Hearts of Iron IV: La Résistance will release on February 25th
- Thread starter BjornB
- 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.
A little bit because it's 'new', once the shine comes off it will still be the same fundamentally flawed game we had before since non of the long standing issues seem to be touched. Maybe next DLC..
No, I believe this is the first one the expansion pass people have to pay for.
It doesn't really matter how feature rich this new thing is, I'll be waiting for the first "musical chairs" reports on front lines to come in - and if that is still going on wait for patch 1, 2, 3 and then if it is still there wait for the next DLC. It's pointless to spend so much time on build up only to see it fall to pieces on the front lines.
Then you are probably better off not knowing.
If you really feel you need to know, look back in the Bug Reports forum and the patch notes from each release.
Go to the "Bug Reports" forum and search for Invasion Routes, and check the numerous reports about how Invasions get routed, notice the game version dating back to version 1.1 up to version 1.5.
Thank goodness for @bitmode (https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-invasion-fleet-routes.1126801/#post-24812202) or Operation Torch would still go via Iceland.
And here is one from the previous DLC Man the Guns: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...l-starting-ships-with-heavy-engine-2.1230366/
Beware, it isn't always a pretty picture.
I have bought everything PDX has for sale for both HOI III and HOI IV (including the Expansion Pass), I still love to play and mod the game.
Overall, I am happy with the value of the Expansion Pass, but without an Expansion Pass discount, I'll wait for rave reviews or a sale before paying for this DLC.
I just wish some adjustments could be made so hopeless attacks aren't undertaken so often. Czechs against the Germans Soviets with their debuffs still intact. If that changed I'd snatch this up.
So the caveat for pre-ordering is a music thing? No discount? I don't see the point in pre-ordering. I will definitely get when release, but no rush now.
Last edited:
I agree that the "remembering" of stuff is a huge area of opportunity. RW forces had large numbers of intel clerks keeping records for a reason: it would be so nice as a gamer "C-in-C" to have the benefit of that service! I remember HoI 2 where the "intel" screen would sometimes tell you that X had 2 capital ships, when you had seen 3 of them in battle with your navy. Ideally, for enemy combat units the places you have met then previously (date and state of each combat, last place seen, even if not in battle) should be available. For ships the sea area and date of combats/sightings would be fine. Air units might be more diffuse, but downed planes and air-to-air sightings should flag new plane models, at least.
I'm not even talking about intel or intel screens, just things you have discovered staying on the map. Possibly with a Stars!-style note telling you when the information was obtained.
Absolutely - maybe a tooltip when looking at enemy units in battle, and "ghost units" as well as known buildings, bases etc. on the map.
Will the Monarchists get more NF in the initial release, or will they be updated in a future patch?
Being a historically focused player using as many realism mods as I can find I see almost no value in anything that this DLC has to offer. Most of the mechanics from this DLC are better of with more abstract mechanics... I just see abuse potential for ahistorical games. MP games are probably going to see a few new pages of house rules and realism mods are going to nerf the new mechanics to the ground except some small part of it that actually is historical...
And armoured cars for suppressing people... common... that is just cartoon like...
First DLC I will care nothing for...the paid content have nothing I need.
And armoured cars for suppressing people... common... that is just cartoon like...
First DLC I will care nothing for...the paid content have nothing I need.
As I probably will be modding around these new systems, I have been reading up about the clandestine aspects of WW2, and I think the new systems described have huge potential - so I guess I disagree. More information on enemy units, buildings and such in general is vastly to be welcomed, IMO, from a realism POV, so I'm looking forward to the new expansion!
Police and counter-insurgency has been a major use for armoured cars more-or-less since they were first developed. Their recce role is nice to have, but by no means their only function.And armoured cars for suppressing people... common... that is just cartoon like...
Each to their own, but to dismiss it on "realism" grounds seems pretty weak, to me. The Iberian stuff, for example, seems like a much improved treatment of the SCW without touching the alternative history at all. Some of the Alt-history seems plausible enough to be an interesting worry, too.
Last edited:
I find the mechanics too fiddly in general and would prefer a better "simulation" with abstract terms giving the same overall feel.
And no... armoured cars had no more impact than regular cars and trucks for any thing... just because you might have seen an armoured car here and there does not mean they had any real historical impact in and of themselves, that is just ridiculous. It is just as poorly a game mechanic as allowing cavalry having better suppression.
The only thing that should allow specific suppression are garrison mechanics. Just allow units to provide its manpower as suppression, that the most realistic. MP companies are equally ridiculous as a mechanic as they are too specific an add no value to the combat aspect of the game.
I don't mind the ideas of espionage and knowledge being more important... I just find the mechanics convoluted and fiddly. This could just have been more simple abstract system doing the exact same thing along time ago.
I'm probably going to spend as much time on the new systems as I do the diplomacy screen in a regular historically oriented game of HoI4... basically never ever...
Armoured cars add to the real mobility and flexibility of garrisons. Obviously you need troops to operate them, but just look at (Northern) Ireland, Iraq, the North-West frontier, Palestine and other counter-insurgency operations for examples. Oppressive regimes around the world major on armoured car and APC purchases for a reason.
As for MPs, they should really be most useful in boosting the effective infrastructure along supply routes, as well as counter-insurgency, but that's just for the "ideal situation" which will be hard to get really smoothly integrated.
Previous "abstract" systems have been pretty poor at modelling anything like the reality facing the senior commands. The new system at least mirrors some of the tradeoffs and dilemmas inherent in covery operations.
The question arises concerning what decisions and operations do you want detailed and involving mechanics? If the answer is "only the military campaigns" then I'm asking myself why you don't just play an operational game?
If you're going to play a game that you fundamentally don't want to play substantial parts of, why are you playing that game? Seriously, these considerations had major impacts on the progress and outcome of WW2 and the conflicts surrounding it - if you want to play a game with those elements essentially removed and assumed, where is the "realism"?
There are HUGE differences between armoured cars in WW2 and modern APC... it is a very poor analogy.
Suppression in WW2 terms was all about manpower and garrison strength... a truck and a regular car would be a much better mobility tool as it was way cheaper and you could have way more of them... so no... armoured cars as especially good suppression tools are ridiculous... there are no historical fact from WW2 that point to armoured cars being a somewhat important tool over pretty much any other type of transportation options. Did they have their uses.. sure... were they more instrumental than manpower or truck... no way!!!
Just admit it is just a way for paradox to justify their existence in the game, nothing more... You will see almost all historical mods remove that in the same way they removed cavalry from that role as cheap suppression tools. Is and armoured car more valuable as a suppression tool par IC than a tank, sure... but not more than a regular infantry man with a rifle... no way. IN reality they would have some strategic and tactical use, but they are almost impossible to reproduce in a game like this.
I also don't think the new system is bad at modelling stuff... I just find it convoluted where a more abstract system could have done the same job. I could think of MANY ways for an abstract system to do even more than the system they introduce with less micromanagement. It is just a system I will pay very little attention to other than get SOME important bonuses from... make sure i have enough encryption and defences so the opponent spend more resources on intelligence than I do. It just seem way to fiddly for very little overall gain.
Remember that all this stuff will cost precious resources you need to build stuff with or political point to use for more pressing matters.
I really want a good asymmetrical warfare aspect to the game or that intelligence actually matter. But then I would like logistics to matter allot more as that is probably even more important from a realism perspective... it's just not sexy enough even though it is what makes or breaks wars.
I would like command restrictions, some action point system that prevents player from micro too much... more restrictive strategic movement that "simulate" reality better... the list goes on...
I'm not even sure what comes with the patch and what comes with the DLC to be honest and I will not care much either...
Last edited:
I got a question leading some other way but cannot find any fitting thread but this one.
I have the Steam version. I am eager to buy the DLC shortly after arrival.
Steam now wants my full name, address and phone number to pay for the game with my Steam wallet money they already have.
I am cautious with giving away personal data unnecessary so I ask myself:
Why do they need these and what, if I do not want to give this information to a shop? Am I out now? Can it be in Paradox' interest that the customer is blocked from buying the game because the shop selling it asks for unreasonally complete information about the customer? The retail shops just ask for my money, but name, adress and phone number mandatory upon paying for a good? I would not enter that one shop anymore. I mean...at a bank, tanking up a loan, yes. But at an online software shop?! I am not sure whether my info is safe there.
Is there a way to get the DLC without using Steam Shop and making it work with my Steam version?
Is there an official opinion on that?
I have the Steam version. I am eager to buy the DLC shortly after arrival.
Steam now wants my full name, address and phone number to pay for the game with my Steam wallet money they already have.
I am cautious with giving away personal data unnecessary so I ask myself:
Why do they need these and what, if I do not want to give this information to a shop? Am I out now? Can it be in Paradox' interest that the customer is blocked from buying the game because the shop selling it asks for unreasonally complete information about the customer? The retail shops just ask for my money, but name, adress and phone number mandatory upon paying for a good? I would not enter that one shop anymore. I mean...at a bank, tanking up a loan, yes. But at an online software shop?! I am not sure whether my info is safe there.
Is there a way to get the DLC without using Steam Shop and making it work with my Steam version?
Is there an official opinion on that?
This needs to be answered sepparately as this is part of the sanbox play of the game... As I'm ONLY interestid in the historical aspect of the game I ALWAYS play hisotrical AI and using the historical part of the NF tree... so yes a large part of the game I simply NEVER experience. I'm certainly not the only one on these forums to do that.
When you play a historical game you pretty much never need to bother about the political stuff or diplomacy screen for anything other than a few rare cases. Most NF will railroad the historically relevant stuff in terms of politics and diplomacy anyway.
It is not my fault that Paradox put so much effort into part of the game that it is of almost complete irrelevance when playing a historic path. These mechanics is only useful when deviating from history as the NF tree is modelling it for you (more or less).
When did you last recruit a leader that manipulate with the political parties of the country or do any of that stuff unless you were pursuing a non historical game?
Is it wrong not to care about the sandbox part of the game and still enjoy it?!?
I know some people enjoy the fantasy part of the game, I simply don't!!!
I wasn't talking about modern conflicts, I was talking about conflicts in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. Armoured car companies were used in interwar Palestine and Egypt, and in Iraq in 1941, precisely because they were useful for counter-insurgency work. They were deployed in Ulster during the 1932 protests and used by the Irish Free State in the Civil war (1922). Could you do the job with trucks, cars and infantry? Sure. But armoured cars had real value in counter-insurgency work, which is why they were frequently used there (whereas, say, light tanks weren't).
I suggest that you are playing just as much a fantasy as the alt-history tracks in the game represent. The historical trajectory wasn't arrived at by the countries involved doing nothing diplomatically or politically; they were very active in making the historical outcomes happen. The political and military leaders of the time did not know that the historical trajectory was the one that was going to happen, so to play while posessing that knowledge in advance is a fantasy just as much as a revival of the Kaiser would be. What you are doing is playing a game where the diplomatic and political parts of the game are essentially abstracted out of the gameplay. You are saying that you want to be able to fight the historical military operations, but without being bothered by any of the other strategic aspects in play at the time. That is absolutely an OK thing to want, but HoI is and has always been a game that tries to cover all of the strategic angles of the WW2 period. How sucessfully it does this we can debate at length (though perhaps not on this thread!), but that is what it sets out to do. By playing as you are you are effectively putting a damper switch on the parts of the grand strategy that you don't want to deal with; that's fine, but don't complain that some of the effort that goes into developing the whole game is irrelevant to you.