I'm not that bothered by minors having crazy alt-history trees tbh. It's just stuff like communist USA and Japan that rubs me the wrong way.
HoI4 Dev Teasers (previously Podcat's Twitter Teasers)
- Thread starter pvt.conners
- Start date
-
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.
EU is characterized a bit differently compared to Hearts of Iron series. One deals with an overlapping point of history that stretches over 400 years (1444 to 1821). So you can understand the leniency of how things can ultimately change differently in that huge span of time. As opposed to the hyper focused setting that Hearts of iron takes on.
However because of that setting it brings about a level of expectation in that the mechanics and features need to be alot more indepth and alot more worthwhile in terms of management to bring make up for the timeframe it takes place. Hearts of Iron takes on an event that has layers upon layers added to it which is what makes it such a big deal and such an interesting thing to study. I don't expect every detail to be right but I expect alot more effort to be put in, so that the game actually can take up the torch for WW2. But as you have mentioned it barely does that and is disappointing to hear.
People often complain about the complexity of HOI3 and how it stumbled a bit in terms of the learning curve and mechanical pains which is why I hoped hearts of Iron 4 would relieve those past gripes. But lord and behold everyone who gave a dam about this series before Hearts of iron 4 got back stabbed as the streamlining went too far. Which is only made worse by the new breed of players not as interested in the depth as this series once had because they never got to experience why that depth made for such compelling gameplay.
[
You are so intent on making your point, that you are making assumptions.
Can you seriously dispute that the majority of the HoI4 players are not interested in a historical game?
Despite your assumption, I am interested in a historical game. If anything, I would want a level of historical accuracy way beyond what most would ask for. But I can accept what HoI4 is and work towards the things I would like to see added. No point in complaining about what isn't there and saying Paradox is making a mistake or worse. Offer suggestions all you want, but realize Paradox is a business that has to be profitable for them to continue offering products. Tell me what WWII Grand Strategy game is out there that is better than HoI4? especially an HoI4 that can be modded.
Merit? That particular point you are referring to is complete horsepoo. I am not satisfied with the base game and I am not one of the majority who is happy with it the way it is. If I was as unhappy with it as you and others claim to be, I wouldn't waste my time talking about it. I'd go find another game or go do something else. Me staying around doesn't mean acceptance. I feel I can offer a historical version that others could appreciate. Funny enough, the vision I have sounds awfully close to your vision. We may disagree on details, but the overall goal is the same.
Why not spend your time on constructive criticism on the historical mods that are already out there? The designers of those mods I'm sure would appreciate an intelligent discussion. Would be more beneficial than bashing Paradox because they have taken a path you don't agree with.
You are so intent on making your point, that you are making assumptions.
Can you seriously dispute that the majority of the HoI4 players are not interested in a historical game?
Despite your assumption, I am interested in a historical game. If anything, I would want a level of historical accuracy way beyond what most would ask for. But I can accept what HoI4 is and work towards the things I would like to see added. No point in complaining about what isn't there and saying Paradox is making a mistake or worse. Offer suggestions all you want, but realize Paradox is a business that has to be profitable for them to continue offering products. Tell me what WWII Grand Strategy game is out there that is better than HoI4? especially an HoI4 that can be modded.
Merit? That particular point you are referring to is complete horsepoo. I am not satisfied with the base game and I am not one of the majority who is happy with it the way it is. If I was as unhappy with it as you and others claim to be, I wouldn't waste my time talking about it. I'd go find another game or go do something else. Me staying around doesn't mean acceptance. I feel I can offer a historical version that others could appreciate. Funny enough, the vision I have sounds awfully close to your vision. We may disagree on details, but the overall goal is the same.
Why not spend your time on constructive criticism on the historical mods that are already out there? The designers of those mods I'm sure would appreciate an intelligent discussion. Would be more beneficial than bashing Paradox because they have taken a path you don't agree with.
I came here looking for a new twitter teaser release and found the same ole alt-history soapbox material from previous threads. How did a thread on Podcat's twitter teasers get derailed into a ravine by a rant about alt history? People do realize YOU are not forced to go down an alt-history branch, and the ai won't take those branches unless YOU select ahistorical?
First of all how about you answer my initial question and tell me the alternative game within the market that does what I am looking for and coincides with HOI4's model, instead of feinting a simple redirect to move away from the point? 2nd your compliance of the policy is the issue, you say you enjoy more history yet are contempt when resources and time are being squandered for something that adds nothing to the game but more clutter? The most interesting attributes of the game delves into the historic nation specific elements that offer a level of choice and interaction that makes it actually feel like your running a country. As opposed of making 1 simple choice and everything magically just falls into place after the 70 day timer ticks. Also modders only can go to the extent in which the tools are provided and the mechanics are in place to tweak around with. I don't pay the modders I pay Paradox and I expect a bit more value for the level in which I am paying them including keeping the rails in place so that the train can actually head in the direction of History as opposed to these side turns for all the memes to play out.
I can ask the same about this title but ya know here we are. Problem again lies in the fact that I am still paying for this stuff in the culmulative bundle that includes mechanical and feature updates not corresponding into the free patch. So In essence I'm loosing value on this package in either decision. I either lose out on the mechanical stuff or I lose out in extra dollars in long term because I am essentially encouraging this stuff to continue. Simply because Paradox developed a paradigm shift and decided the fantasy was alot more enticing then the historical relevancy.
This is off topic. You want to continue this and get answers to your question(s), make another thread. We can continue it there.
While I disagree with PDX direction considering the alt-history, I can accept the fact they are in the business of making money and that even if I will never delve deeply into the alt-NFs, I will pay for them to support the continued development of the base-game.
We are in agreement of the PDX going in the wrong direction @Robosoldier1, but I disagree with you blasting Shaka or the likes of him for being filthy casual meme-players when A) Shaka WANTS historical gameplay and B) you and I both know that the kind of players you accuse Shaka of being are NOT the kind to register an account on the PDX-forum to discuss the current meta or other issues.
Let's try to channel our disappointment in a more constructive manner and not accuse people of being something they're not (especially when they agree with us) before we become as beloved as the MP-elitists of the forum.
We are in agreement of the PDX going in the wrong direction @Robosoldier1, but I disagree with you blasting Shaka or the likes of him for being filthy casual meme-players when A) Shaka WANTS historical gameplay and B) you and I both know that the kind of players you accuse Shaka of being are NOT the kind to register an account on the PDX-forum to discuss the current meta or other issues.
Let's try to channel our disappointment in a more constructive manner and not accuse people of being something they're not (especially when they agree with us) before we become as beloved as the MP-elitists of the forum.
Moment 22 in its essence. The average potential customer don't know what year ww2 started, throws money at everything that has MEMEs and just wants the whole map 'his color'. Whatch him go to the workshop, apply 10 MEME mods, then +4 research slot cheat, 'faster construction' cheat and then he plays a campaign as romania only building super heavy tanks.
Listening to these kind of people will be the end of any business, just give them some Memes and they will be happy, seriously.
Listening to these kind of people will be the end of any business, just give them some Memes and they will be happy, seriously.
1 - 2 DLCs a year, that's ~ 30 € per year on average. Sorry, but that's not an valid argument. There is almost no cheaper hobby than computer-gaming. Complaining about disfunctional game mechanics is a valid argument, complaining about AI doing crazy stuff in historical mode is a valid argument, but whining about some pennys spend in the development of non-historical stuff is definitly not a valid argument.
It's actually even less than that. WtT was released 1 year 9 months after HoI4, and all the 3 expansions together costs 45 € full price. That comes down to 24 € a year, about the same as a single visit to your average not that fancy dinner restaurant or a night at the movies + some junk food where I live. This is something pretty much anyone should be able to afford effortlessly if you expect the game to deliver a few hours of enjoyment or some improvement. Id even pay that without hesitation if I had no interest in the expansion content but just want to support the devs for fixing the bugs and adding new core mechanics like OOB, Fuel, Interface overhauls in the free patches.
Last edited:
A small but vocal minority of this community is craving 'more'. This is not to say we don't hear you, and I think you may be pleasantly surprised for this DLC. However, do not profess to speak for the entire community, because telemetry shows you most decidedly do not.
As had been said before, the notion that Germany could ever win the war is preposterous, and at least as 'implausible' as the other alt-history paths we implement. Yet I never see anyone complain about this.
Such as this pre-order trailer for the base game?
Literally every single metric we have, from daily and monthly active users to lifetime sales, and everything inbetween, shows that HoI4 is vastly (and I mean vastly) more successful than any previous iteration of the game. I am not at liberty to disclose specific numbers, but let's just say the comparison isn't even close.
Telenil hits the nail on the head: our data corroborates this. I'll see if I can wrangle Dan into making another telemetry dev diary to show the numbers on history/alt history, as we did with multiplayer.
So which is it?
Shaka is right. I will say before ending this discussion: telemetry clearly shows the incredible appeal that alt history has, so I can already say this direction will likely not change. As I said before, we do hope you'll be pleasantly surprised for MtG on this question, however. Now, please take any further discussion on this topic (including replies to this post) to a new thread. We've cluttered this thread enough, and if things don't stop I will have to ask moderators to intervene.
Personally:-
PDX should concentrate on ensuring that the mechanics work as intended - so approximating reality. that covers politics, economics and military. The skeleton that this all hangs off should be modable to a degree that allows the community to expand it in, within reason, almost any direction it wants to (time frame, fantasy version, whatever). I don't see what else PDX can do to present us with a game that can be both historical within the timeframe and yet allow us, the players, to indulge our imagination.
With respect to political divergences within the timeframe: the 30's was a melting pot of all sorts of ideologies, with democracy vying against fascism and communism (all broad brush terms). It is not beyond the realms of possibilities for anything to have occurred, improbable for some, yes, but not impossible. So for PDX to cater to these improbabilities is understandable. Just because 'our' personal views may change the improbable to the impossible for some of them, does not necessarily apply to the views of others, or, even worse, should limit their imagination.
Kaiser back in Germany, not a chance, Communist US, not a chance, but what if..... It is purely another dimension to the strategic aspects of the game. Taking up on Bratyn's post above, no one complains if the UK conquers soviet russia in the game, which is even less likely than the Nazi's doing it (I'm a Brit, just in case) and yet the "UK going communist, impossible!".
"]Warfare is an extension of politics]", so there is no disconnect between changing apolitical strategy to changing a military one,because it is all part of the same thing.
Or is it only the changes to the US that raise people hackles? Now that would be a very different issue.
PDX should concentrate on ensuring that the mechanics work as intended - so approximating reality. that covers politics, economics and military. The skeleton that this all hangs off should be modable to a degree that allows the community to expand it in, within reason, almost any direction it wants to (time frame, fantasy version, whatever). I don't see what else PDX can do to present us with a game that can be both historical within the timeframe and yet allow us, the players, to indulge our imagination.
With respect to political divergences within the timeframe: the 30's was a melting pot of all sorts of ideologies, with democracy vying against fascism and communism (all broad brush terms). It is not beyond the realms of possibilities for anything to have occurred, improbable for some, yes, but not impossible. So for PDX to cater to these improbabilities is understandable. Just because 'our' personal views may change the improbable to the impossible for some of them, does not necessarily apply to the views of others, or, even worse, should limit their imagination.
Kaiser back in Germany, not a chance, Communist US, not a chance, but what if..... It is purely another dimension to the strategic aspects of the game. Taking up on Bratyn's post above, no one complains if the UK conquers soviet russia in the game, which is even less likely than the Nazi's doing it (I'm a Brit, just in case) and yet the "UK going communist, impossible!".
"]Warfare is an extension of politics]", so there is no disconnect between changing apolitical strategy to changing a military one,because it is all part of the same thing.
Or is it only the changes to the US that raise people hackles? Now that would be a very different issue.
Last edited:
Communist USA? To be honest, I was expecting this.
HoI4 is not a deep game. Changing ideology and invoking a civil war is about the deepest thing that, politically, can happen in Hoi4. So that's really all that can happen in the name of "alt-history".
Sadly, it also confirms a fear I've had for a while - all countries are going to feel generic. Just switch USA to communist and then play as you would with any other communist country. Communist USA = Communist Russia = Communist Japan. Sure, the focuses to switch ideology may be labelled differently, but its the same thing. And if every country can turn Communist at a press of a button, what sets them apart?
Not much, i fear. Just a name on a map.
HoI4 is not a deep game. Changing ideology and invoking a civil war is about the deepest thing that, politically, can happen in Hoi4. So that's really all that can happen in the name of "alt-history".
Sadly, it also confirms a fear I've had for a while - all countries are going to feel generic. Just switch USA to communist and then play as you would with any other communist country. Communist USA = Communist Russia = Communist Japan. Sure, the focuses to switch ideology may be labelled differently, but its the same thing. And if every country can turn Communist at a press of a button, what sets them apart?
Not much, i fear. Just a name on a map.
It definitely COULD win the war. Germany made a lot of tactical and strategical errors which were the main reason it had lost the war. It's background (such as political situation, production output, international situation, etc.) allowed Germany win the war and in game you can do it by not making such errors RL Germany did. And hearing that you put this outcome in the same row with "LMAO, GOMMIE JABAN IS FUN" and "KEK, HUNGRY-AUSTRALIAN EMBIRE, LOL" absurd shit is really sad.
And that is because we understand why you must give Germany a fighting chance. Otherwise there's no point in the game.
It's a must to give Germany a fighting chance- even make them "kinda" balanced.
Alt-history is completely different to balancing needs.
This is from someone who is mostly neutral on the alt-history or not paths. Mostly
Last edited:
Anymore twitter teasers so far?
If so I hope you guy's didn't forget to threadmark them, i don't feel like wading trough pages of discussion about alt-history >.>
If so I hope you guy's didn't forget to threadmark them, i don't feel like wading trough pages of discussion about alt-history >.>
In a way, I totally agree with you. "Reducing" any country to just a toy box to be used in any way that the player desires. Leaving every country as a generic 'mush' with different economic aspects, initially. But isn't this what the national spirits are all about, Make some of those unchangable (without a mod) and stronger. That would alleviate/resolve the issue?
A oft quoted misconception is that no one can win a land war against Russia, quoting Hitler and Napoleon usually. Well, the Kaiser did it, he "kicked the barn door open and the whole rotten structure collapsed". You can argue 'special circumstances', and people usually do, 'the revolution was to blame', but the Russians lost the land war before the revolution, not after it. That just completed the collapse. If the Russians in WW1 were winning the land war, or victory was seen as possible, would the revolution have worked....?