Hearts of Iron IV - 31st Development Diary - 30th of October 2015

  • 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.

podcat

Game Director <unannounced>
Paradox Staff
12 Badges
Jul 23, 2007
12.811
38.516
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Semper Fi
  • 500k Club
  • Europa Universalis III: Collection
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Hearts of Iron II: Beta
  • Europa Universalis: Rome Collectors Edition
  • Mount & Blade: Warband
  • Paradox Order
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
Hi everyone and welcome to another dev diary for Hearts of Iron IV. Today we are going to talk about peace conferences!

HOI3's peace system was extremely simplistic and easy to exploit and did not really capture WWII and looking at our other games a peace system like Europa Universalis where a war leader dictates terms also does not really fit with WWII. So we set out to make something completely new!

So how does it work? During a war your participation as a member in the war is tracked compared to the rest. Remember Mussolini’s famous quote when about to join the war against France and UK "I only need a few thousand dead so that I can sit at the peace conference as a man who has fought"? We actually track casualties now and that will also factor into your participation score. Most important however is actually conquering enemy territory.

npRhOBu.png


When the enemy finally surrenders the game initiates a peace conference. In multiplayer if there are several players involved this will pause the game and let everyone see what is decided in the conference even if you yourself is not in the war. Points representing the total value of things to grab among the losers is divvied out to the winners depending on what their war participation was at. Each country then takes turns deciding on what will happen to the losers. When you have less points than the person after you its their turn (you can also pass if you like) and on and on it goes until everyone has passed or run out of points. The losers have no say in this unless they have offered up a conditional surrender early on in which case they must approve the conference as well.

The above means that we can now model historical decisions to make sense. For example, there is a reason for USA to get involved in both the pacific war and Europe and not let Stalin decide the outcome on his own there. Taking control of Germany and liberating France will be a race for Berlin and will color how Europe looks after the war ends. The idea is very much to give you the feeling of the Yalta conference where Stalin’s position was very strong and the other heads of governments had less say.

y8stSxp.jpg


The cost of different options depends on wargoals selected before the peace conference so anyone with justified reasons will be able to get those things cheaper, and it will be more costly for others to select those. Do note that order of participation still applies, so someone who has done more could still grab some of your war goal claims, but this would mean that they would themselves get to pick less over all. Stuff like that can set up things for post-war tension should players not be able to come to a resolution everyone is happy with. The basic type of action also affects costs of course, so liberating someone is cheaper than setting up a puppet government under your control, and annexing is much more costly than simply moving the borders some.

The conference also indicates what kind of impact it will have on world tension in the end. This may be a reason to be more restrictive about your choices. Puppeting someone might keep you under a level where the Allies still can not go in and stop you while annexing them would push you over the tension limit.

Next week we'll talk about the sleeping giant - USA!
 
  • 156
  • 52
  • 4
Reactions:
btw Germany got China fighting on its side holy crap! that's very historical until 41 at least :)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-German_cooperation_until_1941

Sino-german_cooperation.png



Chiang Kai Shek's (president of China) son enlisted as an officer of the Wehrmacht. He participated in Operation Otto during the Anschluss and rode in a tank into Austria commanding a panzer unit.

Sin título.jpg


Chinese soldiers in the Wehrmacht.

Chinese_Wehrmacht_soldiers.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • 22
  • 22
  • 3
Reactions:
oh fun! this makes it alot more fun to race to berlin indeed!
why does yugoslavia's name is "radical yugoslavia" some party going on over there?
 
  • 4
Reactions:
  • 33
  • 7
Reactions:
yeah Germany has the option to go both ways. :)

Awesome, this means that when I side with USSR in the Unholy Alliance, we can count on China to help liberate India, Manchukuo and Korea. A Japan in the Allies will have no chance to invade the Asian mainland against the USSR & China united front.
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
Causalities are now tracked but well we as a player be able to see these stats and keep track of them ourselves??

Also as far as Peace Conferences and claiming territory: will this effect pre-determined territorial claims. i.e. Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact where territorial claims were preset..
 
OMG OMG OMG!!!I love this...I just dont understand this Radical Yugoslavia?what is that?What is ur point in that?If u look at history govermant wonted to give Hitler free pass thru country so they can go and help italians i greece and to sign some sort of package, but then the people rebelled because he did not want and with protests and shouts better war than pact better grave than slave government was forced to change his mind with regard to time..so that about radical Yugoslavia in the absurd
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
Good Day podcat!

I generally like what I see. The idea you have to really be part of it to get something out of it. The one minor thing is from the example show is unrealistic borders. Mainly non-contiguous territories, like Bulgaria getting territory near Lithuania. Feels too EU for me. In the time frame of EU it feels right, not here. Can you make non-cores and non-contiguous territories cost even more?
 
  • 20
Reactions:
Of the three symbols, the red skull is obviously casualties, and I'd imagine the percentage to be participation. So what does the green symbol represent?





Oops: Edited my original format of the question and found it had already been answered below. That was quick!!!
 
Last edited:
Good Day podcat!

I generally like what I see. The idea you have to really be part of it to get something out of it. The one minor thing is from the example show is unrealistic borders. Mainly non-contiguous territories, like Bulgaria getting territory near Lithuania. Feels too EU for me. In the time frame of EU it feels right, not here. Can you make non-cores and non-contiguous territories cost even more?

But if the leaders of the faction agree with those changes, then it should be accepted by the rest of the members. If the german player thought it was smarter to hand the Bosphorus to Axis Greek than Axis Italy, I don't see why not.
 
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Of the three symbols, th red skull is obviously casualties; but what exactly do the first two represent?
First one is participation in the war effort, the second is estimated divisional strength.
 
  • 21
  • 3
Reactions:
First one is participation in the war effort, the second is estimated divisional strength.

How important are military casualties in relation to number of provinces conquered to claim better terms in the peace Pod?
 
  • 1
Reactions: