HOI4 Dev Diary - Post-release chat

  • 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.
the bonus doubles the base value right? could maybe go a little higher. What would you consider enough to make it worth picking late game?
It does, however the base value is very low. To go with my Germany example after conquest of Europe, I have 81million core pop and 186millions of non-core pop.
My core pop gives me 4.07 millions of manpower. My non-core gives me 70k. Prince of terror provides another 50k manpower. Proportion remains for all recruitment laws, at most I will get 300k at scraping the barrel.

As you can see, the value is not very noticeable(1.5%). What is worse, prince of Terror effect scales with laws, which makes it impossible to make use of it really.

What I would propose, is instead give prince of terror a flat % recruiting of non-core population %, that would work similarly to recruitment law, and suffers no modifiers from manpower law or occupation policy.
Then, 0.5% to 0.75% would be sufficent, since you could get that additional manpower independently of recruitment law. So, in my case, conquering second-most popular region in game I would get around a million of manpower flat, but that increase would be immediate and would allow me to delay activating harsher manpower laws. It would only boost German manpower by a total of 5-6%, which isn`t huge, but effect is noticeable immediately, and is something desirable.

Alternativly, if mechanics is not changed, around +15% base non core manpower would be notable (yes, 750% boost!).
I disagree. Japan has been really buffed in 1.4 with the addition of Aluminium and the War Minister. Taking China and India gives them about 1b non-core population, and the prince of terror guy gives ~150k manpower. In my Japan games SP and MP, 2.5% manpower law is sufficient! If you are running out of manpower as Japan, you are doing something really wrong. Try using more Medium tanks to push your enemies. If despite that you are still desperate for manpower, you can create divisions out of your puppets.
A minister that is useful only for one country is precicely my point. Anyone why didn`t conquer China, India or both, doesn`t even notice a difference. No, I`m not doing anything wrong with Japan.
 
Last edited:
I played Italy with 1.4.1 all evening yesterday, and it's working great. The only issue I saw was a few crazy American units (British volunteers?) in the middle of the "no mans land" in the Sahara. One pink province surrounded by proper Italian green.
 
Any chance when you are looking at Focus Trees the UK one can get some minor changes? Limited Rearmament and Naval Rearmament really shouldn't be adding factories in any random state, they should work like the Royal Ordinance Factories focus and ideally only add factories in the British Isles or at worst only in sensible states. Obviously working out what the sensible states (no Pacific or tiny islands, not in impassable wastelands, not in the Caribbean if the UK AI is always going to accept Destroyers for Bases, actually since Malaya was removed from the UK there aren't actually many places outside of the British Isles that make any sense to build factories) is going to take a lot longer, but it's absurd to see factories being added to tiny islands or wastelands with no population to support them on the other side of the planet.

Similarly, one of the US focuses put 3 military factories on Phoenix Island the other night when I was playing 1.4. I'm at work right now and can't look exactly which one, but it's the one that gives 6 military factories and 6 dockyards. These factories should be placed in the continental US. MAYBE Alaska or Hawaii.
 
Any plans to fix devisions on the move suiciding at sea?

You have to admit it's pretty stupid that i can't launch a naval invasion if i don't know enough of the sea region(s) while i can freely move my troops in said sea region(s).

Or how about just not allowing them altogether if there is a valid land route
 
You have to admit it's pretty stupid that i can't launch a naval invasion if i don't know enough of the sea region(s) while i can freely move my troops in said sea region(s).

Or how about just not allowing them altogether if there is a valid land route

That's actually a very very good Suggestion. Why not, for oversea Transport, you'd Need ships in the area to even let there be Transport? Atleast in wartime, I doubt anyone would send troops over the Ocean if there wasnt some ships in the Area that could help.
 
Many edge cases and small fixes for focus trees. We are a little unhappy with how much small stuff that slipped through, so for next release we will be changing some stuff with how we do testing. The team has worked like champs and fixed a lot fast though for 1.4.1.

I am going to interpret that to mean a lot of the major power focus conflicts when someone takes a what if? choice on another focus tree have been tightened up? Does that mean now when England and France tell the Czechs they are on their own if they refuse the Munich deal they really mean it and won't just say "just kidding" and join the war the next day? ;)

Why no TAC in naval battles?

changing that for next patch update I think

:D :D :D
Hoping the next hot fix also includes fixing stranded volunteers in No Man's Land and re-balancing the research priorities of doctrines.

the bonus doubles the base value right? could maybe go a little higher. What would you consider enough to make it worth picking late game?

Honestly podcat, I don't know short of something like 5-10% PoT manpower bonus would make it better than going harshest occupation. The 100% usage you get from factories and resources at full whips and chains is pretty powerful compared to the manpower trickle from non-core. Adding a couple of % to the already abysmal 2% minus 70% (best occupation malus) isn't enough compared to getting to use all the French and Benelux goodies (or SE Asia goodies in Japan's case).
I'll use the PoT for his 25% debuff on resistance, but I'm not even paying attention to the new manpower bonus they give. Maybe if I was playing a minor who was scrapping the barrel for manpower it might mean more to me.
 
- Added 4 new portraits for South america for historical leaders for Peru, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay

So now the only South American country without a Historical Leader portrait will be Uruguay? :( The default one doesn't look a bit like our president (though dictator would be a far more suitable term) back then.

terra.JPG
 
I'm more of the opinion that people should be encouraged to create puppets instead. Manchuko and Menguko were created for a reason by the Japanese.

It'd be nice to have the UI capability to see a puppet's training queue, logistics screen, and have some influence over their templates. As of now, they can be a bit unreliable since certain production bottlenecks can stall their division production.
 
- Austria-Hungary should now get Banat if Romania folds in the event chain
Yes!

Also, Austria-Hungary doesn't get cores on Transylvania, even though in case Romania refuses to hand it over and you let it go, the event makes you lose (nonexistent) cores. Since Hungary is the "dominant" part of the monarchy shouldn't they get cores on territory historically belonging to them and having significant Hungarian populations?
 
I'm more of the opinion that people should be encouraged to create puppets instead. Manchuko and Menguko were created for a reason by the Japanese.
If we could do it before peace conference, that would be fine, but we can`t. Also, allies seem quite useless still, better take over their resources anyway.

Also, Germany didn`t create puppets, but that didn`t prevent it from recruiting 1million from SU alone. When Germany controlls Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania and Bulgaria you would assume they will recruit more than a million of troops there.
 
the bonus doubles the base value right? could maybe go a little higher. What would you consider enough to make it worth picking late game?

While that bonus was a good idea, forced conscription still doesn't make much sense and could be a pain to balance back and forth. Plus that's what you have vassals for! (to steal their manpower)

Perhaps instead, use that bonus for "forced labor". There's no such system in the game yet, but maybe you could do it as a reduction on the output penalty you get from factories in occupied territories? That would offset the penalties you get from the conscription laws, making it good on the lategame when they usually come online.
 
Honestly podcat, I don't know short of something like 5-10% PoT manpower bonus would make it better than going harshest occupation. The 100% usage you get from factories and resources at full whips and chains is pretty powerful compared to the manpower trickle from non-core. Adding a couple of % to the already abysmal 2% minus 70% (best occupation malus) isn't enough compared to getting to use all the French and Benelux goodies (or SE Asia goodies in Japan's case).
I'll use the PoT for his 25% debuff on resistance, but I'm not even paying attention to the new manpower bonus they give. Maybe if I was playing a minor who was scrapping the barrel for manpower it might mean more to me.

I'd like to say that I agree with you, but I want to add a few things.

Except for minors, manpower is rarely a constraint assuming you are not stuck in crappy laws. Yes, Britain and the US can get caught in a cycle of insufficient manpower until certain NFs and WT thresholds are reached. But that's not something we worry about at the same time we are thinking about occupying huge swaths of land (like the Axis).

For most major powers, equipment is the limiting factor, not manpower. We can debate the merits of this kind of gameplay, but for our purposes here, it's how the game runs at the moment. Even if you wanted to instantly build 1 million infantry in crappy infantry divisions that just have INF battalions, you need the infantry equipment to do it. I promise the limiting factor will be the equipment, not the manpower.

Once a country is at the point that they are occupying territory, the math for manpower boils down to a fairly simple metric: how much IC do I currently occupy as a percentage of my total IC? If the answer is "30% of my IC is coming from occupied territory," then there is every reason to just eat the economic costs to further conscription rather than soften an occupation to gain manpower.

Service by Requirement costs you a 10% penalty to factory construction speed and a 10% penalty to factory output (while setting manpower to 10% and slowing training speed). But those penalties are more than offset if you are occupying enough IC to equal 20% of your total IC. So, even if you have to increase conscription to Service by Requirement to continue building troops while occupying enemy territory, you still win more than if you reduced your occupation policy to increase your manpower by some meager level. This also does not address the natural resource extraction. You get more resources by using harsher occupation. This might outweigh any silly considerations of manpower, especially for Japan.

Also note that occupation forces that suppress partisans are extremely cheap. Sure, you might need 250,000 CAV to occupy Western Europe and kill off all resistance, but 250,000 men is a drop in the bucket compared to the IC and resources you get from France and Benelux at the harshest occupation. Even if you have to change your conscription law just to supply anti-partisan forces (and that won't ever be the reason you swap laws, I assure you), you still come out ahead.

And let's be clear: in a standard game, the Axis is in a race against the Allies mobilizing for war. Once the US throws off Isolation and the Great Depression, the Axis powers need all CIC and MIC they can find to continue the war. There is no situation I can think of for Germany, Italy, or Japan where even tripling the available manpower from occupied territories would in some way replace the need to use 100% of all resources and IC in occupied territory.

And then there's the historical angle. The last time I tested Germany, I could just about recruit enough manpower from France to create one SS division (which you can then name 33rd Waffen to make it feel historical). That's about how much manpower the historical Germans managed to recruit from France during the war (for frontline duty, which is what divisions represent in the game). So, if you triple the available manpower for game balance reasons, we run into the weird situation of seeing an absurd number of Frenchmen conscripted into the German army. Rinse and repeat with all other occupied countries.
 
Except for minors, manpower is rarely a constraint assuming you are not stuck in crappy laws. Yes, Britain and the US can get caught in a cycle of insufficient manpower until certain NFs and WT thresholds are reached. But that's not something we worry about at the same time we are thinking about occupying huge swaths of land (like the Axis).

yeah good point both of you. Its more useful for minors for sure. I mainly added it as a bit of cream on top on the minister since we had the modifier made for modders. The whole occupation aspect of the game is something I think could do with more interesting choices atm

Any plans to fix devisions on the move suiciding at sea?

You have to admit it's pretty stupid that i can't launch a naval invasion if i don't know enough of the sea region(s) while i can freely move my troops in said sea region(s).

Or how about just not allowing them altogether if there is a valid land route
Thats pretty much how it works.
The big issue is when there arent routes, which happens for germany and italy a lot. We consider this our #1 AI bug atm, but its got no easy solution and the ones we tried so far have impacted performance too much. We will solve it, but not sure when we get a breakthrough on it.

Hoping the next hot fix also includes fixing stranded volunteers in No Man's Land and re-balancing the research priorities of doctrines.

both are on our radar. ai shoots itself in the foot a bit when it ends up doing more than one doctrine all the time
 
The whole occupation aspect of the game is something I think could do with more interesting choices atm

The AI appears to be horrible at managing resistance. It really wrecks their production since destroyed factories come off the lowest production line, leading to them having big gaps in their production, which in turn leads to stuff like them having no airforce.

It might be worth adding resistance reduction to the difficulty sliders for the AI, or rethinking the mechanic in a way the AI can deal with (for example, instead of damaging factories, high resistance could penalise production in those factories, up to 100%, or be a small country-wide penalty to all production)
 
That's actually a very very good Suggestion. Why not, for oversea Transport, you'd Need ships in the area to even let there be Transport? Atleast in wartime, I doubt anyone would send troops over the Ocean if there wasnt some ships in the Area that could help.
The devs have said that this requirement would simply ask too much of the AI. Every time the AI considered whether it wanted to move troops overseas, it would have to check whether it has naval superiority along the route, and then decide whether it wants to (and if it even can) commit the ships necessary to achieve it, and all of this constant considering would be a spectacular strain on the CPU, slowing the game down significantly.

Strictly speaking, a computer can perform any intellectual task, so long as the task is perfectly described, but that doesn't mean it can do the task quickly. There are still a few things that a Mark One Human is simply better at than a computer (see the Travelling Salesman Problem)
 
Maybe you could add land units to fleets, representing the fleet convoying those units? That's pretty much how Europa does it, and Europa handles sea stuff reasonably well.
 
While that bonus was a good idea, forced conscription still doesn't make much sense and could be a pain to balance back and forth. Plus that's what you have vassals for! (to steal their manpower)

Perhaps instead, use that bonus for "forced labor". There's no such system in the game yet, but maybe you could do it as a reduction on the output penalty you get from factories in occupied territories? That would offset the penalties you get from the conscription laws, making it good on the lategame when they usually come online.
How do you define "forced conscription"? Conscription is forced by definition, you don`t need to conscript volunteers. You already have forced labor, that is why factories and resource extraction work in occupied territory, and there are partisans trying to sabotage them.

Conscription from occupied places did both happen and in many ways was no different from regular procedure, exept it has to be done on smaller scale, and has to look up for people from backgrounds usually excluded from positions of power, like minorities, ideological fringes, ex.
It is complex, but makes perfect sence.
The devs have said that this requirement would simply ask too much of the AI. Every time the AI considered whether it wanted to move troops overseas, it would have to check whether it has naval superiority along the route, and then decide whether it wants to (and if it even can) commit the ships necessary to achieve it, and all of this constant considering would be a spectacular strain on the CPU, slowing the game down significantly.
Technically, the game already knows if a region has superiority of a side, it`s not like you have to calculate superiority every time a unit needs to find a path. At least it should exclude zones that have enemy superiority from pathfinding, which would be computationally inexpencive.
 
Technically, the game already knows if a region has superiority of a side, it`s not like you have to calculate superiority every time a unit needs to find a path. At least it should exclude zones that have enemy superiority from pathfinding, which would be computationally inexpencive.

Could the AI perform a check (say, every 72 hours, or whatever, maybe weekly) that gives a go/no go which could be stored? It could also only check the coasts first before going to far (because if the enemy has a presence along your coast, you definitely should not go out to play).