Will there be a way to share experience/upgrades? Like how in real life the USA gave their allies huge amounts of equipment, which contributed to the unit being better armed. How will this be resembled in the game? Also, I like the colors.
Hearts of Iron IV - Developer Diary 8 - Experience and Variants
- Thread starter podcat
- Start date
-
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.
Thats it thats how I love it the map the look the mixture of country colors and terrain finally paradox you understand how to make your maps look good and save us from waiting proper map mods for each game.
- 1
I think you can send equipment that you have allready produced, so if US produce something advanced like the Mustang and send it to example UK, it would phase out UKs older planes.
I think this looks great. Here are a few quick questions on it...
1. For the land and air units, will their equipment be kept track of as model/variant, or will units just have a model assigned and have the variant upgrade automatically?
2. Will you be able to produce different model/variants of the same unit simultaneously? For example, ENG producing fighters that are Spitfire Mk IX and Hurricane Mk IIC in the queue at the same time?
3. Is there something to stop the following gamey tactic: I just researched a new CV. I have a bunch of NXP lying around. I immediately jack up the stats on my new CV model to make it go from state-of-the-art to state-of-the-art on steroids? (Or maybe it's the case that this will be part of a normal build strategy?)
1. For the land and air units, will their equipment be kept track of as model/variant, or will units just have a model assigned and have the variant upgrade automatically?
2. Will you be able to produce different model/variants of the same unit simultaneously? For example, ENG producing fighters that are Spitfire Mk IX and Hurricane Mk IIC in the queue at the same time?
3. Is there something to stop the following gamey tactic: I just researched a new CV. I have a bunch of NXP lying around. I immediately jack up the stats on my new CV model to make it go from state-of-the-art to state-of-the-art on steroids? (Or maybe it's the case that this will be part of a normal build strategy?)
Money is useful mechanic for a WWII game.
If country X wants steel and makes arms.
Country Z has steel and wants rubber.
Country Y has rubber and wants arms.
To trade commodities would be to complicated So X sell arms for money to Y to buy steel from Z. Z uses the money to buy rubber from Y.
This is an over simplification.
Nations could print their own currency as much they want to pay their soldiers & buy domestic produced arms, it is gold/silver & other nations currency that is needed.
If country X wants steel and makes arms.
Country Z has steel and wants rubber.
Country Y has rubber and wants arms.
To trade commodities would be to complicated So X sell arms for money to Y to buy steel from Z. Z uses the money to buy rubber from Y.
This is an over simplification.
Nations could print their own currency as much they want to pay their soldiers & buy domestic produced arms, it is gold/silver & other nations currency that is needed.
Another more intressting question would be if battleship have two weapons, surface guns and anti air guns both which you have to uppgrade and maybe conflict with each other, would it be possible to build crazy ship like superheavy armored anti aircraft only battleships and such?
Somebody mention Rome II?? :ninja:
Each DD is increasing the love and anticipation. Like the experience idea- I hope it will help balance tech rushing against AI and feels plausible.
The Love:-
1. Love how the Art work is shaping up. Please pass and a big thumbs up to artist or Art team. That carrier, with it's attention to details looks beautiful- these details I'm sure will add to immersion.
2. Love that there and actual number of plans on the carrier. Again, when we taking battle losses this will be so much more immersive.
3. Love the grouped Unit Counters on zoom. Will be so much better to keep the overview.
One small suggestion to the art people. Where there's opportunity to infuse life and action into the art picture could be a good touch. The carrier pic for example- some planes on deck- even one taking off.
Each DD is increasing the love and anticipation. Like the experience idea- I hope it will help balance tech rushing against AI and feels plausible.
The Love:-
1. Love how the Art work is shaping up. Please pass and a big thumbs up to artist or Art team. That carrier, with it's attention to details looks beautiful- these details I'm sure will add to immersion.
2. Love that there and actual number of plans on the carrier. Again, when we taking battle losses this will be so much more immersive.
3. Love the grouped Unit Counters on zoom. Will be so much better to keep the overview.
One small suggestion to the art people. Where there's opportunity to infuse life and action into the art picture could be a good touch. The carrier pic for example- some planes on deck- even one taking off.
Please read the thread. Asked and answered twice before.
- 1
Critical hits are a representation of a hit doing extensive damage to some system or superstructure of the ship. Like a Torp breaking the keel or an AP bomb hitting a magazine. Armor doesnt really protect against these things, but good stable design does. This is what the "reliability" trait is to represent, by improving hard traits like guns/engine/capacity/armor/etc there is sacrifice of structure stability and the easing of, or cutting of corners, on design standards which makes ships more susceptible to critical hits (among other things).
Nah. People just hear what they want to hear. It was just a joke in the DD, nothing more.
1. a variant created is a new piece of equipment. I'll use an example people might be more familiar with. Imagine you have researched a Panzer IV F (if I recall, the version we base our Panzer IV on and the one with the 75mm gun) and you create a variant from that increasing its armor. You may now call that the Panzer IV G. its a different tank, but will have a minimal impact on efficiency when switching over the previous Panzer IV production line should you choose to do so.
2. yes
3. this is part of normal build strategy. but of course doing this means not upgrading something else that was sitting around unoptimized.
I kind of see the concern. I would imagine this could be somewhat addressed with putting a cap on stored NXP, AXP, GXP, etc. That way Germany cannot store up a bunch of GXP and once the Tiger is researched, just jump ahead to a practical KonigsTiger.
Well I suppose you could still do the "essentially a King Tiger" tactic, at a cost to your other military units. Is there a downside to the variants (other than reliability)? It would help against this kind of thing. Players will learn to game it somewhere, somehow. What tie in do doctrines have with this? Should doctrines or deciding on one tree within a doctrine have some effect on what you can spend experience on?
As to the armor vs critical hit dynamic, doesn't increasing protection result in being hit less often or in those hits being less severe in general?
The direct increase in chance for a crit due to loss of reliability may not result in a net greater chance once the direct effect of the armor is factored in. In other words, I think there is mitigation.
The direct increase in chance for a crit due to loss of reliability may not result in a net greater chance once the direct effect of the armor is factored in. In other words, I think there is mitigation.
True but it will give the allies a reason to fight for North Africa, to gain ground XP.
It will give a lot of experience to Germany. What they learn in Poland, Denmark and Norway can be used to improve land divisions why the allies are practicing stitskrieg.
I could see the Munich agreement, Spanish intervention, giving xp.
The flying tigers in china giving air xp, ect.