Hearts of Iron 3: the future?

[Tahuti]

Many people, including me would be curious how Hearts of Iron 3 would turn out. Considering EUIII has 3D graphics and fully random events (as opposed to pre-scripted events), its likely HoI3 Will be much like it.

What do you think about it, and would you think out would happen?>

 

[unmerged(48905)]

I would like 2D. 3D really adds nothing to the game. A much more detailed 2d map with actual objectives like bridges, rivers etc would be great. I say stay with 2d, make it bigger and high resolution. The meat of the game is the strategy not the visual so work on that.

So is there anything in the pipes anyways? I am ready to play HOI3 anytime now so come one!

 

[Carroarmato-P40]

I reckon an early 20's start would be best... It would cover a multitude of pivotal events.. The Russian revolution/civil war, the Czech legions, the Polish/Soviet war, the three Silesian uprisings... The formation of Yugoslavia, the founding of the "Ustaše" (1929), the great depression in 1929.. The ability for the USA to remain interventionist by re-electing Woodrow Wilson, or otherwise continuing as per history.. Italy's transition to Fascism, Monarchy or some other psuedo reality, the pressing of Italian possesions in North Africa, Italy could later decide to or not to attack Abyssinia (Ethiopia, Eritrea & Somalia). The possibility of a third Balkan War (Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania & Turkey). The Greek rebellions in Pontus (northern coast of Anatolia), the Armenian/Georgian & Azerbajiani crisis... The Division of the M.E. To take on T.E. Lawence's suggestions or not, the Republic of Hatay, the French Syrian/Turkish war, the Graeco/Turkish war in Western Anatolia.. The failed implementation of the Treaty of Sèvres and later the materialisaiton of the Treaty of Lausanne..


Wow, so much stuff to do... Would be the BEST starting period!

 

[unmerged(88397)]

I'm wan't to be realistic...
HoI III will be - EU3 based disaster for serious strategy gamers and fun for typical players.
It will lose it's best aspects for gameplay. Ok HoI II has a lot of weak points but... HoI III...
The only good game that will be releasted is gonna be the one made by community - if there will be one. Paradox is for making money and thats the problem for a lot of us on this forum. The sourcecode is released. Thats the future. There will be no more games in this direction - only evolution into EU3/HOI3.

 

[unmerged(47937)]

my ideas:
1)abolish the province system, instead, let roads, bridges, railways, cities, forts and other infrastructure appear on the map. This gives a couple of advantages: It's fairly realistic, it leaves use for having anti-partisan patrols, it makes a guerrilla warfare strategy more viable and the most important, it gives infrastructure destruction in preparation to an assault more viable role
2)The flexible unit structure cited elsewhere seems nice, as you could then adapt your units to your strategy. Again: smaller units should be harder to detect, anti air should help against airplanes, and with 88mm gun against armor, police should give more control over cities, armored cars should give better road patrol/recon values, ...
Also, brigades should be able to operate next to their unit, and give support to other units. So an infantry unit close to an infantry unit with artillery should also get a bonus.
3)A special operations tab, allowing specialist units (british SAS, for instance) to cooperate with partisans to recover pilots, decipher codes, blow up bridges, ...
In general, what I want is more detailed options to make sure you have to plan your invasions better, or to make sure a defensive player needs to watch out all the time. This would make a nearly-won game with germany very exciting, while ATM it's just about waiting till your troops occupy the rest of the world. This would also make sure you have a realistic Operation Overlord, with all the planning, infrastructure destruction, etc instead of now just load your troops on your transports and click amphibious assault

 

[unmerged(56754)]

I hope it doesn't go down EUIII radnomness ...

A world war two game without world war two???????

 

[hellfish6]

my ideas:
1)abolish the province system, instead, let roads, bridges, railways, cities, forts and other infrastructure appear on the map. This gives a couple of advantages: It's fairly realistic, it leaves use for having anti-partisan patrols, it makes a guerrilla warfare strategy more viable and the most important, it gives infrastructure destruction in preparation to an assault more viable role

Agreed. The Total War series demonstrates the usefulness of a provinceless combat system well. Keep provinces to admin purposes, ignore them for combat. The rebels in the Total War series were a pain in the ass because it was a provinceless system - in the EU/HoI series they're easily crushed annoyances.

3)A special operations tab, allowing specialist units (british SAS, for instance) to cooperate with partisans to recover pilots, decipher codes, blow up bridges, ...

Disagree. That's a bit overkill and outside the scope of the game. If this was a modern strategy game post 9/11, I'd agree with the idea. For WWII? Nope.

 

[unmerged(56754)]

Disagree. That's a bit overkill and outside the scope of the game. If this was a modern strategy game post 9/11, I'd agree with the idea. For WWII? Nope.

What? The SAS reguarly did the missions hes describing during WWII

 

[hellfish6]

No kidding. I never said they didn't. Modeling things at such low, and ultimately irrelevant, detail is outside the scope of a strategic game. None of the SAS's (or OSS', or Brandenburgers, etc) actions had such far reaching consequences as to warrant their inclusion into a HOI like game. Special operations were a TINY component of WWII, unlike during the Cold War and post-Cold War eras where SOF units were a much larger proportion and much more influential component of warfare.

 

[M. J. Mishcon]

Please consider;
a) any airborne assault or amphib assault automatically burns extra supply per division.
b) any airborne assualt or amphib assault automatically costs a certain % of losses and organization.
c) some means to track location of allied units over whom you have assumed military control.
d) Limit the CAG upgrades a CV can carry to two or three beyond it's base level.
e) Allow players who want a lot more detail and control to have it but please also allow the current production process and perhaps turning over functions like intel and production and, if desired, research to AI control.
f) I like the current naval zones but would ask for consideration of Guadacanal to have two zones to permit the seesaw interaction that occured.
g) Please have the AI garrison every level 10 port with two units.
thank you for reading this
M. J. Mishcon

 

[unmerged(105662)]

Starting from pre WWI?

Hey guys,

I don't understand why the game started from pre-WWII where it could have expanded its game toward pre-WWI. Obviously this game has leeway for expansion. The Axis/Allies preset of the countries could have been much different during the course of history. Diplomacy is rather too simplified in HOI2. Especially peace time diplomacy.

 

[Lascars]

Hey guys,

I don't understand why the game started from pre-WWII where it could have expanded its game toward pre-WWI. Obviously this game has leeway for expansion. The Axis/Allies preset of the countries could have been much different during the course of history. Diplomacy is rather too simplified in HOI2. Especially peace time diplomacy.

May be because without the Peace Treaty of Versailles, at the ending of WWI, a lot of conditions leading to the WWII would not be present. So if you want to make a WWII based war...

 

[GarrettK]

I'd like a scenario in HoI 3 which would start in 1910 and would lead up to WW1 and have techs and units for that time period.

I'd also like to see many more new nations which could be liberated, like those found in the new nations mod.

I also think there should be a few more 'what if' scenarios like what if Germany won ww1 or some of the other mods made for HoI 2

I also like the idea of new random events such as something similiar to archduke ferdinands assassination where an important minister in a nation is assassinated and it leads to war with another nation or even a civil war, or an event which causes a nation like the csa or california, of example, declaring independence, or a territorial dispute similiar to Peru claiming equador's territory which could lead to war.

 

[Lord Finnish]

I wish nothing more from HoI3 that it is a troll with a golden heart, in other words I hope that HoI3 will be a game based on gameplay, not fancy graphics and interface.

 

[unmerged(90027)]

Well, if Hearts of Iron 3 does get made, here's a few things that should be included.

- Fully usable GUI scenario creator, similar to that of Civ 3 etc.
- No 3D, this will confuse some people, such as me. I tried Civ 4, and i couldn't play it in 3D It's too confusing.
- Bug reporting button in main menu, that you can use to report bugs as they are revealed to you, which would be instantly sent to the developers so they can do something about it.
- No restrictive events which force you to play in a certain way. This means that you should give choice to players to go the historical way, or make their own history. Good example of this is Com China Xi'An event which forces the player into peace and removes any chance for actually winning the game.
- Battle system should be kept the same as HOI2, in which when you attack a new territory, the battle initiates immediately, and not after the attacking units have moved into the area of battle. The moving before engaging that HOI1 had for example is totally crap, i got my entire army, every single division encircled once, when i attacked through the whole front, and the enemy just moved into my position of departure faster than i moved to theirs.


Other than that, HOI2 is almost perfect, so you shouldn't try to "revolutionalize" on the whole concet too much. Ofcourse newer graphics, and some tweaking like that stuff i wrote above, HOI3 should be orgasmic. :rofl:

 

[unmerged(105695)]

If I have a say, I would rather like the allies to not always die horible deaths. In every game I have played Japan takes over china, India, and the Pacific. Germany woops France and the Soviet Union, and the only one that doesn't kill the allies at every turn is Italy, who it seems like its more of a 50% chance that they do good in Africa. Also I wouldn't mind having a scenario that included WW1

 

[diablo2211]

any sign from paradox about development?
just to keep hopes up.

 

[bshirt]

I want to know too.....any rumors of Hoi3 out there?

 

[Draigh]

I want to know too.....any rumors of Hoi3 out there?

Not really, though Paradox probably wouldn't want to announce anything before they've got at least something to announce... Besides, though I believe HOI 2 was their best-selling product (perhaps surpassed by EU III now), they've got lots of products to work on. Victoria 2, CK 2 (though Deus Vult has just been released), Rome expansion packes - or a whole new project, who knows?

 

[unmerged(64529)]

You could have no scripted events, but have very detailed events. Have in the 1900's events where nearby countries (which could be decided by the size of your country) could and would fom majoralliances, followed by arguments, the world war. But it would be wierd, like Russia and Germany vs Scandinavia UK and Italy. Start in 1900, ad make World Wars happen, but have random events at the same time.

 

[Akaki]

HoI in 3D will SUCK soo much... I truly hate EU3, yet something has to be done with game speed and requirements...