I get why customization, but I thought, that customization is for having light tank battalions for encirclements, cheap tank battalions as reserves against landing, heavy tank battalions against heavy entrenchments, infantry tank batallions as support for infantry, tank destroyer battalions against enemy encirclements, etc. But I saw lot of "I want light, medium and flame tanks, all inside one battalion". And I don't get that.
HoI4 DevDiary - Tank Designer
- Thread starter Archangel85
- 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.
I get why customization, but I thought, that customization is for having light tank battalions for encirclements, cheap tank battalions as reserves against landing, heavy tank battalions against heavy entrenchments, infantry tank batallions as support for infantry, tank destroyer battalions against enemy encirclements, etc. But I saw lot of "I want light, medium and flame tanks, all inside one battalion". And I don't get that.
This diary has 100k views and hoi4 sold numbers were 500k four years ago . If it doubled since than, it is probably 10% of players, who read the diary. But for commenting, 700 reactions, maybe from 500 players, means the active group is below 0.1%
- 2
Which is why I still believe the ship and tank designers should be optional. Failing this, I hope the auto-design feature is up to par for those who don't want to decide what type of suspension their tanks should have.
Also keep in mind that when or if (hopefully when) we get an aircraft designer, you'll be designing aircraft, APCs, tanks, and ships if you have all the DLCs. Launcher options would allow players to decide what to focus on. I, for example, personally love the ship designer, and I hope there's an aircraft designer, but I'm lukewarm when it comes to the tank designer, tbh.
- 1
- 1
I am actually hoping they further build on the designers as well, espiecally later on to allow for more fluid and dynamic gameplay (espiecally if at some point we get a HOI V), while keeping it interactive for those whom wish to use it and I really do hope they include Armoured cars into this as well as most armies in WW2 used these in the same role as light tanks, usually performing recon, convoy escort and infantry support.
And an Aircraft designer is something I am really hyping for now, espiecally if we can make some of the Strategic bombers into Long Range Patrol bombers or even give fighters like the P-51 the ability to act as a CAS aircraft by adding bombs and rockets, or increase their range with drop tanks.
- 1
My concern is that there wont be enough XP to go around. With the naval designer it makes sense since you only spend your naval xp on designing your ships or the optional research boost. With army XP there's the division template design and a new tank designer. I absolutely love this new mechanic, but I just want to see if the devs considered this and I wonder if any of you share this concern. I see that there are free automatic upgrades, but idk if that will be enough for pre-war and early-war army development.
- 1
- 1
- 1
This is what I'm hoping for as well - take an empty heavy fighter fuselage, for example, and add components to turn it into a CAS tank buster with bombs and rockets, a long-range recon aircraft, a torpedo bomber, or an interceptor with heavy guns meant to shoot down enemy bombers. Would be so much fun.
I have been hoping for a tank designer since MtG so this is extremely exiting to see! I am so exited for the next update and DLC that will come with it!
I can see the point within capacity and distance for supply missions.
And of course engine types as well, like being able to outfit a Spitfire for instance with a Turboprop (since we are getting Gas Turbine engines).
There is no "we"; I don't want any more complexity. But players buying DLC tend to be more invested than the average and it is in the nature of DLC to stretch the limit of what one has control over. So if they come up with a new subsystem they think many people will buy, they won't stop themselves based on whether this oversteps a limit of how much the player should be able to control in their country. The "guiding spirit" is really just an umbrella concept for "whatever we decide to put into the player's hands".
Yes, but Armored Cars and (to a lesser extent) APCs (Mechanized) are also Armored Fighting Vehicles, which it doesn't seem this designer covers.
- 1
Hi Paradox, this DLC and update is looking great, I just have some feedback that I feel like would be useful.
1. I personally would recommend adding an additional doctrine for each type - (air, land naval). This would add a lot more replay ability and could redefine the meta.
2. Please do not make the new focus trees in the new style, like bfb. Please make it instead in the older styles like Germany's in Waking the Tiger or Man the Guns. It makes it much more simpler and less intimidating.
Thanks!
1. I personally would recommend adding an additional doctrine for each type - (air, land naval). This would add a lot more replay ability and could redefine the meta.
2. Please do not make the new focus trees in the new style, like bfb. Please make it instead in the older styles like Germany's in Waking the Tiger or Man the Guns. It makes it much more simpler and less intimidating.
Thanks!
- 3
My issue with this is that the naval research system really feels like it messes up the research system. Almost like ship/tank/plane research should be a totally separate system from normal research.
- 1
Cheers Orlunu - not sure what happened there. Should be fixed in the OP, but as a penance for my crimes, here's a picture of a (Sherman) tank being far classier than most tanks could ever be (ie, being underway at sea
)
- 3
- 2
- 1
We Def, Need A better air designer first cause it's a entire branch that's being ignored
- 6
- 2
- 1