Hearts of Iron IV - Dev Diary 6 - Division Design

[novapaddy]

I think you would be well advised to give the game as it is to one of your trusted, old hoi2/hoi3 veterans, let them see what you have there, and it will stop any "problems" at this early stage.

Because the more I read about hoi4, the more I worry that this new game won't add up to expectations.

I'm not blaming you, I think you are probably being shifted from one project to another and may be losing focus, and who can blame you.

I'm sure I read earlier, that you cannot have infantry and tanks in the same unit.. well if that is the case, only the germans had tank units, everyone else added tanks to infantry ...

 

[Dr Hiram Temple]

Quick question: will NATO counters be available for battalions on the division design page? I've become quite the NATO counter addict in my wargames, and while the current images seem resonable, I'd much prefer the option to switch.

 

[Karelian]

Quick question: will NATO counters be available for battalions on the division design page? I've become quite the NATO counter addict in my wargames, and while the current images seem resonable, I'd much prefer the option to switch.

This.
Other than that the system seems intuitive and really good.
As a grizzled old HoI veteran, I have so far been more and more pleased with every single Dev diary.
Good additions, and so far the small things I'd do a bit differently seem quite moddable to my liking as well.

 

[seattle]

XP is per Template to discourage Min-Maxing/over-specialisation, if players find they can get a small advantage for free by enduring micromanagement hell and creating dozens of ultra-specialised Templates they like will do so, while also complaining bitterly about the micro-hell they are forced to endure. While you can still have specialised Divisions, there is a clear cost for doing so.

I shall print that on a t-shirt. This quote is a perfect summary of the average gamer!

 

[Alex_brunius]

Yes, 30 battalions means nothing if it is more abstract in the end, with HoI3 you only had 5 brigades, but those 5 brigades were detailed with a model picture, statistics, brigade names and tech components. I am a bit worried that this level of detail will be gone with HoI4.

With more detail being added like actual individual tank models, my feeling is the complete opposite, that there will be MORE detail of model pictures instead of the totally wrong picture added like most of the time in HoI3....

From the production DD we also already know that each battalion will be detailed enough to require equipment being produced in your assembly lines.

 

[Secret Master]

Is it really that different from HoI3 where you need to research a superior firepower doctrine to add a 5:th brigade ( that doesn't have to add firepower at all ).

If you think of both examples like you don't have the experience to coordinate such a large formation as a single cohesive unit, then it makes a bit more sense.

I like this system better then HoI3s superior firepower doctrine way of doing it.

I hate to agree with Alex, since I prefer trolling him pointlessly in threads , but this sums it up for me. Superior firepower in HOI3 is a clunky way of doing what this system does elegantly. Also, divisions start trying to match the template without me having to deploy extra brigades, so that's a dream come true for me.

B) We don't want a player's foreknowledge to overwrite a nation's situation, nations which were unprepared for war or who had made decisions which turned out to be flawed will have to actually fight and learn before they can resolve it.

Yep. It's like those bad ass French armored divisions I have in place in 1939 ready to fight, complete with good tanks, excellent division compositions, and the doctrines to support it. Now I won't be able to fight 1939 with division compositions I learned about in 1945.

It also prevents "Hitler has access to a time machine and is now a damn genius in military affairs" problems:

"Alright, Guderian, I want you to reorganize our panzer divisions along these lines: yada, yada, and yada."

"But mien Fuehrer, those compositions are insane! I will resign rather than implement those changes!"

"Look, Guderian, you're a smart kid. I like you. But, you magnificent bastard, I read your book. And your autobiography, which you won't write until 1952. And I read B.H. Liddell Hart's work, which you will help him with in the 50s, and I know some stuff you don't know right now. Trust me on this, buddy. In another decade, you'll agree with my assessments here."

"Ummm, are you okay, mien Fuehrer?"

"What, just because I talk about reading books from the future, you think I'm ill? Come on. Now get out of here and implement those division templates. And tell my doctor to come in and give me more meth, which I only know about because I read post-war documentation from the Gestapo."

How so? In anything you learn more from a challenge than an easy success. If you aren't tested you rarely notice weaknesses.

That's my motto, although I say it more along the lines of "You learn more from your failures than your successes, assuming you are open to learning anything in the first place." The US in WWII in particular had to learn from a few failures before really getting into the swing of things, and the Soviets did, too.

 

[Dalwin]

That's my motto, although I say it more along the lines of "You learn more from your failures than your successes, assuming you are open to learning anything in the first place." The US in WWII in particular had to learn from a few failures before really getting into the swing of things, and the Soviets did, too.

I like to think that I learn the most from my narrow victories, from the ones that forced me to reach down and find something extra, something new to pull it off.

Learning from defeats is great for beginners, but there comes a point when to become more than average you need to learn from your victories as well.

 

[unmerged(83175)]

With more detail being added like actual individual tank models, my feeling is the complete opposite, that there will be MORE detail of model pictures instead of the totally wrong picture added like most of the time in HoI3....

From the production DD we also already know that each battalion will be detailed enough to require equipment being produced in your assembly lines.

Maybe, I am not seeing it, I am also not convinced about the amount of detail the divisions and seperate brigades have.
Will there be brigade names, which you can rename? Will there be brigade model pictures and etc. None of the pictures I have seen give imo the same immersion as was possible with TFH.

 

[Aleksi_i]

I think you missed my point entirely. I know you can make different templates. What I am saying that is if a division is locked into one template when it is created instead of being able to change an existing division from one template to another, we then lose a LOT of flexibility.

If we cannot shift existing divisions between templates, these templates are not a shortcut to reduce micromanagement. They are instead a straight jacket that will make it very difficult to alter your forces the way you want to.

You missed my point. As you can make new template, giving your tank divisions medium armor to replace the light one is a change to a new one too.
You could make totally new medium tank template, and leave the light one alone.

 

[Secret Master]

I like to think that I learn the most from my narrow victories, from the ones that forced me to reach down and find something extra, something new to pull it off.

Learning from defeats is great for beginners, but there comes a point when to become more than average you need to learn from your victories as well.

Well, that's why I said you learn MORE from your failures, not that you can't learn from successes. Moving from "noob who loses all the time" to "mediocre person who can win some of the time" is usually a huge step in terms of learning.

The key for learning from success is not to get complacent; sadly, some players tend to fall into this trap. And when game mechanics change in an update, or the AI just plain gets better, they suddenly start losing horribly again. And they feel like they are being picked on.

 

[scroggin]

With this system I could see myself wanting an Elite-panzer template for use in breakthroughs, a Standard-panzer template and a Reserve-panzer template for quiet fronts.

-Is there going to be any limit to the number of templates we can have?

-When we bring in a new model of medium tank will we be able to specify which templates or which units get them first?

-Does the EXP used here give battle modifiers? .....are we giving up some fighting skill in order to modify our divisions?

 

[Alex_brunius]

None of the pictures I have seen give imo the same immersion as was possible with TFH.

Despite having correctly named tanks instead of a picture of a generic Soviet tank for your German armor units since they have a slightly different tech makeup?

Despite having to chose one or two support "brigades" instead of historically being able to have all of them as battalions?

Despite having a real WW2 TO&E? ( Table of Organization & Equipment ) instead of fictional brigade structure like in HoI3?

 

[Dalwin]

With this system I could see myself wanting an Elite-panzer template for use in breakthroughs, a Standard-panzer template and a Reserve-panzer template for quiet fronts.

-Is there going to be any limit to the number of templates we can have?

-When we bring in a new model of medium tank will we be able to specify which templates or which units get them first?

-Does the EXP used here give battle modifiers? .....are we giving up some fighting skill in order to modify our divisions?

The way I read that is that there is a tradeoff. You can have diversity now by creating more templates, but the price down the road is that it will give you more templates to alter later, paying for changes to each.

 

[mursolini]

How so? In anything you learn more from a challenge than an easy success. If you aren't tested you rarely notice weaknesses.

However it is silly to agrue that small countries ever had similar amount of modifications and division templates as larger ones.
Larger nations tended to have much more, despite haing far smaller percentage amount of their military fighing the war.

Large chunk of German army was sitting idle guarding Norway and France. Should Germany really gain less combat expirience fighting with hundreds of divisions in Russia but only having say 60% of it`s forces engaged, than say Slowakia that has 1 division, and has 100% of it`s forces engaged?
USSR historically only had a small fraction of it`s forces engaged in winter war, and yet, it gained significant expirience and certain designs were thrown away, while others uplifted(most famous probably KV-1 tank), while Finland having most of it`s forces engaged didn`t really manage to get ahead in terms of organisation, nor to develop great domestic modification to it`s equipment. It would feel very awkward to see the situation reversed in game.

IMO as people sugested, something like logarithmic dependency would be great, where nations like Germany and USSR would gain 2-3 times the amount of expirience small weak states like hungary will gain.

 

[aphrochine]

Alex, some people simply equate clicking and crowded interface with complexity. Neither you, podcat or an overpriced psychiatrist will ever be able to correct this.

 

[alkomon]

yes. The template only works with what we call equipment archetypes, so the template says "1 battalion of medium tanks" and that can be a mix of any medium tanks you have (of course trying to use the newest/best if possible). This stuff will be covered in a future diary, but basically you can have a mix of equipment. We felt this was important to reflect history where nobody really ever managed to switch out everything to the latest and best and stuff was always in flux.

I hope that there will be some negative logistical "bonus", when you have too many different tank types in your Bn/Div.

 

[xJoe]

1. Will all battalions in the same division that are due for upgrades of same kind (new tanks for example) get them at the same time or will it be sequential?

2. Will the template change be on a individual basis or will i be able to "click+shift/ctrl click+change template" including more than one division (but not necessarily all from a specific template)?

3. Will we get a notification with the amount of lost equipment when we lose a division and a prompt to rebuild it or something along the line?

Thanks in advance ;P

 

[Amallric]

Which are the "equipment archetypes" and will they be moddable(i.e. adding new archetypes for instance).

 

[scroggin]

Despite the name, you earn a little Land Combat Experience even while at peace, but the primary gain is from combat. The rate of gain depends on the proportion of your units in combat, the more of your units that are fighting, the faster you gain Experience. This also means that smaller nations do not necessarily earn less than larger nations, as it's not the total number of units that matters, and large nations will likely not get much Experience when rolling over small ones.

I worry about having experience gain purely by "time in battle" it favours unit types or terrain that causes long drawn out battles over unit types or terrain that allows you to quickly smash through the enemy

 

[Dalwin]

You missed my point. As you can make new template, giving your tank divisions medium armor to replace the light one is a change to a new one too.
You could make totally new medium tank template, and leave the light one alone.

My concern is not about what I can do with new divsions. It is about how much flexibility I have in altering existing ones. Creating a new template does no good whatsoever if existing divisions are locked into whatever template was used to create them. If I created 10 new panzer divisions after the fall of France all on one template, I might later want to make some of those divisions be different from each other rather than the 10 always being alike.