German Strength & peace conferences

[brantodb01]

So I've been going for the battle cry achievement and has been quite difficult but fun.

I'd managed to conquer all China besides Manchuria and Sinkiang. Both of which had joined the Comintern. That's fine the Soviets are at war with both the axis and allies anyway so they're not going to be too hard.

So I manage to push the Communists out of China and out Into Siberia, the issue is that then the Soviets capitulate and the axis get the peace conference annexing all of the Soviets and purporting the allies in china, so all my fighting was for nothing.

No I would have to do that same fighting again but going all the way to nationalist Spain but that's next to impossible as the allies are reduced to just GB and their dominions. India has capitulated, meaning another front I have to fight. Japan has bypassed the Philippines so no USA, Japan keeps invading me but I have no navy due to focusing on MIC which doesn't even matter as now Germany has unlimited factories from owning Europe and Russia with their 1k divisions.

So I'll never out produce them, I'll never out tech them from starting behind. Then only option I have is to sit and hope I can attrition away their millions of men without them ever breaking through a front line on every side


Tldr: the combination of Germany''s strength in this patch and the broken peace conferences make the game really unfun

 

[Reman]

Yes, peace conferences are well known for ruining campaigns. Welcome to HoI4.

 

[brantodb01]

It just feels much worse this patch and is frustrating when it ruins hours of a campaign.
It's not like EU4 or CK2 where you can easily come back from a loss. It's just shit that it's still not fixed

 

[Reman]

It just feels much worse this patch and is frustrating when it ruins hours of a campaign.
It's not like EU4 or CK2 where you can easily come back from a loss. It's just shit that it's still not fixed

I share your pain! The degree and frequency with which peace conferences ruin campaigns means they've deserved to be a #1 priority for a rework since patch 1.0. This has made it very frustrating to watch patch after patch arrive with no meaningful changes at all. Indeed, the devs have instead allocated their time to designing features of far less importance (e.g. special forces rework, licenses, now espionage).

 

[Crowarior]

When germany has 1k divisions a lot of them are shitty and they are commanded by AI so you always have advantage. Also, use nukes.

 

[Mr_Dimento]

I too had a few Battlecry achievement games ruined for me; for example Japan went into a civil war against the communists for years while I was eating up the rest of China, then the civil war was lost, and the Fascists won back in Japan. Japan then Joined the axis mere days before they capitulated and I could not fight the Germans in 1948 with how much stuff they had.

 

[Iskulya]

I share your pain! The degree and frequency with which peace conferences ruin campaigns means they've deserved to be a #1 priority for a rework since patch 1.0. This has made it very frustrating to watch patch after patch arrive with no meaningful changes at all. Indeed, the devs have instead allocated their time to designing features of far less importance (e.g. special forces rework, licenses, now espionage).

The opposite is true. peace conferences are very low priority.

In a historical game, there are a small handful of peace conferences. The Spanish Civil War, which is between two belligerents and so it doesn't matter. The Sino-Japanese war, where the winning side just consists of one country and its puppets, so again, it doesn't matter. The defeat of Japan, and the distribution of Japan's territory for a player UK or US is unimportant for anything other than role playing a realistic peace. And then the defeat of the Axis, which is the same thing. It really only matters for making a nicer looking post-war world, but the game is over at that point anyway.

The only people complaining about this incessantly are people who just play absurd meme campaigns. There's no reason not just to use player led peace conferences at that point if it bothers you so much. Problem solved, end of story.

Peace conferences should be improved, yes, but it's not remotely as big of a deal as you make it out to be. There are exactly two people complaining about this repeatedly, and you are one. I'd rather have the devs focus on interesting new content than wait a year and have improved peace conferences to the exclusion of features and fixes that actually have an impact on the game beyond vanity and achievement hunting.

 

[bitmode]

The opposite is true. peace conferences are very low priority.

In a historical game, there are a small handful of peace conferences. The Spanish Civil War, which is between two belligerents and so it doesn't matter. The Sino-Japanese war, where the winning side just consists of one country and its puppets, so again, it doesn't matter. The defeat of Japan, and the distribution of Japan's territory for a player UK or US is unimportant for anything other than role playing a realistic peace. And then the defeat of the Axis, which is the same thing. It really only matters for making a nicer looking post-war world, but the game is over at that point anyway.

The only people complaining about this incessantly are people who just play absurd meme campaigns. There's no reason not just to use player led peace conferences at that point if it bothers you so much. Problem solved, end of story.

Peace conferences should be improved, yes, but it's not remotely as big of a deal as you make it out to be. There are exactly two people complaining about this repeatedly, and you are one. I'd rather have the devs focus on interesting new content than wait a year and have improved peace conferences to the exclusion of features and fixes that actually have an impact on the game beyond vanity and achievement hunting.

The reason not more people are continously complaining about is that peace conferences are already an item on the developers' roadmap, whether you like it or not.
You can use a mod anytime but when doing an achievement and many of them are alt-history and do depend on peace conferences. If you don't want to do them, fine but don't act like the majority of players share your view.

 

[GeorgieBest]

Was having the most enjoyable campaign I've ever had playing as Dutch fascists.

Then the peace conference rolls around and completely ruins the campaign which I had sunk hours into.

I had spend ~5 years building up France's infrastructure so that it was pumping out fuel, rubber, and had a massive industry base, and then italy gets to take all of it just because they sent 5 million of their own men to die in Africa (and still lose all territory there anyway).

I'm on ironman so I can't even change anything. Never been so disappointed after playing this game. I think I'm going to have to install player led peace conferences and accept that I can't play for achievements until they fix this.

There are exactly two people complaining about this repeatedly, and you are one.

You can't be serious? One of the biggest complaints about this game that I constantly see here and on reddit is that the peace conferences are currently abysmal.

 

[Reman]

The opposite is true. peace conferences are very low priority.

In a historical game, there are a small handful of peace conferences. The Spanish Civil War, which is between two belligerents and so it doesn't matter. The Sino-Japanese war, where the winning side just consists of one country and its puppets, so again, it doesn't matter. The defeat of Japan, and the distribution of Japan's territory for a player UK or US is unimportant for anything other than role playing a realistic peace. And then the defeat of the Axis, which is the same thing. It really only matters for making a nicer looking post-war world, but the game is over at that point anyway.

The only people complaining about this incessantly are people who just play absurd meme campaigns. There's no reason not just to use player led peace conferences at that point if it bothers you so much. Problem solved, end of story.

Peace conferences should be improved, yes, but it's not remotely as big of a deal as you make it out to be. There are exactly two people complaining about this repeatedly, and you are one. I'd rather have the devs focus on interesting new content than wait a year and have improved peace conferences to the exclusion of features and fixes that actually have an impact on the game beyond vanity and achievement hunting.

Something like 90% of the achievements require the player to go alt-history, and many of them require defeating multiple factions. Through peace conferences, the AI can hijack huge swathes of important land in Europe you occupied because they lost 5 million soldiers in worthless trench warfare in the Congo. This type of situation can cause the player to lose 80%+ of their industry base overnight, setting their progress back by years or even ruining the entire campaign outright. Other infamous possibilities from peace conferences include:

• By far the most frequent source of crashes in HoI4
• AI chain passing to lock other nations out of peace conference entirely, even if they have 33% war participation
• Getting your own puppets randomly annexed by other nations in peace conferences where you are the victor, depriving you of >80% of your accessible starting manpower

Peace conferences need to be burnt to the ground.

 

[GeorgieBest]

Other infamous possibilities from peace conferences include:

• By far the most frequent source of crashes in HoI4
• AI chain passing to lock other nations out of peace conference entirely, even if they have 33% war participation
• Getting your own puppets randomly annexed by other nations in peace conferences where you are the victor, depriving you of >80% of your accessible starting manpower

Peace conferences need to be burnt to the ground.

Oh god this hurts too much. In the campaign I mentioned in my last post: I was producing all of the rubber for the axis, I had such a strong industrial base that not only was I pumping out advanced heavy tanks and fighters, but I had enough to send 40% of my production to italy and germany each month. Whilst the Germans relentlessly charged into Soviet bayonetts, my heavy tank divisions were the ones which actually broke through the front and began encircling divisions. My subs and fighters completely nullified the RAF and RN, eventually leading to the invasion and surrender of the UK.

For all of that I was thanked with the game freezing for two minutes whilst Germany and Italy divided up the world for themselves. After single-handedly dragging the Axis out of the gutter and winning the war the only thing they let me have was a single worthless province in Canada. How anyone can think this is OK is beyond me.

 

[Paul.Ketcham]

If you're not able to use a mod since you're going for achievements, the easiest way to work around peace conferences is:
1.) Don't join factions (see step two).
2.) Declare war on the faction with more warscore (or any other faction you are afraid is going to steal your winnings).

If you're at war with them, then even if they get the peace conference (whoever has more warscore will get the option to deal with the defeated powers) you'll keep everything you took. It sucks if you're playing a minor like the Dutch since they can't exactly afford to fight Germany, but for majors like Japan its feasible. My first game actually went towards a world conquest solely because I wasn't willing to give up all my conquered territory and I ended up at war with every other major power in the world (except Brazil).

Personally, I gave up a long time ago and just use Player-Led Peace Conferences. I even have the tookpack mod to fix borders screwed up by entirely AI-led peace conferences (no more Italian Caledonia or Germany forgetting to annex Zaolzie and Sakhalin).