Or Command sits in hypothetical HQ somewhere in Capital? I really hated HQ in HoI3.
- 4
Do we have HQ units?
- Thread starter Suor
- 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.
No HQ units in HOI4. I really loved the OOB structure from HOI3 - gave tons of immersion and should have been improved upon instead of removed. Could for instance be a choice by the player if he wanted them on/off map.
It is more simplified now. Gone are corps, armies, army groups etc. Well, you can create "Armies" - but Armies now consists of everything from 1-unlimited amounts of divisions.
It is more simplified now. Gone are corps, armies, army groups etc. Well, you can create "Armies" - but Armies now consists of everything from 1-unlimited amounts of divisions.
- 10
- 3
- 2
It was tedious to micro-manage this ridiculous amount HQ. I glad they rid off it, but I understand why some people liked them.
- 22
- 1
What i have done is just increase range of all HQs hugely, so i don`t have to move them around constantly. That is actually what is annoying about it, not their existence. So off map HQs that could somehow also get involved in combat would be great... But no idea how to do that. Maybe auto follow function for HQs would solve things?
- 3
I liked the OOB aswell but i really hated the on-map HQ to be honest.
In HoI IV there isnt really a OOB anymore. You just assign divisions to a general or a field marshal. You can sort those by assigning them to a theater, of which you can set the supply priority.
In HoI IV there isnt really a OOB anymore. You just assign divisions to a general or a field marshal. You can sort those by assigning them to a theater, of which you can set the supply priority.
- 2
It could be a bit painful in HoI3 but it was more realistic. In HoI4 it will be casual Now you can assign all your armies to your best fieldmarshall. no need to bother with more than one commander as this one will be able to manage you landed troop in south america in the same time of the ones in africa and the others in China... In HoI3 It was many to command them all, in HoI4 it's one to master them all. Well If they took away the high command level I hope that they did not take away the division leaders too....
- 5
- 2
I also really disliked it. Spent about 30 minutes reforming everything the first time I'd set up an invasion, only to have it all fraked up by the time I'd acheived victory on one front. Having to redo it all was a pain. I'm glad it's gone.
- 1
- 1
you still have to have several armies to operate. You need atleast one per front. You cant simply let rommel (for example) operate the entire wehrmacht. Sure, you could let a field marshal controll the entire eastern front and put up a simple attack line right through the soviet union, but that will be very inefficient and most likely fail. It is way better to have several armies attacking from several angles and taking different routes. You obviously want your mountaineers in the mountains and your tanks on plains rather than the opposite for example.
- 5
- 2
Of course technically having several commanders will allow you to take advantage of their specific bonuses but that's all. You don't need to split your strength into several armies if you keep controlling them manually. Splitting is good if you let the ai move your troops fo you. But I admit that if they dropped the divisions' leaders too you will lose that level of bnuses and have to rely more on the army commander. (Anyway I had no answer about the dropped or not division's leader.)
Removing the HQ is fine for me, but one more Level of command would be appreciated.
1) Theater (no leader)
2) Army Group (General)
3) Army (General)
4) Division (no leader)
1) Theater (no leader)
2) Army Group (General)
3) Army (General)
4) Division (no leader)
- 4
IMO, off-map OOB would be a good compromise that would keep immersion, while eliminating useless clickfest of moving those HQ units.
- 1
As far as I am aware the rule is that each Front-line has its own Axis of Attack (Arrow) and an Army can have as many Front-lines as it has Divisions so if you wished you could have an Army of 20 Divisions and a Battle-Plan for that Army that consisted of 20 Front-lines and 20 Axes of Attack.
And each Arrow is not a pathway it is only a guide that a Division or Divisions will use for the general direction of the advance which I presume is why its called an Axis.
- 1
That conforts me in not using such system and give each of my divisions their own patchways.
Just to make it clear a Division does not follow an arrow from province to province its not exact and it has a certain amount of leeway either side of the arrow to choose where to go.
The further away the Offensive Front-line or the more curved the Axis of Attack the less defined the route will be which is of course going to lead to some serious player frustration as they try and get the AI to do what they want and not what it wants.
I suppose I should ask Paradox is there any way to define a fixed path (province to province) for Divisions to move along within the Battle Plan system? I think it was Ctrl Shift in HOI III.
- 1
in Hoi3 you could give your division a precise pathway province by province. I assume that this is still in the game when not using the Battle system as I don't plan to use it.
You can give direct orders to individual division, even when they are executing a battleplan - watch WWW for examples.
Which is a bad plan because the units get bonuses for having an overall plan. The nice part about the new system is that you can still micro within it to exploit openings and the like.
Well so according the last 2 post I will draw a general plan and pinpoint province b province the moves of each of my divisions, taking in the bonus and not being fucked by the stupid ai moves...
True but it would be must easier to be able to give precise movement orders (Province to Province) to Division\Divisions within a Plan as this will then mean they will attempt to go where you want them to go and not along an axis that could be 2 or 3 provinces wide and you certainly do not want to send Divisions along an axis that curves back on itself as God only knows what the AI would do.
Of course I am not saying that you would want to do this for every single Division but I think most people would agree that to be able to give precise movement instructions to PZ Divisions within a Battle Plan would make the system more effective even if you do have to intervene manually at some point.
There is also an issue with what happens to Divisions when you manually give them orders, do they on completion of that manual order return to the original Plan without any further input from the player? That could be a recipe for disaster.
Yeah, this is the camp I'm in. Setting up the OOB was avtually a pretty fun thing to do in peacetime, but once war started, it felt absurdly tedious trying to keep corps/HQs together.
I'm a little bummed there's no OOB, but if that's the price to pay for having a smoother/less-headache-y management of your fronts, so be it.
- 1