Err . . . sprites are standard, they've been in HOI since HOI1. What's the problem?
-
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.
- Status
Err . . . sprites are standard, they've been in HOI since HOI1. What's the problem?
What it does nowadays is almost as stupid - invading with 10-15 divisions when that still isn't enough. Playing as Greece, I saw AI Italy throw away 10 divisions by landing them on the island next to Athens (which lacks a port) and trying to attack Athens across a strait against 5-6 defending divisions - pure dumb. It's quite possible for the AI to have a rough idea of how strong the defences they will face are and deploying a force strong enough to actually over come it and capture the ports necessary to supply their armies.
What you see are uprisings every 6 months or so, always easily crushed.
I don't think you got my point. My point is that it should not be necessary to perform pointless micromanagement, and that automation is not a real solution to this problem.
Again, I don't think you've got my point. Saying that something shouldn't be shown because, under the current set-up, it causes slow-down and cluttering of the display, it just an argument to make it possible to display more information without things getting slowed down/clutter, not not to display these things.
I would like to be able to sort the research queue a bit more. When you play with a major it gets very unwieldy to look through your queue and take a good look 'in the round' at what you are researching. Being able to sort by forecast completion date, research days left, name would be helpful.
What I want to see is a refine game take what work and did not work. and make it better. I have little bugs as possible.
Yes, a challenging AI is currently lacking the most and needs to be at the heart of the game. And as BarrosRodrigues mentioned it is not always the big things which count here but lots of details like an AI friendly starting OOB. Any other bug is just a minor annoyance compared to this and any further added feature can not merely give as much fun as that.
I'm looking forward to see what a Paradox team with much better resources and dedicated team-members can do for:
- The AI
- The Interface
Should be fun.
- The AI
- The Interface
Should be fun.
Bring back giving terratory to allies, or at least when you occupy a nation that has allied cores give them to your allies like in HOI2.
Also let us put in puppets in occupied terratory. Having a government in exile never stopped anyone from making a puppet nation. I always loved to make Scandanavia, not the most usefull AI but had good tech teams and IC and the metal you needed from Sweden going straight to Germany, lastly it eliminated the need to garrison the area. Plus if you took Finnland it gave another front to attack the USSR.
Also let us put in puppets in occupied terratory. Having a government in exile never stopped anyone from making a puppet nation. I always loved to make Scandanavia, not the most usefull AI but had good tech teams and IC and the metal you needed from Sweden going straight to Germany, lastly it eliminated the need to garrison the area. Plus if you took Finnland it gave another front to attack the USSR.
I'd like to see technology unrestricted or at least have the year rule abolished. There were various reasons for one nation's arms to be better than the other's. There is no way for Tibetian '38 weapons to be the same as German '38 weapons, even if they both have the second level of small arms.
but remove the year rule wont prevent Tibetians to research level 2 of small arms at same pace that Germany. In fact they would research it easily ahead of time. with the rule, researching it ahead of time is only possible for nations with lots of leadership.
perhaps to achieve your objetive would be better to tie seval technologies to each characteristic. i.e. dont have one single technology to get +0.60 SA, but one to get +0.20SA,+0.5HA, other to get +10SA, +0.5km/h, other to get +30SA,+10%attack speed, and so. That way, a minor would hardly be able to get up to date in anything, but would be able to develop many areas.
About my own wishes for a HOI4. just a better AI!
perhaps the ability to place depots. even the need, puting limits in the size of a depot stockpile. but this is just a gift. better AI is really a must.
Why? That's a silly argument. What makes it impossible for a minor nation to be good at some specific thing? The difference between minors and majors is that minors have to focus carefully on what they think is important, whereas majors can spread their research more and still stay up-to-date. Your proposal would put the game back towards an inherently scripted version, where diverging from real history would become impossible except for the player. I, at least like that the game can surprise me every now and then.
These kinds of arguments all come from a fundamental misunderstanding of what tech levels and years represent.
All a tech level represents is a standard. If you have 1938 small arms, you have reached that standard in your small arms (a certain effective range, penetration, reliability of firing in poor conditions, and so on). That's it. It has nothing to do with country, culture, or even the phase of the moon. You either have achieved that standard or not. It is also a standard that exists no matter what year it is in the game. Even in 1948, 1938 small arms are still objectively less effective than 1940 small arms. The tech level just regulates how effective various techs are against a universal standard that measures everyone's weapons.
So, it's not that 1938 Tibet small arms and 1938 Germany small arms are equal to each other; it's that they are both equal to an outside objective standard that exists regardless of whether these countries even exist.
The year also functions as a barrier to entry. If the game has not reached the year that a tech has stamped on it, then it is harder to research. Period. That's it. We can all debate whether the ahead of time penalty on research is too small, too harsh, or just right, but the year on the tech, in game terms, is there to make sure that "high tech" remains hard to achieve. You want 1942 small arms in time for the Fall of France, you gotta pay the price.
The real question to ask about techs is this, "Does Tibet consistently have infantry technologies that are on par with Germany? If so, is it because Germany is too far behind her historical progress, or Tibet is too far ahead of her historical progress?"
You're missing my point. There were minors that were pretty darn good at some fields, even better than some majors.
As I see Tibet, they have 4.56 LP at the start. That's surely enough at least to keep all the infantry weapons updated. But Tibet is irrelevant, since it isn't directly involved in the war (at least not in 36-48 timespan) and honestly, Tibet doesn't really need air force or navy in order to succeed. The flaw is in the long timespan being just one level (18-36, seriously Paradox?). For HPP, I can say there is at least a four levels difference between 18-36, at least for INF weapons.
Let's compare tank research from Czechoslovakia (8.00) and Germany (29.68).
I can say that Czechoslovakian tank research truly started in 1933. Still, in 1938, German tanks sucked balls in comparison to Czech ones. Pz IV still had the armor comparable to LT 38, but IVs had just a howitzer-like cannon and lower numbers. What's interesting is that Pz IV is always considered to be a medium tank, no matter the version, opposed to "heavy" LT such as LT 38 was.
What's important is that Czechoslovakia will never have enough leadership to research all the things they historically did/would. Why? Because you didn't take officers, diplomacy and espionage into account, and at least maintaining a proper officer ratio is important for waging a successful war. I'm not saying a totally unrestricted research is the way to go, but I'd like to see it changed in some way that makes more sense. But if French in HPP have 1942 LT armor techs right off the bat in 1936, you have to admit that this was their '36 standard and saying them that they won't be able to improve it without severe penalties at least next 6 years is somewhat... weird.
P.S. If you think I'm too biased towards HPP by this argue, compare T-35 and the Soviet tank research in vanilla and whether it fits into light tanks
You're missing my point. There were minors that were pretty darn good at some fields, even better than some majors.
As I see Tibet, they have 4.56 LP at the start. That's surely enough at least to keep all the infantry weapons updated. But Tibet is irrelevant, since it isn't directly involved in the war (at least not in 36-48 timespan) and honestly, Tibet doesn't really need air force or navy in order to succeed. The flaw is in the long timespan being just one level (18-36, seriously Paradox?). For HPP, I can say there is at least a four levels difference between 18-36, at least for INF weapons.
Let's compare tank research from Czechoslovakia (8.00) and Germany (29.68).
I can say that Czechoslovakian tank research truly started in 1933. Still, in 1938, German tanks sucked balls in comparison to Czech ones. Pz IV still had the armor comparable to LT 38, but IVs had just a howitzer-like cannon and lower numbers. What's interesting is that Pz IV is always considered to be a medium tank, no matter the version, opposed to "heavy" LT such as LT 38 was.
What's important is that Czechoslovakia will never have enough leadership to research all the things they historically did/would. Why? Because you didn't take officers, diplomacy and espionage into account, and at least maintaining a proper officer ratio is important for waging a successful war. I'm not saying a totally unrestricted research is the way to go, but I'd like to see it changed in some way that makes more sense. But if French in HPP have 1942 LT armor techs right off the bat in 1936, you have to admit that this was their '36 standard and saying them that they won't be able to improve it without severe penalties at least next 6 years is somewhat... weird.
P.S. If you think I'm too biased towards HPP by this argue, compare T-35 and the Soviet tank research in vanilla and whether it fits into light tanks
I think that you should give the Total Realism Project (TRP) mod a shot.
Absolutely agree! Tech research in TRP is an absolute pain in the backside. I have difficulty keeping up with techs, much less researching ahead of time. This is the most fun I've had with HOI since I started playing it.
I agree with >90% of the changes that Lothos made; I really need to find some time to play it because if it is at least half as good as it seems on paper, it is a huge improvement for HOI3.
Last edited:
I agree with >90% of the changes that Lothos made; I really need to find some time to play it because if it is at least half as good as it seems on paper, it is a huge improvement for HOI3.
I was kind of wondering why, at least the AI changes, from TRP hasn't been implemented into the base game yet? By this I mean tech, diplomatic and espionage AI (again, I'd be wiser if I ever played a single TRP game, but anyway). What sucks is that the military AI cannot be modded :sad:
Allies that can betray you. Italy, Hungary, and Romania all betrayed Germany when the winds turned south, but in HOI 3 they fight to the death in the name of the Axis.
I manage to get them to change sides. That's what the puppet war goal is for.
However that is you installing a new government, rather than the old government flipping sides.
- Status