Hearts of Iron 4 - Livestream today at 15:15cest

[Augustus93]

Whoever still thinks its a good idea for diverse stats for different countries' medium tanks despite having the exact same technology, should really reconsider. :huh:

There wasn't any difference in HoI3 either so I don't really understand what the big deal is.

 

[aprof]

Just take your time of posting your message (10:18 AM) and add roughly five hours (15:15 PM)

Isn't that adding 17 hours?

 

[Fletz]

Whoever still thinks its a good idea for diverse stats for different countries' medium tanks despite having the exact same technology, should really reconsider. :huh:

why? as long as it is depending on strategic decisions and there is no "best way" but only different ways of research/customizing of tanks i think it would be a great thing!

 

[PlacidDragon]

Isn't that adding 17 hours?

10 AM to 3 PM is 5 hours (i messed up by using the 24 hour clock, so said 15:15 PM instead of 3:15 PM).

 

[Te. Kenzo]

Yes, clearly the Japanese Empire, a nation capable of constructing Aircraft Carriers, Jet Aircraft, and the largest Submarine in WW2, is completely incapable of constructing tanks as good as or better than the Soviets or Germans in any alternative timeline.
Even if the Empire actually makes tanks a huge priority from 1936, and does not divert resources to other projects, like the navy.
Even if they decide to strike north and engage the Soviets in years of intense combat, and develop an extreme need for better tanks.
Even if they become one of the most experienced nations in the whole world at armoured combat.


(I'm being sarcastic, by the way)

Agree

 

[Chemo]

Reading this discussion about tanks, I'm thinking back to one of the DDs for East vs West. Remember how you were supposed to be able to design your own warships? What if you had an option to do that for your tanks in HOI4? Such as choosing whether to favor armor over speed. Nothing absurd (like choosing the type of suspension), but it would be so that technology alone isn't the sole factor in whether your tanks are decent or not. Plus, for role-players, you could design tanks in a historical manner (such as making German tanks expensive, but overall quite good.)

This does come at the risk of increased micromanagement, something that the devs are trying to cut back on, but perhaps the system here would be that, by default, each tech level gives the same quality of unit to every nation, but you (and the AI, if it's smart enough) are given the option to make changes to the design before putting it into production, such as adding more armor at the cost of slower speed and reduced toughness (reliability). So, you could have British and German tanks identical on a technological basis in 1941, but Germans could choose to prioritize speed over armor and armament (or, alternately, do the opposite). No railroading, no excessive micromanagement, and best of all, it's optional.

But, this being a Paradox game, I'm sure there's a glaring flaw somewhere in this proposal that I didn't manage to spot

 

[Cybvep]

Is the DD coming today?

 

[Joppos]

Reading this discussion about tanks, I'm thinking back to one of the DDs for East vs West. Remember how you were supposed to be able to design your own warships? What if you had an option to do that for your tanks in HOI4? Such as choosing whether to favor armor over speed. Nothing absurd (like choosing the type of suspension), but it would be so that technology alone isn't the sole factor in whether your tanks are decent or not. Plus, for role-players, you could design tanks in a historical manner (such as making German tanks expensive, but overall quite good.)

This does come at the risk of increased micromanagement, something that the devs are trying to cut back on, but perhaps the system here would be that, by default, each tech level gives the same quality of unit to every nation, but you (and the AI, if it's smart enough) are given the option to make changes to the design before putting it into production, such as adding more armor at the cost of slower speed and reduced toughness (reliability). So, you could have British and German tanks identical on a technological basis in 1941, but Germans could choose to prioritize speed over armor and armament (or, alternately, do the opposite). No railroading, no excessive micromanagement, and best of all, it's optional.

But, this being a Paradox game, I'm sure there's a glaring flaw somewhere in this proposal that I didn't manage to spot

I do believe this is essentially what they are aiming for in one way or another.

We just unlock the 1 model via the tech and you'll be able to upgrade the gun/engine etc via practical experience.

Is the DD coming today?

Next friday.

 

[might]

There wasn't any difference in HoI3 either so I don't really understand what the big deal is.

If you compare eu3 to eu4, there certainly is validity to that remark

 

[mattpilot]

I can't find a summary of the livestream anywhere? Did someone summarize the main points/highlights somewhere?

thanks

 

[A_Spec]

[video=youtube;hwFvVM_zZxQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwFvVM_zZxQ[/video]

 

[dsteve3]

I thought we were pretty open with that it was mostly going to be going over the information so far? I realize you guys who read all the details and posts on the forum wouldnt get that much out of the stream, so I'll see if we can get more new stuff next time, but the idea was to kinda cover the last couple of months updates for people who werent up to date as well.

You did not account for the forum junkies who hang off of every syllable written? Golly, I feel so ... nerd-ish.

 

[Ciaphas Cain]

Did someone summarize the main points/highlights somewhere?

http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?756563-Hearts-of-Iron-IV-Developer-Diary-Archive

 

[Oorlog]

Really enjoyed the vid. Learned more that i expected, after reading all the comments.

 

[Spruce]

concerning the tech tree, some basic boundary conditios cause some "unease" for a player in a game. Some nations during ww2 had a lot of hindsight concerning what was going to happen, f.e. Nazi Germany was heavely involved in preparing for war. But for Hearts of Iron every player knows that the game is not about pacification and political reasoning.

Some nations made specific (in some cases argued as bad) design choices, but for sure they were NOT behind in technology. F.e. the Japanese had their vulnerable wooden carrier decks, but you can't hardly argue that they were "weak" concerning carriers. A similar reasoning goes for the comparison between the German and Soviet armour. The Soviets were very bad at piercing enemy armour, but they had quite reliable tanks especially during winter conditions and probably were less complex to be produced + superior armour from a certain year on. The model in HOI3 is quite good imho, with pratical and theory ... but practical should have a bigger impact ... and coming from Nations specific tech team skills, this could be "amplified" - be the first to produce and to rule, you know what I mean.

Another issue that remains from older Hearts of Iron releases is that the amount of choices or projects was so limited, you never had the feeling that you could excel or pioneer in some specific domain. You could handle "all" domains, f.e. Germany is able to develop aircraft carriers as well and still excell at their ARM, TAC, FRT etc. So is there really a choice? My feeling is not,

And yet another issue is that Paradox failed at some of the key technology developments of ww2. The V-weapons project is such a thing, it is quite obvious that the V1, and especially the V2 were indead a threat to defeat the UK - even with the USA in the allied camp. In Hearts of Iron, the V-weapons project is more a point and click nuisance for the German player without any real effect on the game outcome. So I stronly advice Paradox to either leave out the V-weapons and Atomic weapons project, or do it right this time. And no we don't want a body-count to count the amount of people killed due to these weapons, but an effect on dissent or whatever is also possible to implement. It won't be a "glorious" victory, but it's a back door for Nazi Germany to negotiate peace.

 

[meertn]

I would consider this a bad example or an invalid argument (which one is up to you ). We do have numerous pieces of code that could take care of such situations (total_amount_of_divisions, total_amount_of_planes, total_ic, etc) that could take care of such 'problem situations'. It is only a matter of time invested in the creation of events (or decisions) that poses a problem. Making an event template could safe you a lot of time if this is a problem.

The more the AI is hardcoded the less flexible it is to mod things. I prefer normal soft coding of an AI over an AI that is super good but hardcoded.

I agree it is a good thing that PDS makes their games as moddable as possible. But if it comes to a trade-off between a good, moddable feature, or a great hardcoded one, I would hope they choose the hardcoded one. Johan posted some stats about EUIV usuage at the moment which show the most popular mod has only 6.5 % of the players using it, and the first mod that would have a major inpact on the AI comes at less than 2%. Basicaly, nearly all players will play with vanilla AI, so that should be as powerful as possible.