Hearts of Iron IV - 40th Development Diary - 15th of January 2016

[jackalope81]

I hope the Brazilians or the Americans get a focus that in exchange for American military access Brazil gets an indigenous Steel resource and a state level development bump. Seems the system is set up to do it easily and it's how they got pulled into the Allied orbit.

 

[pyrignis]

So basically, either have many factories with less output than its other research group that is focused on having fewer factories but more "efficent"?

Many factories, less output (per factory)
less factories, more output (per factory)

That's not how I see it. Both have the same number of factories. But in one case the factories are all grouped together and no effort is made to protect them from bomber => the same number of factories are able to produce more as they are conveniently placed next to each other. In the other case, the same number of factories are scattered around in the state and/or have some effort done to hide/protect them from bombings. This is less optimal for pure production value but makes it harder for the enemy to bomb it.

 

[Te. Kenzo]

I Hope in a future DLC, the type of this regions will be dynamic.

 

[Killerrabbit]

Am I the only one that really dislike this change?


First of, now region population is just a number, with no implication beyond getting manpower.

Secondly, infrastructure just affects your movement speed, not your level of industry in a region. If you already have 50 or 60 infra regions, there would be no logical reason to improve it, since it already works well enough for your movement needs.

That sounds very similar to how it was in HoI2 or HoI3.

The system before was beautiful, where you gradually improve infrastructure and industry hand in hand when you have a underdeveloped region of high density population. If you already have very developed regions, like New York or Westphalia, you would need to expand to state of the art infrastructure to build more factories there. This made the economic game have more dept, and there were more consideration to make during peacetime. Now it's just: "Try to max out your factory slots". So much lost gameplay and modding opportunities!

 

[Raptor83]

Am I the only one that really dislike this change?


First of, now region population is just a number, with no implication beyond getting manpower.

Secondly, infrastructure just affects your movement speed, not your level of industry in a region. If you already have 50 or 60 infra regions, there would be no logical reason to improve it, since it already works well enough for your movement needs.

That sounds very similar to how it was in HoI2 or HoI3.

The system before was beautiful, where you gradually improve infrastructure and industry hand in hand when you have a underdeveloped region of high density population. If you already have very developed regions, like New York or Westphalia, you would need to expand to state of the art infrastructure to build more factories there. This made the economic game have more dept, and there were more consideration to make during peacetime. Now it's just: "Try to max out your factory slots". So much lost gameplay and modding opportunities!

Population was static anyway and I am sure, that regions population has impact on its category.

I agree, that infrastructure should still play role in determining max number of facilities on each region.

 

[Foke]

That to me sounds like it would fall under the Rural Region. Tiny island makes no sense for Gotland. Bornholm is a tiny island.

Gotland today is only slightly more populous than Bornholm with 51 to 40 thousand inhabitants, and i'm positive it was much the same i ww2. Do you really think an island with 51 thousand inhabitant should get 1 factory, when a city with a population of many millions, like London only gets 12... Doesn't quite make sense does it?

 

[Soviet_Union]

This "improvement" is literally cancer. GG HOI4 hardly knew you.

 

[Aries666]

This "improvement" is literally cancer. GG HOI4 hardly knew you.

I think you should look up the meaning of the word literally.

 

[Secret Master]

you can take focuses to improve areas (gives them more factory slots), but the type doesnt change.

I can use mechanics to add slots to a region like, but I can't change its type.

So, I can't turn this:

into this:

Well, there goes my Dune/HOI slash fic.

 

[Killerrabbit]

Population was static anyway and I am sure, that regions population has impact on its category.

I agree, that infrastructure should still play role in determining max number of facilities on each region.

I'm pretty sure that rural regions with 20 million people in India will be treated equally with rural regions in Europe/Soviet Union will less than 1 million.

 

[romothecus]

... the previous system of three different caps, depending on hidden formulas for manpower & infrastructure was too obtuse for players

not in english.

obtuse = difficult to comprehend : not clear or precise in thought or expression
obscure = not readily understood or clearly expressed

Obtuse is absolutely the right word.

"Obtuse" is not wrong, but the meaning Johan is using (and correctly gave) is not the primary meaning of obtuse (or even the secondary meaning, really). "Obtuse" primarily means that a person described is not intelligent, slow to understand, stubborn or insensitive, etc. But "obtuse" can also mean that something is difficult to understand, which makes sense in this context.

However, "obscure" is a much better word here. Because Johan highlighted that the system "depend[ed] on hidden formulas for manpower & infrastructure" it's less that the system is "difficult to understand" and more that the system was not "clearly expressed." The problem, as he put it, wasn't that the formulas are too complicated, but that they're hidden from the player. As the DD was written, "obscure" fits better than "obtuse."

(And as a side note, that would be typical for Paradox games. The systems often aren't complicated, but the rules are hidden from the player. They're not hard to understand (obtuse) if you know where to look.)

 

[kviiri]

Pardon me if this is something obvious, but what happens if the control of a region is split between two or more countries? Is the industrial capacity available to each likewise split?

 

[Soviet_Union]

Not gonna lie I was a total idiot to be fooled by paradox again after HOI3. Never again, this DD opened my eyes that perfection like HOI2 cannot be improved on with this development team.

 

[ZanderD]

I see that concerted and dispersed industry are mutually exclusive. Can a player switch from one to the other at a later date, like with doctrines?

 

[LordOfWar16]

How come you can still see the international borders of Czechoslovakia and Austria if you look closely, weren't they supposed to diplomatically annexed and not occupied?

That are the state borders not the country borders.

Well it would be correct, I've seen a map from 1944 and the borders of Czechoslovakia and Austria were still there (even Poland was). From an not-axis perspective most of it were just temporary occupations.

Edit:
For the one person who disagreed:
http://www.mapywig.org/m/ALLIED_maps/various/Small_scale_maps/THE_WORLD_25M_AMS_1944.jpg

It doesnt matter what the allies think. Whats important is what the country thinks that controlls it. From Hitlers perspective most of the territory that they claimed was stolen german territory in the first place including the sudentenland with the exception of czechoslovakia.

 

[The Menace]

That are the state borders not the country borders.

If you look closely, you will see that the former international borders are much darker.

 

[LordOfWar16]

If you look closely, you will see that the former international borders are much darker.

probably to make it easier to see which states are your cores and which are conquered states. It could also be there to make it easier to see where released puppets would go (simmilar to HoI III) for people that dont know their exact geographical location. Or it is simply an bug in the current built.

 

[DasDEUCH]

When is the release date its already 40th diary and still no release date lol

 

[PunkDanny182]

I have to agree with the group of people who believe Infrastructure should play a part in Industrial output. Not in terms of the Factory cap, the system you describe in the DD I think is very good and will work with the overall system in place but there should also be a factor of Industrial Efficiency. For starters, the concentrated Industry versus dispersed industry would have different % modifiers for Factory Output. I also think that the % efficiency modifier should be capable of reaching higher than 100% which would better portray more developed countries ability to produce.

Infrastructure should also have a % efficiency modifier. For example; (the numbers are purely for example purposes only)

-A Region has a cap of 10 factories
-A region currently has 6 factories
-A region has an infrastructure level of 1 (let's just say for examples sake this indicates no or minimal roads and primarily walking trails, so the input of raw materials into the factories would literally have to be hand carried or push cart = 10% efficiency)
-A region has dispersed factories = 75% efficiency
-A region total factory output = .45 Factories (6 x .1 x.75 = .45)

-B Region has a cap of 10 factories
-B region currently has 6 factories
-B region has an infrastructure level of 10 (also for example only, this indicates a system of railways/shipping networks with well developed roadways making it easier for raw materials to be brought in) = 120% efficiency
-B region has dispersed factories = 75% efficiency
-B region total factory output = 5.4 Factories (6 x 1.2 x .75 = 5.4)

Now in the above example, it wouldn't make sense to build more factories in region A as it's poorly developed and wouldn't be worth it until you built up some infrastructure to support the factories. The region B would benefit from building more factories and would see a greater benefit from having concentrated factories (if that value were say 100%). Now I also believe it would be a good idea if Ports added an additional bonus modifier to factory efficiency. For example, region B with a level 5 port could add an additional 15% to factory efficiency as it would simulate the added ability to transport raw materials via waterways.

I think this would make it more dynamic and still allow for balance. This would also create that separation between the industry and infrastructure of Europe to say China who has the population (and in this system say Metropolis regions) but lacked the infrastructure to support efficient factory output.

 

[Sir Garnet]

Trying to figure out the UK map. Are the separately shaded areas on that map each a "region" colored to indicate development level, with the states being sub-areas not shown on this scale? So Eire and Scotland each have 4 regions, Wales 1, and England 10?