HoI3 1.4 and the future

[unmerged(1823)]

An expansion OK. Only downloadable not OK. I will 100% not pay for a dowloadable content, I want a cd! I know I'm old school, but I have money too. So think about it PI

We tried that, and it was not economically feasible a few years ago. Now when the download part of the market is growing so insanely rapidly and shelf-space is shrinking even more, you'll never see a cd of an expansion. Maybe there will be compilation boxes later on like Eu3 complete was.

- I can still today not understand why it was not decided to multithread this game that arrive on the market when people have all dual core or quad core, so you know what I mean.

It was one of the few things that got cut from the game during development as it was too risky to get ready.

OK , Johan, time to go to bed. Thanks for taking from your time to chat with us !

Well, I have spent the entire day trying to download the Star Trek Online beta, and I'll be damned if I go to sleep before I've at least tried it once just 20 mins left of patching.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

Would it be possible for you to make the territory of allied nations be added to the theatres of a country like it does for puppets?

I remember asking Doomdark (who wrote the military AI for hoi3) about if it was possible for 1.3 and his reply was that the amount of time for it made it expansion material.

 

[Sangeli]

I have a number of suggestions:

1. Units in combat or moving should use different amounts of supplies. It just doesn't make sense that units who are stationary use the same amount of supplies as units attacking.

2. Elimination of attack delay:
Instead of units having this artificial attack delay, units should simply lose org when they arrive at there destination, the more casualties suffered the the greater than penalty. Obviously techs would influence the penalty. Also, it would make sense to have a minimum level of organization to carry out an attack.

3. Greater defensive bonuses. Defending units should not suffer as much organization loss and dug in units should perform far more effectively, especially in air defense like in HOI 2.

4. Teach the AI how to understand terrain bonuses and stacking penalties. Obviously this is very difficult, but at the least the AI should know that having 7 divisions garrison each province in the Maginot line is overkill.

5. Fix map problems:
One thing that bugs me is that many important Soviet cities are way out of place such as Kiev, Smolensk, and I believe Moscow as well. Also, it bothers me that so much of Belgium is forest even though most of it, except the Ardennes of course, should be plains.

6. Impassable provinces:
I liked HOI 2's system of impassable provinces, like in the Sahara. Otherwise AI units use the Sahara to manuever like it's no big deal.

7. Revamping experience gains:
gaining experience should not be linear; less experienced units should gain experience much quicker. The difficulty in gaining experience should be proportional to the experience already accumulated; a unit with double the experience of another would gain experience half as quickly.

 

[coreymas]

if they do something it is fine, I just son't want to see the hq range increased by an artillery brigade... :rofl:

Actually attaching Artillery at the Corps level or above would require an addition to the intelligence/communication assets of the Corps HQ.. which in turn could increase the range of said HQ (especially if the Artillery assets added were of Large calibre/long range variety).

 

[TheDarkside]

Well, I have spent the entire day trying to download the Star Trek Online beta, and I'll be damned if I go to sleep before I've at least tried it once just 20 mins left of patching.

You can forget about sleep tonight

 

[zeekater]

All stats are combined in landcombat. Damage is split depending on maximum-strength IIRC.

Good to know, thanks

So a 100 strength brigade in a 10.000 strength division will only take 1% of the damage.

Could be useful for modders

I would also like to request the modding ability to give techs a negative theoretical or practical bonus and the ability to define boni to more then one theoretical or practical value.
Also the ability to have negative provincial stats and allow provincial buildings to influence more then one provincial stat.

 

[bairdlander]

reply

Can the strategy guide be re written to properly explain the supply system?Can it be made more simplified?A lot of posters claimed it was bugged,unplayable etc etc,yet you say its not.Can it be explained simply in laymans terms?Its the major cause of me shelving the game along with many others.

 

[goulash]

As a fairly noob player to such a complex game and due to the ammount of changes this past few months, I would really appreciate a decent tutorial to come with any expansion.

When I say decent, I mean something that is almost like a scenario in itself but will explain all the key aspects of gameplay like supply, understanding how the combat is calculated, etc etc.

personally some tactical tips would help also

At the moment, the tutorials offer no great insight into the game.

I think a big tutorial running for approx 1-2 hours would really encourage new players to this type of game and probably clear some mist for existing players whom are just too busy to read then play.

I dont think players are put off about playing complex strategy games so long as they have somewhere to get a refresher lesson from, in one place.

At the moment , I feel like sherlock holmes trying to find bits and bats of info. Even then it is written.

We all know that doing somthing as it plays is much better than just reading about.

At the very least do some good videos to explain things and post them here

 

[Lucasiewicz]

Slightly off topic, but this thread proves me why I keep believing in your company. In the end, you get very lovely games (which are tremendously hard to make, because they are vastly complex) and in the proces towards that end you keep on proving that the input from your community really cares!

 

[SFJackBauer]

Johan, don't know if you're still there, but:

- can the limitation of "5 units under an HQ" be removed? Since the AI doesn't build new HQs, this is only imposing an unnecessary limitation on humans.

- can be added the ability to view the current orders for the selected air unit in the map (highlight provinces, arrows etc)? You can only see it when you give the order - suppose you order an air unit to patrol the Denmark, choosing only its provinces. Later on, you can't remember what you did, since selecting an air unit gives no clues about their orders area.

- can be added a message when one of your ships is destroyed? Right now, you set subs in convoy raiding and from time to time some flotillas just disappear without a message (there are bug reports about this). You have to count manually every once in a while your flotillas to see if some has been sunk.

- does this: http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=358508
works for Hoi3 too?

- and last but not least, as a suggestion, you guys could do from time to time, a kind of dev-chat, like 1h per month, with the community. In this thread you answered questions that some guys were asking for months around the forum. I remember the devs of Americas Army 2 doing that and it yielded lots of good ideas into the game.

 

[unmerged(1823)]

I'm off to bed now.. cya guys l8r.

 

[MontanaPrussian]

Johan,Thanks for updating us and asking our desires,I much appreciate it.

My main wish,as some others have said,is to make CTFs act more like they did historically,attack at long range,escorts stay with CVs.....

 

[unmerged(149385)]

Dear Balor,

Most of my suggestions were done by others, so i have not so much to say. The only thing that still strange for me is the research system, in particular in aeronautics (the one I know the more). It is only a little remark and it is not a big problem in the game.

A plane is a combination of airframe/motor/weapons and must be researched as a set. Hard to imagine a jumo turboreactor on a wooden l-153 or a Me-262 with one 7.62 mm machinegun . But in the game it is totaly possible. It is true that motors and turboreactors must follow specific R&D, but the airframe/weaponry/fuel tank (that in fact is a part of airframe) must be a single R&D and moreover an airframe design can support only one type of motors (with little variations).

In brief it is impossible to upgrade a l-19 squad to a yak squad without BOTH the good airframe an the good motor! For example the Me-262 stays at blueprint and prototype state during years until a correct turboreactor has been build. I just want to say that air squad can only upgrade to higher level only if the airframe level match with the motor level.

A compensation for the combined research airframe/weapon/fuel tanks on a plane can be a higher cost that one in leadership.

It is also important to note that the a turboreactor based airframe is very different that a propeller based airframe, so perhaps it can be more accuary to could lauch research in turboreactor based airframe when the therorical jet engine has been researched.

An another thing that bother me is the cumulative effect of turboreactor with standard propelled planes... Just a few (and extremly bad) prototypes has been build with both propulsion mode.

An another time it is just a little suggestion that do not change the game so much, and i know that a videogame do not need to be logical or historic, it is just a videogame.

Continue your good job on this great game all team!

PS: sorry for my bad english I am not so good with this language.

 

[Hptm. Jaadoo]

I have a few questions (or more like wishes )concerning the expansion:

- Will it get multithreading?
- Will it be possible to implement videos? e. g. in the event-boxes?
- Will there be more control over the theatres?
- Will it be possible to tell the research-AI what to research and what not? e. g. if dont want any rockets or nukes, you can just tell the AI not to research it, so you're not forced to take control over the research
- Will the leadershippoints-distribution, be seperate from the research area? so that i can give the research to the AI, while remaining in command about the distribution of the leadershippoints?
- Will I be able to reject expeditionary-troops?
- Will I be able to automate the answers to tradeoffers, without automating the whole system of it?

Thx in advance.

 

[plasticpanzers]

thank you very much for posting on the game.

i am really disapointed that allied forces will not be able to work together still til
perhaps an expansion as this is a major gamebreaker and totally opposite of any
real world alliance. My hope would be now for the ability for major powers to
ask other majors and minors for expeditionary forces (that are able to upgrade
from their home nation) of sufficent quantity to make a difference. right now
its still very bizzare to watch Canada or Australia try to invade Germany on their
own!! LOL! makes no sense whatsoever.

also if you can work into the game the supply draw for units thru their parent
field hqs i think it would be much better and more realistic

allowing the modders some more leeway in the program is a good thing as well.
I think the modders can add alot of tweaks that gamers would like.

Armored car units should add to breakthru and delay of parent units and be much
less useful on their own. having them as part of a division should be much more
desirable for a player or AI and provide a much better attack and defence bonus

combined arms should focus more on arm-inf-art then it does now. it seems that
now just armor and infantry are for combined arms and this is not accurate.

perhaps have the "commonweath" as one nation but each member would create only
a limited number of field divisions the rest garrison units that cannot leave the country.
this would include "locked" air units

less emphasis on "spies" for diplomacy. that would be fine for a game on its own but
has little to do with real 20th century diplomacy. you should be able to influcence other
nations with gifts of money, resoruces, or license

allow the ability to sell license to other nations and smaller nations buying licenses to build
units comparable to major nations combat divisions. even Brazil that loaned a division to
the Allies fighting in Italy sent them over to be equipped by the US so they could fight
effectivly.

 

[Red Ant]

- Will it get multithreading?

Obviously I'm not one of the developers, but I really really doubt that. You can't just tag on multithreading as an afterthought. Either you design for it from the get go or you do without multithreading.

 

[TheLoneGunman]

Obviously I'm not one of the developers, but I really really doubt that. You can't just tag on multithreading as an afterthought. Either you design for it from the get go or you do without multithreading.

Yeah, I'm thinking that their next-gen game engine after Clausewitz, or a total rewrite of Clausewitz will need to be done to support that.

 

[ashandresash]

Excellent news, Johan! And great ideas here...

My thoughts about an expansion:

- Changing the training and experience system. Not just a law, bringing it to brigades/regiments. So 'basic' infantry regiments requires less time to build, it's effective against infantry, but not so much against tanks and defending from airplanes. I'd like experience to play a more important role, specially giving unities more capacity against tanks and airplanes (a way of making these features more important). 'Elite' infantry regiments should be a little more effective than basic against infantry, but could resist better an attack of armour. The same about tanks: unexperinced armour reg and divisions could make it right against infantry, but awfully against experienced tanks (think on Russia at the beginning of Barbarrossa).

- More interaction with allies and puppets. I wish you could influence in your allies trying to bring more of their forces to your main theater, and giving them objectives (rather than bringing back the military control issue). I support the idea of 'sharing' theaters with allies (common theaters of the faction). It should be great giving some uses to spies and political influence/diplomacy in the faction (adressing more effort to your main theater; think on UK influcing USA to get the 'Germany first'!, or Germany on 1942 pressing her allies to bring more men to Russia).

- Officers and elite forces. Increasing importance of OOB... should it be possible to reduce the demand of officers of divisions but increasing it on HQs to get the effects (making them bigger, maybe). If player should select which HQs to reinforce with officers... you could create SS or Soviet guards. Maybe your vanilla armies or corps could be at... 70%, but your elite forces could be at 150%, increasing their power. I really like to feel myself afraid of fighting against the 6th SS Panzer Army... Officers rate should multiply commanders trait (less officers, your commander hardly do anything; plenty of them, great effects).

 

[Capzero]

I have some input although it comes with only a couple dozen games played:

1- AI minor allies should always strive to build purchased units.

2 - AI minor allies should send any units not needed for defense to a major as expeditionary forces
(This raises a question. Does the minor get practical experience for units under another nations control?)

3 - This may be just my lack of experience but stances need to have their effects well defined. Defensive (avoid combat), Passive (Enage weaker opponents only), Aggressive (Attack regardless of odds)? An aternative would be to have more stances that are better understood (recon, patrol, ASW, Shadow) etc.

4 - Have the AI understand what an impossible attack is. I always end up defending Malmo to the endless German assaults that can never win.

5 - OOB editor is a must. Have it include data showing the pass down effects.

6 - CAGs should extend into the next zone when stance set aggressive and stay home on passive/defensive (unless you add more stances ) This way you could have one CAG stay home while the other attacks out.

7 - The log needs to be cleaner and easier to read. I would make it a seperate window you call up and seacrh trough. I would like to see progress of a single battle for instance.

Thats all I have for now - if some of these already exeost let me know

 

[Surt]

Originally Posted by VetMax View Post
Can you make naval patrol to avoid battles with superior forces? It should be reasanoble to patrol seas with battlecruisers.
Thats a very good idea.

Thats a very good idea.

I thought that was included in setting the mission to defensive?
as you sometimes get the message "shadowing" from fleets when they find someone much stronger.