HoI V will prob feature Vic3 like combat

[salisano]

I realised that this is the future of paradox gaming and that HoI V will definitely have Vic 3 combat system. Maybe a tinkered and revised one, child of multiple Vic patches, but this is the future.

I can also foresee an integration with the current designer mechanic and with the production method system. It's pretty obvious that units on map made their time and paradox, to avoid working tirelessy on improving IA strategies province by province, will shift to this huge front mechanic. No point squeezing IA to match a human player making a spearhead by hand, let's remove the hand alltogether.

I personally do not know if I would like this HoI V, maybe yes, but I am really afraid that this way the game will lose its magic. What do you think?

 

[FlinzP]

Personally I always thought you have frontlines and not actual single divions. You add divisions directly to the frontline and they list there. Divisions are spread to front and you can manage intensity on regions. You can then plan tank and artillery advances on certain regions etc. Just my imaginary

 

[BeauNiddle]

The purpose of HOI is to move toy soldiers around. The purpose of Vic to play the economy. They wont move the war system from one to the other (either way round).

But yeah it is obvious the purpose of the Vic war rewrite is to simplify the problems of the AI and the overhead required to run it. Still got a lot of teething issues tho.

 

[salisano]

The purpose of HOI is to move toy soldiers around. The purpose of Vic to play the economy. They wont move the war system from one to the other (either way round).

But yeah it is obvious the purpose of the Vic war rewrite is to simplify the problems of the AI and the overhead required to run it. Still got a lot of teething issues tho.

But this does not imply that they will not shift towards the same system for hoi. Despite the purpose of moving toy soldiers as you stated.

The vic purpose to just play the economy is just an excuse made for players to soften the blow of not having soldiers anymore (and for vic I agree). However, I think the same will be said for HoI V. Something like "you will be like a true general on a map and paint arrows" "drive the war machine by producing your model of tank/ship/plane" etc.. You cannot say this is impossibile because the road ahead seems pretty clear to me.

Personally I always thought you have frontlines and not actual single divions. You add divisions directly to the frontline and they list there. Divisions are spread to front and you can manage intensity on regions. You can then plan tank and artillery advances on certain regions etc. Just my imaginary

For a lot of players is not like that, but this is even more a symptom of the future removal of toy soldiers. It's also (of course) more beginner friendly.

 

[Herennius]

It can be debated, if the way Vic3 handles warfare is a good one or if a different approach would be better - but applying that purely strategic approch (with with few tactical elements attached to commanders behind the curtain) to the HoI series would be a huge fail, IMO (and that even in case you deem Vic3's system as "ok" or "good"). And that's why I don't think it will happen.

I would even go so far to say that in this case HoI5 could be canceled outright and any developement effort could be saved for something else Why? Simply because a GG solely and only focussed on warfare needs a tactical level. You can make a Weapon&Armor tycoon game (IIRC, something like this even already exists...) or you can make a front supply manager, but that no longer would have anything to do with the HoI GSG spirit.

Comparing it with Vic3 is just like comparing apples and pears - Vic3 isn't a pure war game, socities/economy/diplomacy/culture play at mimimum the same role like wars (which are inevitable, too - but that kind of inevitable is different to HoI, where simply everything is centered around some small scale wars in the beginning and one/few world wars after). Everything not being directly combat related in HoI exists for the sole purpose to shape war and combat and that's why a pure strategic approach would just leave too little player involvement.

 

[Synicus]

I think HoI5 would be more like the game is now but with a newish engine. Like HoI3-HoI4, one step back with two steps forward in DCL's.

 

[Xerberous]

this is the future of paradox gaming and that HoI V

When I have a look at the Roadmap (s. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/hoi4-dev-diary-thoughts-roadmap.1509941/) I'm rather optimistic that there is no need to have this debate for the upcomming 3 years, most likely even more.

 

[marcelo r. r.]

To only screenshoot i save from hoi2(aside from doctrines) is a joint picture with all barbarrosa huge front.

Im also old(40yo) and a hater from modern tendencies to minimalism. Probably when hoi5 came around i will retire from games.

When i discovered hoi series, at time i didn't bother with ww2 and was just playing around with BRA. was that huge front, that catched my eyes.

 

[Svenkomigen]

If there is to be any speculation at all on the way combat will be handled in HOI V, I think it far more likely that we'll simply see more or less the same sytem HOI has always had, but with more depth being given to the battle planner/frontline manager. You'll most likely still very much be able to move single divisions around just as you've always been able to, but the option to off-load the micro onto an AI general will be expanded on.

HOI is HOI, and Vicky is Vicky. CK3 still has you moving armies around and splitting stacks up to suit your needs, Imperator did so as well, as almost certainly EU5 and HOI5 also will. The Vicky 3 system was just a better fit for that era/game. There's no need to be pessimistic and dismissive of a hypothetical game system in a hypothetical game that most likely won't even be announced until we're past the halfway point of the decade.

 

[Harin]

Personally, my hope is HOI5 moves the needle so far to the good that all the OTHER forums talk about how their games should emulate HOI5, instead of the other way around.

 

[coffeelingfine]

Forget HOI5 for a minute. Who knows how far out that is. I'm more interested to see what warfare will look like in EU5.

 

[Harin]

Forget HOI5 for a minute. Who knows how far out that is. I'm more interested to see what warfare will look like in EU5.

Good point. The fact is, to me at least, that combat needs to get better. If EU5 is next at bat, I hope they hit a home run that all the games can learn from.

 

[vermicious knid]

Moving units around is a large percentage of the fundamental gameplay of HOI. Abstracting combat to the point of V3 wouldn't leave you enough to do.

That being said I wouldn't mind a more abstracted game that covers the entire 20th century. That gives enough space to do the things Vicky does well. WW1 and the Cold War would work just fine with abstracted combat.

 

[Qwerlancer]

If so I'd rather play Axis vs Allies then. However I don't think future Hoi games would go abstract approach in warfare.

 

[Airl]

The developers of Vic3 chose to abstract the war system because they felt that Vic2 overly focused on warfare in place of what they though the Victoria series' main focuses were, economics and diplomacy. The Hearts of Iron series' main focus is warfare. So, it seems unlikely that Hoi5 will have a Vic3-like warfare system.