HoI4 DevDiary - Tank Designer

[parkerg12]

The only thing I see that will hold this back is the xp system. I really dislike the fact that any xp investments in division templates are a single use application. This creates a weird environment were xp is both over valued and undervalued. Do I really need to save every template so I can revert back if need be? Do I really want to use xp on this fighter I'm about to swap out? So in regards to tanks I think xp is going to be an annoyance in getting all your designs how you want them. IMO I would much rather have it as a single investment instead of a single use. Or better yet make other uses for XP like upgrading generals, admirals, Hiring Aces, Boosting more research.

 

[minimouse007]

Not sure, how much it is rough example and how much is from files, but if from files, just correct mistake, that it is Somua not Soumua and it had casted armor, not welded. I am not sure about gun, if you meant SA 34 from first prototypes, small gun is properly correct. If you mean SA 35, small gun sounds weak

Edit: just found, that SA 35 gun variant was ready in late 1937, SA 34 in 1936

yeah, early french tanks were often cast, but sometimes of poor quality

 

[Wminus]

It would have been much better to work on finding use-cases for the existing tanks rather than adding new tanks with no use-cases!

This is questionable game design as it basically adds complexity without depth. This is a major issue that the HOI4 designers struggle with (a recent example was the addition of different types of recon).
Especially taking into account what happened with the MTG ship designer. But I understand the need to add some shiny features to put on the DLC product page or 3D models (such as the armored car in previous DLC).

A module system is only interesting if:

1. several significantly different templates for the same unit are viable. Otherwise —and this is what happened with MTG— you're simply adding extra clicks to achieve what could be already done before. In MTG, there is for example only 1 optimal detection ship template, so why force us to click on all the modules? Same for other ships.
2. the choices you make on modules actually have an impact. Making people choose between Armor A, Armor B or Armor C is useless if difference between those modules is negligible in the final fight calculations.
3. (applies to single player only): the AI is competent enough that designing templates actually has a payoff. In MTG, that isn't the case; any template will stomp the AI, so, after the first few hours of discovery, why bother designing templates? (navies are actually not needed in single-player as the AI kills all it ships purposefully on naval bombers, but that's another topic).

Additionally, no true effort was made to balance modules MTG in subsequent patches. Balance in a module system is essential, otherwise there are optimal templates which defeat the very goal of having a module system.

Question to the devs:
Currently, we already have many different tanks, however people overwhelmingly use the same ones (medium tanks).
What makes you think that adding a template designer is beneficial to the gameplay?
What's going to happen is that people will build the same optimal design repeatedly, with extra clicks now. It would have been much better to work on finding use-cases for the existing tanks rather than adding new tanks with no use-cases!

Absolutely correct. An overarching problem with HoI4 has been that the devs just consistently put on more features and flavour without actually making the gameplay in any way better. Of course I appreciate all the effort the PI devs spend on this, and I'm sure some players like it and buy the DLCs because of this, but it certainly doesn't make for a 'deeper' game in the traditional sense.

Hopefully the project managers and higher ups will somehow find the will at some point to redirect this ship from milking the franchise and selling trinkets, to actually improving the game. But with PI now being a fully commercially run, publicly traded company, I doubt it... Money is king...

 

[Balesir]

The only thing I see that will hold this back is the xp system. I really dislike the fact that any xp investments in division templates are a single use application. This creates a weird environment were xp is both over valued and undervalued. Do I really need to save every template so I can revert back if need be? Do I really want to use xp on this fighter I'm about to swap out? So in regards to tanks I think xp is going to be an annoyance in getting all your designs how you want them. IMO I would much rather have it as a single investment instead of a single use. Or better yet make other uses for XP like upgrading generals, admirals, Hiring Aces, Boosting more research.

It could do with some changes, true, but I don't think upgrading generals or "hiring" aces are the choices I'd make. Maybe halve equipment costs for technology that is not the most advanced chassis/base available, and charge template changes for changing units to a different template rather than for designing a template. The ability to split a template into multiple sub-templates (and to combine them into a larger template) would be superb, as an "added extra".

The main precursor to this would be a battle frontage set by terrain, though - get rid of the ridiculous "design for frontage" meta.

 

[ragingpanzer333]

2 I personally like very large trees in the style of mods because German rework in some issues leaves much to be desired, it feels a bit empty in some branches and I think that both in the last country pack and the Polish rework I love them in general and i hope soviet rework i dont know unless polish rework

Yeah I don't agree with this either. I find that the now focus designs are simply boring. I hate playing the countries included in bfb apart from Bulgaria, that one's alright.

 

[kimidf]

Should mediums and amphibious be moved back a little bit?

In the current armor tech tree, you start with either lights or heavies, and mediums are basically a later tech that unlocks in 1939.

Now, you'll get a medium as a 1934 tech which just seems early.

I thought it was semi-historically accurate. (The early tanks were either light or heavy, and the process to make a hybrid, a medium, came later. Apparently according to wikipedia, the Panzer IV entered service in 1939.)

Most of the great nations of the game had medium tank projects since the mid-30s, we remember that both Panzer III and its twin brother, the first versions of the Panzer IV began to be produced at the end of 1936 and 1937, although the first models are true. combat standards did not appear until 1939, although the numbers were terribly low in the Polish campaign and in the West.

 

[JD_548]

Would it be possible to see the similar design system for the aircraft and other military equipment (like artillery)?

 

[kimidf]

Would it be possible to see the similar design system for the aircraft and other military equipment (like artillery)?

I think it is assured that we will see some aerial designer and but instead I do not think we will see it for artillery in my opinion you should do a rework of your technological tree for example you should have a light or heavy version of each type of artillery

 

[dsteve3]

Hello, my name is Steve, and I'm a Hybridoholic.

(waits for the polite greeting from members of the meeting)

In every game I play - strategy, role-playing, card games, ... I always strive to do every option I possibly can that is offered. I always have the Fighter-Cleric-Thief-Mage. My kingdom is always the resource-rich super-economy with the massive army & navy.

And I always get beat ... until I find the sweet-spot. Then I always win. By that point, the game is very old and there's a new iteration (or DLC) out.

....

I would like to put forward some suggestions to make MY game better. This may not be good for YOUR game - so I'm not going to say "better game"


FIRST OFF - pls make it easier to research more. One beautiful consequence of this Tank Builder is that researching tank guns is now Mandatory! It was too easy to skip that before. Now make researching AA guns mandatory too.

*** -> I have a suggestion on how to increase the viability of peripheral research options & encourage building different types of units. Include a variable modifier in COMBAT that randomly gives big penalties to Armies (including reserves) that do not have all the different support groups present. The way to prevent being afflicted with this temporary debuff is to ensure that you have a median value in EVERY category.

This also makes big attacks against strong defensive positions easier because it represents commanders on the ground finding that one weakness and exploiting it.

Every three hours the game calculates a variable based on the inverse of the variety of units & support - the more diversity, the smaller chance of gaining the debuff.


Make us Hybridoholics happy - give us mechanics that support our addiction!


AGAIN - this is only for my game. I don't know if it would make the whole game better or not.

 

[kimidf]

The only thing I see that will hold this back is the xp system. I really dislike the fact that any xp investments in division templates are a single use application. This creates a weird environment were xp is both over valued and undervalued. Do I really need to save every template so I can revert back if need be? Do I really want to use xp on this fighter I'm about to swap out? So in regards to tanks I think xp is going to be an annoyance in getting all your designs how you want them. IMO I would much rather have it as a single investment instead of a single use. Or better yet make other uses for XP like upgrading generals, admirals, Hiring Aces, Boosting more research.

Maybe armor will have its own experience system different or secondary to the terrestrial experience in general .

we remember that both armor has its own designer and as I have commented several times that hiring a designer from your sector should give a small daily experience gain when hiring one of those companies.

 

[Tugric]

good

 

[xtfoster]

Would it be possible to see the similar design system for the aircraft and other military equipment (like artillery)?

It is certainly possible, although not likely in this DLC. Aircraft is more likely than artillery.

 

[Ossiv]

In 1943 the Germans started replacing 4-wheel armored cars with SdKfz 250/9 halftrack that had the same 2cm gun/turret as most of their armored cars. Companies that used 250/9 were called Panzerspähkompanie c. Will it be possible to build 250/9 and to use it in armored car recon company, as it was historically used?

Here is 250/9 http://www.kfzderwehrmacht.de/Homep...__Spw__-2cm-/sd_kfz__250-9_l__spw__-2cm-.html

 

[Secret Master]

In 1943 the Germans started replacing 4-wheel armored cars with SdKfz 250/9 halftrack that had the same 2cm gun/turret as most of their armored cars. Companies that used 250/9 were called Panzerspähkompanie c. Will is be possible to build 250/9 and to use it in armored car recon company, as it was historically used?

Yes, but only if I'm not the one that has to do non-German localizations of Panzerspähkompanieknicnnackpaddywackgiveadogabone and other terms.

 

[Orlunu]

In 1943 the Germans started replacing 4-wheel armored cars with SdKfz 250/9 halftrack that had the same 2cm gun/turret as most of their armored cars. Companies that used 250/9 were called Panzerspähkompanie c. Will is be possible to build 250/9 and to use it in armored car recon company, as it was historically used?

Here is 250/9 http://www.kfzderwehrmacht.de/Homep...__Spw__-2cm-/sd_kfz__250-9_l__spw__-2cm-.html

I believe they will have to technically be in the light tank recon company, but yes. They will be buildable and deployable as recon elements.

 

[Harin]

Panzerspähkompanieknicnnackpaddywackgiveadogabone

My wife gave me a vitamin this morning and this afternoon I can read German! Amazing what they can do nowadays.

 

[GenericType]

*transmission broke*

Bahaha! I doubt we can properly model this in the game. The transmission problem is a sign of WW2 Germany's poor industry and low quality/quantity of production, but in-game Germany is usually an economic powerhouse.

I think we can still see it if the devs decide to not remove the negative reliability bug.

 

[Zauberelefant]

Bahaha! I doubt we can properly model this in the game. The transmission problem is a sign of WW2 Germany's poor industry and low quality/quantity of production, but in-game Germany is usually an economic powerhouse.

I think we can still see it if the devs decide to not remove the negative reliability bug.

Was also a design issue If you overload the vehicle by some 40%, tends to eat up gears fast.

 

[ThaHoward]

It is also rushing prototypes into battle.

 

[Elijahr241]

Can I bring back Nick from the dead in the new USSR tree?