always counterattack leaving my armies with very little R&R.
-
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.
I'm ashamed to say it, but I never bought/tried Darkest Hour. I loved HOI2, but disliked the over-exposure of related third party offerings that had to compete with each other (Arsenal of Democracy, Darkest Hour, Iron Cross) as well as shiny new Paradox offerings.
Although, every previous attempt I made to get into HOI3 left me disappointed, I'm currently trying HOI3, again. I need to take a break from some of my favorite Paradox games that are looking like permanent, buggy Beta efforts these days, thanks to the current DLC system. And I don't really want to waste my time experimenting with HOI4, given my experience with early HOI3, and the fact that I can't believe a WW2 game can possibly work if you change the rules around every few months. Tried some older games, Civ6, etc., but want to get back to Paradox games if they were just somewhat stable.
So, hunting around for a compelling, "finished" game led me here. I just purchased Darkest Hour, based on some of the comments in this thread. But I'm ambivalent which WW2 experience I want to try first (well, re-try). I already own Arsenal of Democracy (and Iron Cross, though I never really figured out how it fit into the scheme of things) as well as HOI3 +expansions. Time being more valuable than money these days, I'm wondering if the (presumably highly biased) crowd here has anything particularly positive or negative to say about some of the other "competitors" to Darkest Hour besides HOI4? E.g., would some of the statements made in this thread (about Darkest Hour vs HOI4) apply equally to comparisons of the latest version of HOI3 or Arsenal of Democracy to HOI4?
The comment about the "almost useless airforce", for example, leaves me a bit concerned that I might find some aspects of Darkest Hour unsatisfying, as well.
As a newbie, I just finished my first game as Germany (and second game overall) in HOI IV on Ironman: I invaded Britain, USA, and Russia; and also helped Japan win against China. So I can understand why people consider it to be very arcade.
I have Darkest Hour and HOI III but they have always been more dense and harder to crack, never won any wars in them. I have a suspicion though that a lot of that is due to how easier it is to manage armies in HOI IV. You can draw a border and assign many divisions with just a few clicks. The tooltips in HOI IV are very good at explaining a lot of what is happening too.
I definitely think HOI IV makes a great gateway game into the older titles.
I don't think you will find the perfect or 'finished' game (there's always something that could be improved), but if you want complexity then HOI III with the Black Ice mod has a really good reputation. I like the presentation in Darkest Hour though, and it comes with a really amazing manual.
I have Darkest Hour and HOI III but they have always been more dense and harder to crack, never won any wars in them. I have a suspicion though that a lot of that is due to how easier it is to manage armies in HOI IV. You can draw a border and assign many divisions with just a few clicks. The tooltips in HOI IV are very good at explaining a lot of what is happening too.
I definitely think HOI IV makes a great gateway game into the older titles.
I don't think you will find the perfect or 'finished' game (there's always something that could be improved), but if you want complexity then HOI III with the Black Ice mod has a really good reputation. I like the presentation in Darkest Hour though, and it comes with a really amazing manual.
In HOI IV, aircraft basically teleport to the air zone they are assigned to fly in., e.g. Southern England--> Western Germany.
In Darkest Hour, said planes would have to battle interceptors all the way across the Benelux to Germany.
In Darkest Hour, said planes would have to battle interceptors all the way across the Benelux to Germany.
https://aaltomies.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/ageless-games-across-generations/
Maybe relevant to the discussion, maybe not.
Maybe relevant to the discussion, maybe not.
i just bought darkest hour should i keep it? i have hoi4 too which one should i play?
HOI IV has many of the issues that HOI III was accused of having. Awkward building system... which seems to work quite well in Black Ice in HOI III where as in any sense HOI IV build program is incredibly tedious for no apparent reason for bonuses that make little difference. IVs naval production is terrible with the same number of shipyards building a carrier or destroyer and still like III you can assign it to appear anywhere you wish which was an issue with III. HOI IV has given up the more detailed map allowing less provinces than in III. The division maker in IV is fun but mods have allowed this in III for years. IV has the very ahistoric IMHO command rules. I commander who says attack and thats pretty much it. In III you would built a workable pyramid of command in III and could assign commanders to control fronts for you. I have done that in III setting up Gibraltar as American later in '43 and assigning an army under Eisenhower to take N. Africa and ask for help from allies and he does it.... even launches attacks into Sicily. Giving AI command in III would place your general on the same AI footing as the enemy. Its the officers you assign, supply, and support fighting the specific campaign front. Having an AI fight AI in Russia works great for me in III with 3 German fronts plus an Arctic command. IV is just so off in combat because the provinces are less. The great strength of HOI I to III were the number of provinces. These are just a few things I find that make HOI IV the more inferior version of Hearts of Iron II thru III On Darkest Hour (which I play too) the game and its more fun than IV. There just is not enough good stuff in IV to make it great. All this IMHO.
- 2
Frankly, in my opinion, HOI4 is little more than a world war 2 sandbox and not much of a war strategy game. Victoria 2 was also rather limited in its war system, but it worked, and that game had an amazing political and economic system that HOI4 can't even come near to. That is to say that HOI4 is basically a jack of all trades and master of none. There is no harm in enjoying playing some crazy scenario in it and I do not begrudge those who enjoy it, but personally, I've come to expect war strategy from the HOI series and in that regard HOI4 completely failed to deliver. I'd imagine it's a result of Paradox's shift toa general audience.
HOI3 had too much micromanagement in it as well but it still seemed to retain the war strategy core of the series. Hearts of Iron 2 and its Darkest Hour refinement, in my view, did so well precisely because they neglected all other game systems but warfare left a game in which the systems worked pretty well precisely because they were so simple while making warfare suitably challenging. That said, having played Darkest Hour for a long time (though only with lore centric mods such as KR, Napoleon's Legacy, others and Vanilla) I find that I know how the game works well enough to the point that the AI generally poses very little challenge.
Even the DH AI is very limited without the more gameplay dedicated mods. Personally, I find I enjoy it just the same along with self-imposed challenges and limitations. In KR for example, I can play the Commune France in at least four unique ways if not six. It's the game (and mod) I never seem to get tired of.
HOI3 had too much micromanagement in it as well but it still seemed to retain the war strategy core of the series. Hearts of Iron 2 and its Darkest Hour refinement, in my view, did so well precisely because they neglected all other game systems but warfare left a game in which the systems worked pretty well precisely because they were so simple while making warfare suitably challenging. That said, having played Darkest Hour for a long time (though only with lore centric mods such as KR, Napoleon's Legacy, others and Vanilla) I find that I know how the game works well enough to the point that the AI generally poses very little challenge.
Even the DH AI is very limited without the more gameplay dedicated mods. Personally, I find I enjoy it just the same along with self-imposed challenges and limitations. In KR for example, I can play the Commune France in at least four unique ways if not six. It's the game (and mod) I never seem to get tired of.
- 3
- 1
How do you defend this indefensible Hoi4 production?
No it is not better or more complex.
You just have to make factories to make factories, I don't call that deep gameplay.
And no more worrying about how you are going to distribute your ic, now you assign your factories to produce the equipment proportionally to what you use, no more worrying about making trade-offs between economy and happiness of its population, or even between the improvement and the creation of unit.
You just produce the material in good quantity with factories manufactured with factories.
No it is not better or more complex.
You just have to make factories to make factories, I don't call that deep gameplay.
And no more worrying about how you are going to distribute your ic, now you assign your factories to produce the equipment proportionally to what you use, no more worrying about making trade-offs between economy and happiness of its population, or even between the improvement and the creation of unit.
You just produce the material in good quantity with factories manufactured with factories.
- 1
- 1
DH has the best graphics, map and ability for alternate history type modding (flexible event structure, lots of unique commands, etc) but the weakness is that the combat is pretty pathetic. There's very much a meta, certain things are borked outright (I generally try to have as little to do with the naval systems as possible because they're so frustrating) and the WW1 scenario in particular is horribly railroaded but still plays out as fast as the WW2 scenario, especially in the East.
AOD has the better wargame and especially has the best logistics models out of all of them, but has the ugliest graphics and map (hence not surprising it plays second fiddle to DH). You can actually simulate Lend-Lease and the UBoat campaign! Units have their own supply stocks so it's not cut them off and then they're out of supply from one hour to the next and it generally makes sense to leave your pocketed units alone and try to rescue them to conserve supply (or preserve them with air supply), instead of immediately trying to break out like in DH.
Iron Cross I never played and I'm not sure if it's even for sale still, but back in the day, it was lauded for having the best tech tree out of any of the games.
- 1
Only thing I kind-of enjoy from HoI4 is the prototyping of equipment, and the sort-of way units can be designated elite and upgraded before the others with those, but I don't know if it works. XD
_____
I guess my only other opinion on it, about the "sandbox" complaints, is that it easily allows for nation-building, that pesky doctrine we saw play out in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Korea, Ukraine, etc., with the caveat that it needs to work, again. XD
I find that HoI4 looks more appealing with non-WWII modifications such as the Fallout Old World Blues.
_____
I guess my only other opinion on it, about the "sandbox" complaints, is that it easily allows for nation-building, that pesky doctrine we saw play out in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Korea, Ukraine, etc., with the caveat that it needs to work, again. XD
I find that HoI4 looks more appealing with non-WWII modifications such as the Fallout Old World Blues.
Last edited:
You can prioritize specific units to upgrade and repair before others in DH too. But maybe HOI4's feature is different.
- 1
HoI4 seems hopelessly lost in development. I guess WWII simulators for a company that's grown to be as big as Paradox has is too controversial unless they cram everything they can into it that allows for total fungibility of the historical aspects.
Upgrading in DH feels megalithic and "board-gameish" with universals applied all across and instantly, whereas I do like that HoI4 will(allegedly) count every single tank and every single tank variant, and attempt to ship that deluxe Tiger VI to your favored fash-bois.
- 1
From what I've seen and read on HOI4 in the forums, I'm sure you can call it many things but it's definitely not a WW2 simulator (more like a meme generator). Cramming as many side tasks as they can into the game seems more to have the player engaging with *something* since they decided to try and automate the main gameplay loop (of moving the pieces around the board yourself). Otherwise the massively increased numbers of provinces and units compared to the HOI2 generation would stretch people's capability to react in real time. HOI4 just goes to prove that more is not always better IMO...
It's interesting you say that DH is the boardgameish one though considering that boardgames themselves tackle WW2 on the same microscopic scale as HOI4 tries to, just it's actually doable there because they're turn-based. FITE (Fire in the East) for example that Gary Grisby used to make War in the East on PC, represents the entire Eastern Front down to every single tank and AT gun, with the units at regiment level. Each player has to move ~2500 units each turn. The games last as long as 450 turns but usually people finish by turn 300
If you like a more nuanced view, I'd suggest you try out Arsenal of Democracy across the street, as it doesn't get down to counting each bullet, but it avoids a lot of the generalizations that DH has, especially with supply.
As an aside, this joke post from the HOI4 forum that was nominated for post of the year suggests to me that the extra nuance in HOI4 is kind of wasted and is the game equivalent of a make-work project.....
- 1
How else to keep the consumers sated, management happy, and push endless promise of wealth? XD
Anti-work is like a sacrilege. I feel like democracy has become more fanatical than communism ever was, but I'll reserve my expectations of its future.