Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Hearts of Iron IV - 22nd Development Diary - 28th of August 2015

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Hearts of Iron IV 45494 Bug Reports 15182 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
So we know, that artillery can be added as combat part, not just support...
But wat about anti-air, recon, anti-tank, engineer? Is it possible to add those as combat elements as well, not only as support?
 
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
Radu said:
"Paying" to expand divisions.

That's not how it works.

Making a division bigger isn't that big of a deal from an organization point of view
Click to expand...
You "pay" with combat experience points. If you start with small Divs in 1936, you need experience of combat in a war, or from war games done by training, to inform you that it would be a good idea to increase the size of the Div, for instance adding an extra combat brigade.

There is also a cost I think in removing battalions/companies, any change to an existing template, or creation of a new one, has a cost. The cost in combat experience points appears low compared to how many points get generated once the bullets start flying. It appears only to be a limiting factor for neutrals, who will find it difficult to change templates pre-war, because they can't send volunteers to fight in Spain, etc. They are restricted only to their own training to gain experience points.
 
  • 5
  • 1
Reactions:
Very happy with what I've seen here! Like the NATO counters as well.

Regarding the concept of having to pick only five support battalions - I'm fine with it. Abstracted I assume that every division already has these units to function, being able to pick support battalions is allowing the player to determine what is important to them.

If you gave me everything then apart from the restriction of research I'd not have to put too much thought into how my different templates should be built. Now I've really got to try and pick what's important to me, and that's a good feature in a game.


Several points I'd like to ask please;

1. Can we assume all support templates can be used by paratroopers, mountain and marines? I'd guess this has already been thought about but could this be confirmed please.

2. Could the brigade system be revisited again please? I have no objections that a new bde costs 25 points but I feel the emphasis for a player right now is to try and fill current bdes with 5 battalions. Extra bdes are needed for armour or incompatible battalions but for a normal infantry division it will be mostly an aesthetically pleasing design. The answer would be if one bde of 5 infantry works the same a 5 bdes of 1 infantry and the only difference is a whole lot more points cost then perhaps for each extra bde bought it brings a combat bonus? This would balance the extra cost.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Why would I choose to have support Artillery/AT companies rather than full blown Artillery/AT battalions? (and vice versa)

On AT does a single support company of AT give it's max penetration value to the entire division? (If no other unit has higher) At which point you get a cheap penetration stat and would never want a full blown AT battalion.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I would, in all honesty suggest a slightly different approach in in-game presentation. Taking stuff away from the player is always a worse solution that presenting it as a bonus (as has been shown by posts in this thread already). It's not easy for everyone (especially people new to the series) to abstractly "imagine" all the soft/organic units that make up a unit and the support units might actually be a bit confusing due to the fact that they're "capped" in terms of slots.

If the Support column was increased as a Div.HQ column (or similar) instead with all the "abstracted" organic components shown from scratch (communications, logistics etc, with those "soft" numbers not normally shown for a division broken down, modified by techs and doctrines) then the support units could be presented as "upgrades" or reinforced functions. Upgrade your medical capacity in the Div with a Field Hospital sounds a lot better than choosing between either Mechanics or Doctors.

It's just changes in GUI/Presentation to what's been shown, there's no real difference to what we're seeing (or the mechanic) but it's a helluva lot easier to cater to new players by saying "upgrade your security platoon to a full MP-Company" than to make the player feel like they're missing out on something by choosing AAA instead.
 
  • 16
Reactions:
Until we have the Dev answer I suspect that support ART/ AA and AT are the only ones that don't give movement/ air drop penalties to specialist divisions like paratroopers or amphibious assault to marines. Normal ART for example would make the paratrooper division a ground unit only.
 
Peekee said:
Why would I choose to have support Artillery/AT companies rather than full blown Artillery/AT battalions? (and vice versa)

On AT does a single support company of AT give it's max penetration value to the entire division? (If no other unit has higher) At which point you get a cheap penetration stat and would never want a full blown AT battalion.
Click to expand...
I read somewhere that they give a bonus to combat battallions and on its own add some firepower.
 
Thx for the DD.

I guess I go with Recon, Engineers, Field Hospital, Maintenance, Signal (only offensive Divisions) and Logistic (only defensive Divisions). Garisons may only get Logistic and Military Police.

But my fear is that I cant build enough trucks because every frontline Division has 2 support Companys that needs Trucks.
 
The Guru said:
Looks nice

the role of the Military Police, though, is not counterinsurgency. It's the regulation of traffic and, marginally, police functions with the division's personnel, not civilians from the occupied territory.
Click to expand...
This!
MPs (or traffic platoons) were vital in getting supply and combat forces quickly to where they were supposed to go. Put enough military vehicles, soldiers and equipment in a area and you'll have chaos as long as there's no higher echelon officers to handle prioritization on-site. A Company commander will always think that HIS unit is most important (and by all right) but that won't un-bottleneck the crossroads when it's full of mudstuck trucks, tanks and broken down carts. I'd even go so far as to give a province with MP and engineers present a bonus to temporary infrastructure (meaning faster movement and better logistics). Maybe not now but at least in future expansions.
 
  • 5
  • 3
Reactions:
Will max number of support companies in division be affected by doctrines?
 
IMHO these Nato counters don't match the whole graphic enviroment of the game as shown until today ... if it was another game maybe yes but i just think they don't match ... if i was Paradox just after the release of the game i would make a DLC with Nato counters and other stuff for the guys who want them or make a choice ingame ... BTW great DD Johan ... :)
 
  • 5
  • 4
Reactions:
Nicolas I said:

There will be no longer garisons divisions. Some people suggested that we should make/use bad infantry instead...
Click to expand...
In the unmodded game (as best as I understand it) we will no longer have garrison brigades, but players can make a divisional template called Garrison Division and that division may just have a few normal infantry battalions and Logistic & Military Police support units.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
princeseth said:
IMHO these Nato counters don't match the whole graphic enviroment of the game as shown until today ... if it was another game maybe yes but i just think they don't match ... if i was Paradox just after the release of the game i would make a DLC with Nato counters and other stuff for the guys who want them or make a choice ingame ... BTW great DD Johan ... :)
Click to expand...
Blasphemy!!!
 
  • 13
  • 2
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back