Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Hearts of Iron IV - 45th Development Diary - 19th of February 2016

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 45530 Bug Reports 15229 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
Cheers for the DD (and extra details) Podcat :D. The 'new and improved' battleplan system looks the goods, and looks like it's benefited a heap from extra time in the development 'oven'. Particularly a fan of having overlapping plans, so a Field Marshal on a broad front and 'strike' (Panzer/Guards/Shock/etc;) armies for specific pincers and the like sounds brilliant, and almost definitely the way I'll play it.

Also think adds quite the 'cool' factor (in a nerdy strategy gamer way, but that comes with the program :)) to the screenshots of land warfare, and will make it easier for people not used to playing with this many units and provinces to get into it. Excellent design :).

+1 to the questions from folks about how well the AI takes into account terrain bonuses (ie, do we have to make a separate plan for our mountain troops for them to be used sensibly, or will the AI be able to put them in appropriate terrain without help). Am sure we'll find out the answer in time, but if easy to answer, then interested.

You also mentioned you thought you were being a bit 'nice' with units keeping the planning bonus when deviating. No way I could make a sensible judgement without playing the game, but it does feel that some kind of penalty for adjusting the plan on the go might be warranted. Not sure about the micro side of things - perhaps you could have a tick-box at game set-up that gives you the option of no micro-ing penalties or not (just for players - AI does whatever you've got the AI doing), so that folks who want complete control can have it, but players that want something a bit more plausible can have that as well? Might also make things a bit more competitive against the AI (I'm guessing the AI is just the AI, rather than is either in 'battleplan' or 'micro' mode?).

Looking forward to the DD on Britain next week :).

Edit: +1 for sharing/ccordinating plans, and stealing them, in DLC if you can get it to work, would be very cool.
 
  • 5
Reactions:
EntropyAvatar said:
As far as I can tell, defining a front-line and an arrow path defines a sequence of provinces that will be taken in order (and you can see which provinces and which order via the animation). So if it's a broad front and a straight path, the provinces are taken one layer at a time. If it's a narrow front and you drag the arrow far to the side, the set of provinces should be a curving path one or two provinces wide, taken in sequence. So I think you can get pretty close to defining the exact path.

The potential trouble I see is if you want to distribute Panzer divisions along that path as you go so the enemy doesn't simply take the ground behind you.
Click to expand...


I think its possible with some effort to try and restrict Divisions to a path but its pretty clear that the system is not particularly well designed to do this otherwise you would have an arrow that defined a clear route that must be taking by a Division\ Divisions and there is none.


Nothing much has changed since we first discussed Battle Plans and nothing much makes them of any value except the bonus, they are simply a tool that people can use to get a lot of their own men killed.:)


Even a passing glance at the Screens posted in the OP would tell you that you would need to take manual control almost immediately and if you did not the enemy AI is useless.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Modestus said:
I still do not understand why you do not include an arrow that Divisions must follow through specific provinces.
Click to expand...
we sort of do. thats what a manual order is.
 
  • 9
  • 5
Reactions:
podcat said:
we sort of do. thats what a manual order is.
Click to expand...

If you could define a path for a Division within a Battle Plan it would make Battle Plans much more useful you may even be able to make a Battle Plan that would succeed because at present its certain you will need to take manual control almost from the first shot.


As far as I can tell you dont even know what Divisions will attack what enemy Province when you activate a Plan.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Looking at your plan, you didn't seem to care about rivers all that much. Does the AI automatically account for river crossings to some degree (say if your line of advance was parallel to a river), or did you just not care that much about the potential malus in this example?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
ackack said:
Looking at your plan, you didn't seem to care about rivers all that much. Does the AI automatically account for river crossings to some degree (say if your line of advance was parallel to a river), or did you just not care that much about the potential malus in this example?
Click to expand...
in this example I basically assumed I would punch through the soviets fast and there wouldnt be a proper defense waiting for me at a river, its also a lot trickier to take the rivers into account without adding a lot more detail to the plan and you guys wanted a diary out today ;) I do tend to plan around them when appropriate. my top prio here was avoiding the marshlands.


Afganitia said:
What is the maximum time of bonus for planning? If with SU I plan the invasion of Germany in the 36 for the 41 I will get like 200% bonus?
Click to expand...

the cap is 100% I think now. it depends on leaders assigned and doctrine choice.


Modestus said:
If you could define a path for a Division within a Battle Plan it would make Battle Plans much more useful you may even be able to make a Battle Plan that would succeed because at present its certain you will need to take manual control almost from the first shot.


As far as I can tell you dont even know what Divisions will attack what enemy Province when you activate a Plan.
Click to expand...

you are thinkign too low level and tactical now. That level is really below what the intent is for battleplans which are a bit more strategic. If you care about each individual province and not assume the divisions will attack one or the other in front of them (it depends a bit who gets assigned to go and who support attacks) you are probably the kind of player who will enjoy playing mostly manual. When I play I only really care about important provinces so I dont mind the plan pickign this for me in the majority of cases.
 
  • 16
  • 1
Reactions:
Does the battle plan bonus apply to every unit under the general in charge no matter how long the unit has been there or is it applied differently to each unit. Example: You have 12 division defending against France while you take on Poland but you know France is next. Can you draw up a battle plan for the invasion of France with just those 12 divisions and just let it sit, then add more divisions to the plan after the fall of Poalnd and launch it immediately....will those new units all get the max battle plan bonus? (providing you had reached the max bonus with the oringal 12 of course)
 
podcat said:
Assign Frontline:
Used to assign divisions in an army to a frontline. You can either assign to the whole frontline with a nation by clicking it, or click and drag to assign just a part of it. Having an assigned frontline is required for making offensive plans because you need to know where to attack from.

.
Click to expand...

Is it possible to make a fake frontline in your own territory?
For example I don't want to position my troops at the border and give away Intel on my panzers, but instead make a fake frontline one province line back and advance from there?
Granted the time moving one privince Will take its toll on the bonus, but coming as a surprise could prove beneficial.

Does the fall back line plan grant a bonus also?
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Very interesting information in this DD. Thanks!
 
love the new system. Best of both worlds. Let the ai do its thing while i can micro in a specific spot is perfect. Will make the length of a game compared to hoi3 so much shorter. I usually micro all units in a Barbarossa campaign. But after 700 hours it gets too micro intensive :p . thanks for the great dd podcat!
 
  • 1
Reactions:
CocoCincinnati said:
Does the battle plan bonus apply to every unit under the general in charge no matter how long the unit has been there or is it applied differently to each unit. Example: You have 12 division defending against France while you take on Poland but you know France is next. Can you draw up a battle plan for the invasion of France with just those 12 divisions and just let it sit, then add more divisions to the plan after the fall of Poalnd and launch it immediately....will those new units all get the max battle plan bonus? (providing you had reached the max bonus with the oringal 12 of course)
Click to expand...
The bonus is for a division and so the newly assigned divisions will not get a bonus.
 
Modestus said:
If you could define a path for a Division within a Battle Plan it would make Battle Plans much more useful you may even be able to make a Battle Plan that would succeed because at present its certain you will need to take manual control almost from the first shot.
Click to expand...
podcat told you - you can define a specific path for every Div in an army by giving each one a manual order of where to go. Not just the end point, but a province by province instruction of how to get there.

Just for you, HOI3 with improved graphics!

But your units with their specific path to follow can't react to what's happening around them. They hit unexpectedly strong resistance in a province, they can't bypass it, or attempt to outflank/encircle the enemy forces before continuing to their objectives. This is not allowed, they MUST follow the manual order they are given.

So I guess you don't do that surely? It would be kinda dumb. I think you micro-control one province attack/movement orders. Then when that order is done you decide what would be the next micro order to give. You don't plan at all, or you have a rough idea of what you intend each unit to do over the next few weeks/months. You don't have fixed paths that you write down and stick to rigidly. You are flexible and continually adjust what micro orders you give to try and gain what you think is the most advantage at the time.

So why expect the AI to do something which no human would do?
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I am i bit concerned about battle plans ... How it works ... I dont understand how is practically right to assign a battle plan to your armies and not have to change the routes of your divisions from day one of the plan ... Especially in a big front like russia ... I dont think you expect tha you draw lines then exexute plan Barbarosa and you sit and enjoy it ... I think micromanagement will be there from day one cause the reaction of the enemy armies .... If thats not the case either the ai is dumb or the game is too easy without any strategic depth ... I am concerned how this will work ...
 
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
princeseth said:
I am i bit concerned about battle plans ... How it works ... I dont understand how is practically right to assign a battle plan to your armies and not have to change the routes of your divisions from day one of the plan ... Especially in a big front like russia ... I dont think you expect tha you draw lines then exexute plan Barbarosa and you sit and enjoy it ... I think micromanagement will be there from day one cause the reaction of the enemy armies .... If thats not the case either the ai is dumb or the game is too easy without any strategic depth ... I am concerned how this will work ...
Click to expand...

I agree , your relying on pure luck there is nothing remotely there that could be described as a Plan unless its your early retirement from the General Staff.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back