HOI4 Dev Diary - Early look at at supply and the coming year

[General Ricot]

hopefully Italy will get a focus tree

I really hope so, even bulgaria has a better and more interesting focus tree... and considering Italy is in the top 5 most played nations in the game, and it is even used as the tutorial nation, it is ridiculous that still has that thing that someone dares to call focus tree.

 

[bitmode]

I have not played it, but in many ways the supply seems to go back to how it worked in hoi3(?)

You seem to stay committed to the bottleneck idea still. But now that supply supposedly limits snowballing, I assume all supply flows through a bottleneck are additive, right? I.e. if a chain of previously three supply zones is now connected from a single rail line, it needs to support the needs of all units combined?

If so, what about allies? It would make sense for rail traffic of different countries to add up as well. This could excarbate the current supply problems of AI frenemies.

What about building/repairing rail in allied territory? Even if an AI faction member manages their internal rail well enough, it may be necessary to interface their network with your own.

As was already mentioned by some, a lot hinges on whether the AI can handle this system with at least a bare level of competency. Partly this concerns combat which might see changes anyway in some latter dev diaries. But I'm particularly worried about building/repairing/regauging rail. These are geometric problems which are hard to handle for an AI. (For instance look at how it draws naval invasion orders.)

 

[Lucas1899]

I really hope so, even bulgaria has a better and more interesting focus tree... and considering Italy is in the top 5 most played nations in the game, and it is even used as the tutorial nation, it is ridiculous that still has that thing that someone dares to call focus tree.

I agree, but podcat does have a good point that it just doesn't fit the expansion. If they rework USSR, Finland, Germany (a bit to fix Barbarossa), Poland, and the Baltics that's quite a few focus trees (1 major and 3+ minors) and Italy doesn't really connect to them.

 

[AwareGamingNews]

I agree, but podcat does have a good point that it just doesn't fit the expansion. If they rework USSR, Finland, Germany (a bit to fix Barbarossa), Poland, and the Baltics that's quite a few focus trees (1 major and 3+ minors) and Italy doesn't really connect to them.

really sucks, that every dlc Italy doesn't get anything even though its been highly requested and more important unlike the others but i look for a Italian dlc in the future

 

[Praetori]

Depending on how much supply is transported you need a certain amount of trains for the rails to perform. Trains are a new equipment type that we will dig into in a future diary (well actually, several types ;P)

An important part of railways is that they are capturable, so as you push into enemy territory you will want to make sure to hold vital railways and capture railway hubs to supply your troops. There is a conversion time here to model the fact that there was usually some repair or re-gauging that needed to happen for attackers.

Given my longstanding signature this looks promising.

 

[General Ricot]

I agree, but podcat does have a good point that it just doesn't fit the expansion. If they rework USSR, Finland, Germany (a bit to fix Barbarossa), Poland, and the Baltics that's quite a few focus trees (1 major and 3+ minors) and Italy doesn't really connect to them.

You are right, Italy doesn't really fit in a barbarossa themed expansion. But if we think it on the other side of the coin, we have a supply themed dlc incoming, and in that case italy completely fits in, especially regarding the war in africa and the battles to defend supply's convoys in the mediterranean. In northern africa the main issue, that also stopped Rommel advance, was the lack of supply. In my opinion it would fit, but probably this dlc is already too fat.
Hopefully it will come in a little dlc at the end of the year like battle of the bosphorus

 

[AwareGamingNews]

You are right, Italy doesn't really fit in a barbarossa themed expansion. But if we think it on the other side of the coin, we have a supply themed dlc incoming, and in that case italy completely fits in, especially regarding the war in africa and the battles to defend supply's convoys in the mediterranean. In northern africa the main issue, that also stopped Rommel advance, was the lack of supply. In my opinion it would fit, but probably this dlc is already too fat.
Hopefully it will come in a little dlc at the end of the year like battle of the bosphorus

totally agree

 

[Rachidelson]

I agree, but podcat does have a good point that it just doesn't fit the expansion. If they rework USSR, Finland, Germany (a bit to fix Barbarossa), Poland, and the Baltics that's quite a few focus trees (1 major and 3+ minors) and Italy doesn't really connect to them.

If anything I want Iran or even Mongolia to get focus trees, but right now, not the baltics, I can't see how even make them fun to play without overpowered focuses. Right now there are so many countries that fought a lot more and still haven't received trees, among them are Brazil, Siam, Poland, ( actual one sucks ) Italy and maybe Norway and Sweden in a near future.

 

[Praetori]

Never thought I would be this excited in my life about trains, but this dev diary has made me the most excited for HOI4 in a while.

I sense a Thomas the Tank Engine mod incoming....

 

[AwareGamingNews]

If anything I want Iran or even Mongolia to get focus trees, but right now, not the baltics, I can't see how even make them fun to play without overpowered focuses. Right now there are so many countries that fought a lot more and still haven't received trees, among them are Brazil, Siam, Poland, ( actual one sucks ) Italy and maybe Norway and Sweden in a near future.

i don't understand that, they probably know that hardly anyone play the Baltics but they're giving them a focus tree

 

[po8crg]

this question took longer than I expected ;D we arent sure yet. we discussed having a modifier on soviets to represent it takign longer to convert to-from its gauge, but its also sorta abstracted in the conversion/repair everyone needs to do

My thoughts on this, FWIW:

Abstracting it as modifier to the conversion/repair cost is fine (you should apply the modifier by state and apply it to Finland, India, Ireland, Japan, South Africa, Spain and Portugal as well, and possibly some Australian states). You could possibly add a rule that a country that has the modifier doesn't suffer from it when converting states with it, but does when converting regular states without, but you're probably going to be able to get away without - the only likely conquests where a country would have to convert in-game when it wouldn't in reality would be the USSR in Finland, Spain and Portugal conquering each other, and South Africa in southern Africa (adding an exception for civil wars would be needed to stop it messing up the Spanish Civil War, but you'd want to add that anyway).

Alternatively you'd have actual gauges (Standard, Russian, Iberian, Irish, Indian, and Cape/Japanese), trains would be built for a specific gauge, so when you conquer a state from a different gauge, you have the option of just repairing it, or converting it to your own gauge (more expensive); if you just repair, it stays on the original gauge and you then have to build (or capture) trains in the other gauge as well as your own. I don't think there's enough benefit from this to justify the added coding time, the added UI complexity, the added decisions for the player, and the added performance impact, but you would get a rail-gauge mapmode out of it, and there are certainly lots of rail nerds around who'd love that.

It would also make the UK, Australia and Portugal a pain to play as they would have multiple gauges from the start (Australia would have Cape in Tasmania, Queensland and Western Australia, Irish in Victoria and Standard in all other states; UK standard most places, Cape in the states near South Africa and Irish in Northern Ireland, Portugal Iberian at home and Cape in Angola and Mozambique)

 

[Krey_Lollipop]

You are right, Italy doesn't really fit in a barbarossa themed expansion. But if we think it on the other side of the coin, we have a supply themed dlc incoming, and in that case italy completely fits in, especially regarding the war in africa and the battles to defend supply's convoys in the mediterranean. In northern africa the main issue, that also stopped Rommel advance, was the lack of supply. In my opinion it would fit, but probably this dlc is already too fat.
Hopefully it will come in a little dlc at the end of the year like battle of the bosphorus

Yeah, it feels like it comes down a lot to theme. Had they not gone as hard on the Eastern Front, then Italy could have been a great pick. Also, what part of Germany comes to mind for a DLC titled "Waking the Tiger"? I think they have a focus for demanding some land off China, but if that's where the bar sits then I just want to point out how many focuses Italy has related to infrastructure and land warfare.

That said, I kinda agree with podcat that Italy could use it's own expansion. But being stuck with Finland for what could be an entire year (or more...!) while Italy sits there with a boring old focus tree kinda blows. And that's coming from someone who's gonna main Finland when this DLC comes out (provided they're in it).

 

[Trinium]

Please make sure it doesnt turn into a battle of logistics.
And also look at mutiple cities as supply centers and not just the capital.

But it looks good so far.

 

[freejones912]

Will you be attempting to limit AI deathstacking with this new mechanic? It feels like wars are won by whoever can shove more troops into one province where defense stacks indefinitely and its nearly impossible to acquire enough attack.

 

[RolandRahn]

First of all, I am absolutely amazed that railroads are incorporated into HOI4!

Now, I have several questions:


First:

An important part of railways is that they are capturable, so as you push into enemy territory you will want to make sure to hold vital railways and capture railway hubs to supply your troops. There is a conversion time here to model the fact that there was usually some repair or re-gauging that needed to happen for attackers.

As the Soviet gauges were wider - can we have a longer conversion time for Germans capturing Soviet Rails and an even longer one for Soviets capturing German (and other European Nation's) Rail? Because converting to a wider gauge is more difficult.


Second:

The German steam locomotives were not suited for Russian Winter temperatures and Russian distances - they needed more water tower stations e.t.c.
Will this be represented by making German use of Soviet Rails less efficient?


Third:

What are other gameplay implications (apart from supplying German forces in the Soviet Union)?

Here are a few examples that jump into my mind:

Currently, I don't need Narvik to get ore from Sweden to Germany - if I control the Baltic, I am fine.
With railways, we could simulate the need for Narvik to get the Ore from northern Swedish mines.....

Murmansk. Threatening that railway could be an issue to slow down lend lease.

Spain. All those railroads leading from the ports to the inland and so few going over the Pyrenees would make supplying an Axis force marching through Spain a logistical nightmare (and the RN would be able to interdict the supply of such a force).
Vice Versa, Portugal joining the Allies and the Allies marching through Spain would also be problematic once they pass the Pyrenees.
Oh, and that main railway line over the Pyrenees close to the Atlantic Coast is basically begging for a visit by British Commandos.....

Again, I am really looking forward to this - it will probably as important as the introduction of fuel consumption with Man the Guns!

 

[BoomKidneyShot]

This sounds cool! Most of the armies in WW2 weren't that mechanized though., do we need to produce horses and trucks?

 

[wingren013]

Are horses going to be part of the system? Axis horse losses and the ensuing shortage were one of the major factors in their defeat.

Please make sure it doesnt turn into a battle of logistics.

You just described WW2

 

[KGBi]

Nice Barbarossa was a great movements oh tropas read this first dairy dev some no like me why capital first why no quiere your build equipment start from there i play much and when enemy close circle your capital or viceversa troops starts to die how fish off water waited what it fix

 

[Farquarsen]

Reminds me of this quote by Private David Webster from HBO's "Band of Brothers":

"Hey, you! That's right, you stupid Kraut bastards! That's right! Say hello to Ford, and General f***in' Motors! You stupid fascist pigs! Look at you! You have horses! What were you thinking?!?"

- Remnants of Army Group B walking as far west as possible while surrendering to a fully motorized Allied Army moving eastwards (1945)

Right, Fuel in Germany went to Panzers and Panzer Divisions, not to trucks. Horses moved supplies from rail heads to the troops so as not to waste fuel.

 

[CaptainD00M]

does this mean we have to produce trains, trucks, horse carriages now?
guess no more encircle capital to kill supply for entire country?

*scorched earth policy intensifies *
railway plough go brrrr