HoI4 DevDiary - Tank Designer

[Saevynn]

What is this??

 

[Deathbringer620]

I see that there's now a 1934 medium and no 1939 medium, this is going to make tech rushing in MP even more of a big deal.

 

[CundoSoilder13]

With all these changes, does the purchase of licenses totally change or will a different price be handled in terms of civil factories?

 

[Jochen_Mongolia]

Very happy to see the Panzer designer and Maybach engines with Porsche turrets. Nice job done. Thanks Devs!
And my questions are: Do Panzer Schools being established to train the real Panzerwaffe? Do Panzer Aces lead the SS-Panzer Divisions?

 

[Spelaren]

Looks good! I hope we can get stugs to work in divisions now

 

[Red4113]

Dübletanke

View attachment 710515


What is this?

 

[Polish Boie]

thats so cool!

 

[noname warrior]

Regarding the criticism that you guys have been getting lately, I know how frustrating it can be to get ridiculously high criticism for something you've put way too much work on, I've been there. I really appreciate what you guys have been done for this game over the last few years. Just wanna say that right off the bat.

To talk about specifically what happened last week, some of the criticism was rightfully there IMO. There were some things one could consider "flaws" in that dev diary, and it's our right to talk about those things as the community. But some of us were way too harsh on you guys and you didn't deserve it. I just hope we can get past that and look forward to what's coming.

Keep up the good work, keep throwing those content on us!

 

[CaptainBruh]

This looks amazing! I have to ask, will there be focuses/decisions to get historical tank designs in some trees? and will countries start with their historical designs?
perhaps the Polish can start with their excellent 7TP design that ate panzer IIs for lunch. (this would be a great addition to the polish update, give them their historical tank divisions!)
And italy can start with very lightly armed and lightly armored L3s in 1936 as well

 

[podcat]

i like it. but the techtree looks kinda skelety. How about adding techs as camouflage painting or maybe smth else to have beetwen the chasis like in the infantry equipment tree.

A big feedback with the ship designer was that we had too many new techs to research, so we wanted to focus on giving flexibility without drownings you in must have techs.

I agree, it would be looking better in green but I think they wanted to give a sort of « blueprint » look to the components!

We've discussed it and may try it if it looks good but we will see. We kinda tried to make it feel consistent with other modules

Will we see a focus tree/rework reveal next week? Such as the Soviets rework or Finland focus tree maybe?

Next week is probably something more on mechanics before we do more focuses. Also if you think about it perhaps it doesnt make sense to talk about Soviet before pdxcon... if we were to add such a thing...

Amazing job!

One question, though: will the ship designer receive some of these QoL features, like the auto-upgrade and auto-design? I believe even fewer people like to mess with the navy than they do with tanks...

We have discussed it a little and may look into porting some that fit in easily, but we will have to see. The night is still young and there is a lot more stuff to do.

 

[bitmode]

Very happy to see the Panzer designer and Maybach engines with Porsche turrets. Nice job done. Thanks Devs!
And my questions are: Do Panzer Schools being established to train the real Panzerwaffe? Do Panzer Aces lead the SS-Panzer Divisions?

Wehraboo level: 9000

 

[Czaristan]

Before closing, I would like to note a few things on the subject of giving feedback. When I first started at Paradox, the direct line between community and developers was a major plus for me, because I liked the idea of talking to the community without having to run every post past three different marketing departments first. However, this kind of direct community access comes at a heavy cost for us. As many of you have noticed, we have gotten a little sparse in these forums in the last few months, or even years. The reason for this is that often we do face a debate culture that is not enjoyable to take part in, where it is taken as a given that the devs are either lazy or incompetent and where everything we do is viewed through that lens. Not only is it incredibly demoralizing to spend months of your life creating something, only to see the people you made it for tear it to shreds, it is also a debate that gives no one anything. We aren’t paid to wade through pages of abuse to find a few nuggets of useful feedback, and so that feedback is not acted on. A lot of you have access to sources in languages we don’t speak or have studied some detail that we weren’t aware of. Such feedback is very useful - just a few weeks ago someone sent me a plan of the Turkish railways in 1936 taken from an old Turkish book, so I was able to use that to update the Turkish railway setup at game start.

We’re not looking for fawning adoration (although we will certainly accept it) or a forum in which our decisions can’t be discussed with a critical eye. We want to have your feedback, but there is no point to it if it can’t be delivered with a minimum of respect for each other. If you want to have a forum where developers are willing to go and answer your questions, then it is also your responsibility to build a place where we feel welcome, and where we can disagree in a productive and professional manner. It costs you nothing to assume that we were acting in good faith. None of us wake up in the morning and go to work in order to do a bad job.

I certainly appreciate that the devs are humans with souls and feelings that need to be respected. I think the vast majority of the criticism with Paradox I see on these forums is that releases lack adequate QA and it seems to be Paradox's strategy since at least HOI3 to release games that are clearly not done and in which release serves as essentially an open-beta. That may be a broader issue with game development right now and I get that grand strategy is a very complicated arena, but it is a common observation that I seem to agree with and which really has never been addressed by the developers.

That said, this DLC so far looks solid and seems to include things people have wanted for a long time. It boggles the mind why extremely limited releases that nobody asked for like La Resistance were given development priority over things like this.

 

[Brownsnoot44]

What does this mean for Big Bob

 

[Culdranth]

Anyone else over the moon we don't really have to wait until 1939 for a medium tank chassis now?

 

[4l3x4nd3r0]

No transmission? Now how will I make my Hans za transmission broke jokes against my german friend...

 

[Duke_Dave]

I like although I would like two things added:

-armored cars created the same way,

- Flamethrower tanks

 

[minimouse007]

overall i really like it!! there is depth in it, yet it is not overly complicated (magnetic mines)

although i do have to note one thing. maybe there should be a way to represent well armoured sides of a tank. The axis used armoured skirts for their sides (pzh) in order to protect their weak sides againt at rifles. It even inspired other axis minors like hungary to equip it's tanks with it. Also, part of the fear early heavy tanks like kv1 or tiger1 created wasn t simply their frontal armour, but their side armour too. a tiger had 80mm side armour, which was actually quite decent in itself, making it hard to take down even if your gun was in the 80-100mm pen threshold.

soo, at maybe at the added modules....
armoured skirts?

 

[Nawolith]

To be honest, i feared this change. But now im interested, intrigued perhaps.

 

[Rudolf Nechvile II]

I honestly don't know how I feel about this. As someone already pointed out before, there'll end up being an optimal design and most people will just stick with that, rendering all of this choice somewhat useless. I was really excited for the naval designer, but at some point researching everything separately and playing around with design just becomes tedious, because every time you unlock something new, you have to go back and change it up to improve it. Also, what's the point of having the ability to make a bunch of different designs, when you'll probably just end up being able to have the manufacturing capacity to field significant numbers of one.

I know I'll probably be in the minority on this, but I'm really not sure this was necessary and it'll just end up being more tedious clicks and something for people that like to min/max.

As an aside though, it would be nice that whenever I unlock something new (say a turret) for a battleship, that I can fit it to the ship while it's still under construction, without losing all of the manufacturing progress. I don't like having to create a new class of ship or having to wait till I have all the modules researched before I construct the ship I want, since they take a long time to build. I will concede though, perhaps I just missed the ability to "refit" a ship still under construction.

 

[StrikerBoy_]

will be in the new Barbarossa patch a update/rework or expansion for the eastern europan countrys (like Czechia,Hungary,Romania & Yugo ? for expample some new focuese or a small expansion in this patch and will germany get a rework , they played a huge role in ww2 and should get more options to pick for example reworking monarchist or democrat and maybe a communist path O_O ?