Hearts of Iron 3 was a great game with some flaws. But in my opinion, the greatest flaw of all was the diplomacy system--a mere shadow of what could have been the greatest realpolitik simulator.
In HoI3, the AI makes very little use of diplomacy. With the exception of multiplayer, countries always gravitate and form towards the same alliances. The system is static. I can't for example, say, load up Finland and try and to form an alliance with Sweden and Norway to form a local hegemony against the Soviet Union. My neighbors will always say no. If I load up the Soviet Union and invade Poland and baltics, no other country will do anything about it. The complete lack of diplomacy makes playing minor countries completely unfun and makes the game very predictable for majors when you know who and what will be your friend/foe every game.
A robust and expansive diplomacy system is desperately needed for HoI4. In the recently acclaimed Eu4 and Ck2, diplomacy makes those games great and memorable; combat in those games is very simple and abstracted. Its the constant struggle for powerful allies, backstabbing, and positioning pieces on the chessboard that shines. HoI4 should be no exception.
------
For a good diplomacy system several design goals need to be achieved:
------
What HoI4 needs is three systems: aggressive expansion, a balance of power system, and Diplomatic plans (similar to battleplans).
Aggressive expansion (or threat) is self explanatory. Make big armies, threaten your neighbors, invade other countries, and you appear more threatening. Neighbors start forming local alliances and foreign diplomats start trusting you less.
Now introducing the balance of power system: How this works is, international politics seeks to balance itself. If the relative strength of one group, faction, or local alliance becomes too powerful in terms of military strength, other groups will start to band together to protect themselves and keep the balance of power in check.
Here is how these two systems play together: For example, if I play the Soviet Union and I start the second Polish-Soviet war and make Poland into a communist puppet in 1937, the rest of the world is alarmed. I gain AE. This causes Germany to form an alliance with Great Britain with the goal of stopping international communism from spreading. Together, Germany and Britain are powerful--any additional allies in their coalition would probably break the game and decide the result then and there; however, this is where the balance of power system kicks in. Other countries and groups of countries that are behind in terms of realpolitik get bonuses to diplomacy to allow them to form new and separate groups. Now back to our scenario: GB and GE have formed an alliance. In response, nearby France, alarmed that their centuries long rival has formed an alliance with their old enemy, starts negotiating with Italy to maintain their own international clout and independence.
The key here is that actions in HoI4 should not just be a simple action and reaction whereby everyone joins together against 1 aggressor. Alliances elsewhere should shift and in turn cause more ripple effects as various countries try to maneuver for the best advantage when hostilities break out again. The key is to have multiple ripple effects throughout international politics, not just a one time event. Multiple causes for ww2 become possible.
-----
The final system for diplomacy would be diplomatic plans, similar to the battleplan system already discussed. In a bold and grand departure from previous Paradox games, I would suggest that diplomatic actions like signing a peace treaty and forming an alliance no longer happen instantly with the click of one button. Instead negotiations take time. This is more realistic and representative of actual politics.
Let us say that I am playing France and I want to make an alliance with Italy. What I do is send one of my diplomatic teams on a mission to negotiate with the government of Italy--effectively initiating a diplomatic plan. I start with an initial offer: An alliance with Italy in exchange for recognizing Italian claims in Yugoslavia along the Adriatic coast.
The alliance request occurs overtime. Each week reports back how likely it is that the other party will agree. Earlier estimates tend to be more inaccurate. Because diplomacy takes place overtime and not instantly, other nations with spies inside my nation can discover that such negotiations are underway and try to encourage or block the action.
It might look like this:
Initial Talks:
- Started: Aug 24, 1937
- Proposal seems likely to be accepted.
- Estimated Completion Date: Dec 3, 1937
Mid-Negotiations:
- Current Date: Sept 7, 1937
- NOTICE: German diplomats are exerting strong diplomatic pressure on Italy to reject our offer.
- NOTICE: Our national goal to become a major naval power is frowned upon by Italy.
- Proposal in doubt.
- Estimated Completion Date: Dec 3, 1937
Final-Negotiations:
- Current Date: Nov 24, 1937
- NOTICE: Germany is exerting strong diplomatic pressure on Italy to reject our offer.
- NOTICE: Diplomats from the Soviet Union are encouraging Italy to accept our offer.
- Proposal seems likely to be accepted.
- Estimated Completion Date: Dec 3, 1937
This overtime negotiations system would also be able to handle events like the claims on the Sudetenland, the annexation of Czechoslovakia without the need for a separate system, and even allow new possibilities like perhaps convincing Romania to switch to the allies in the middle of the war--all happens dynamically.
---
thoughts?
In HoI3, the AI makes very little use of diplomacy. With the exception of multiplayer, countries always gravitate and form towards the same alliances. The system is static. I can't for example, say, load up Finland and try and to form an alliance with Sweden and Norway to form a local hegemony against the Soviet Union. My neighbors will always say no. If I load up the Soviet Union and invade Poland and baltics, no other country will do anything about it. The complete lack of diplomacy makes playing minor countries completely unfun and makes the game very predictable for majors when you know who and what will be your friend/foe every game.
A robust and expansive diplomacy system is desperately needed for HoI4. In the recently acclaimed Eu4 and Ck2, diplomacy makes those games great and memorable; combat in those games is very simple and abstracted. Its the constant struggle for powerful allies, backstabbing, and positioning pieces on the chessboard that shines. HoI4 should be no exception.
------
For a good diplomacy system several design goals need to be achieved:
- 1). Countries need to respond to perceived threats and react accordingly.
- 2). Painting the entire map blue where everyone holds hands and sings kumbaya should be nearly impossible.
- 3). Alliances should be fragmented, no super coalitions that contain the US, USSR, Germany, and France all at once, etc.
- 4). Espionage should play a part.
------
What HoI4 needs is three systems: aggressive expansion, a balance of power system, and Diplomatic plans (similar to battleplans).
Aggressive expansion (or threat) is self explanatory. Make big armies, threaten your neighbors, invade other countries, and you appear more threatening. Neighbors start forming local alliances and foreign diplomats start trusting you less.
Now introducing the balance of power system: How this works is, international politics seeks to balance itself. If the relative strength of one group, faction, or local alliance becomes too powerful in terms of military strength, other groups will start to band together to protect themselves and keep the balance of power in check.
Here is how these two systems play together: For example, if I play the Soviet Union and I start the second Polish-Soviet war and make Poland into a communist puppet in 1937, the rest of the world is alarmed. I gain AE. This causes Germany to form an alliance with Great Britain with the goal of stopping international communism from spreading. Together, Germany and Britain are powerful--any additional allies in their coalition would probably break the game and decide the result then and there; however, this is where the balance of power system kicks in. Other countries and groups of countries that are behind in terms of realpolitik get bonuses to diplomacy to allow them to form new and separate groups. Now back to our scenario: GB and GE have formed an alliance. In response, nearby France, alarmed that their centuries long rival has formed an alliance with their old enemy, starts negotiating with Italy to maintain their own international clout and independence.
The key here is that actions in HoI4 should not just be a simple action and reaction whereby everyone joins together against 1 aggressor. Alliances elsewhere should shift and in turn cause more ripple effects as various countries try to maneuver for the best advantage when hostilities break out again. The key is to have multiple ripple effects throughout international politics, not just a one time event. Multiple causes for ww2 become possible.
-----
The final system for diplomacy would be diplomatic plans, similar to the battleplan system already discussed. In a bold and grand departure from previous Paradox games, I would suggest that diplomatic actions like signing a peace treaty and forming an alliance no longer happen instantly with the click of one button. Instead negotiations take time. This is more realistic and representative of actual politics.
Let us say that I am playing France and I want to make an alliance with Italy. What I do is send one of my diplomatic teams on a mission to negotiate with the government of Italy--effectively initiating a diplomatic plan. I start with an initial offer: An alliance with Italy in exchange for recognizing Italian claims in Yugoslavia along the Adriatic coast.
The alliance request occurs overtime. Each week reports back how likely it is that the other party will agree. Earlier estimates tend to be more inaccurate. Because diplomacy takes place overtime and not instantly, other nations with spies inside my nation can discover that such negotiations are underway and try to encourage or block the action.
It might look like this:
Initial Talks:
- Started: Aug 24, 1937
- Proposal seems likely to be accepted.
- Estimated Completion Date: Dec 3, 1937
Mid-Negotiations:
- Current Date: Sept 7, 1937
- NOTICE: German diplomats are exerting strong diplomatic pressure on Italy to reject our offer.
- NOTICE: Our national goal to become a major naval power is frowned upon by Italy.
- Proposal in doubt.
- Estimated Completion Date: Dec 3, 1937
Final-Negotiations:
- Current Date: Nov 24, 1937
- NOTICE: Germany is exerting strong diplomatic pressure on Italy to reject our offer.
- NOTICE: Diplomats from the Soviet Union are encouraging Italy to accept our offer.
- Proposal seems likely to be accepted.
- Estimated Completion Date: Dec 3, 1937
This overtime negotiations system would also be able to handle events like the claims on the Sudetenland, the annexation of Czechoslovakia without the need for a separate system, and even allow new possibilities like perhaps convincing Romania to switch to the allies in the middle of the war--all happens dynamically.
---
thoughts?
Last edited:
