One of the longest requested changes to the game which has thus far not been implemented is an improved peace conference system. For obvious reasons, a dlc focusing on the late-game and endgame would be an ideal opportunity to introduce such a change, but I argue that it could be the opportunity to introduce many more long sought improvements in a single stroke.
One of the strangest parts of HoI IV, which is meant to be a war game, is the unusual ability of the player to not actually involve themselves in the main war (or even any war at all) without any real consequences. Sometimes the problem with this is related to balance and 'realism', with regard for example the ability of a player UK to simply refuse to get involved in the war on the continent, and instead focus entirely on some other goal (federation for example), without the need to worry. This understandably casts uncertainty about what the goal of the game even should be.
A more egregious example may be if a player chose to be a country like New Zealand "ok so... what's my goal exactly?". In these cases the introduction of an endgame expansion is the perfect opportunity to make clear to players what they're fighting for. My suggestion is thus:
Ideological victories. A final win condition for the game which identifies one of the 3 primary political ideologies as having 'won' the second world war. The way this could work is simple: the game already has a relatively simple system in place to identify countries as being 'major powers'. As far as I know this is only used at the moment for deciding who needs to capitulate and who doesn't to end a war, and diplomacy menu sorting. A single ideology can be identified as having won if the following conditions are met:
- the year is past <some date>
- the world is at peace
- >2/3 of major powers are of the same ideology (idk if it would be helpful to include or exclude puppet governments here but whatever you get it)
The name of the victory would be based upon the ideology. For example democracy gets 'United Nations', Fascist could gets 'New World Order', and Communists gets 'World Revolution'. Or something like that, you don't have to like the names.
Establishing an ideology-based victory condition can provide incentive for a player UK to make sure to get involved in the war, for example. And allow a player NZ to feel like they're still able to consider themselves to have 'won' the game without feeling pressured to form a great big Kiwi empire of some sort.
There should also of course still be individual victory conditions as well, and this can be as simple as just giving every non-puppet major power a spot on the post-war council and a special recognition (probably a national spirit). So that way Soviets and China can still consider themselves to have 'won' as well, even if their ideology didn't win the war. Again for example, any non puppet majors after a democracy victory could be a 'Permanent Security Council member', Fascist victory could have 'hegemons', and communist victory could have 'vanguards'.
This way players can have several different dynamic ideas from a role playing perspective on where they want to take their country, without feeling pressured to just ruthlessly conquer as much as possible or to simply achieve the goals laid out for them in their focus tree.
Depending on just how many birds you want to try to kill with a dlc focused on peace in a war game, this would probably also be a good opportunity to introduce the League of Nations in some capacity, if it ever is going to be introduced. This could once again provide even more incentive for otherwise pacifistic players. If the LoN starts off giving a lot of power to the victors of WW1, the collapse of those systems and mechanics (whatever they may be) could provide incentive for either a player Germany to target their historical enemies, or for a player UK, once again, to defend their status as a world leader to protect their precious ideological victory. Selfish side-note: the LoN would likely also work well with another long-request addition: the Free City of Danzig.
The peace conference system as it stands is gaining increasingly more and more infamy but I just wanted to point out that there's more to gain here if the chance is taken. I believe that there's actually a lot of frustration with the dramatic drop in content and detail in the late game, and that for now most of that frustration is being taken out on the peace system, but that even if the peace system alone were patched, that it wouldn't actually scratch that itch the same way as a thorough late to end game revamp.
One of the strangest parts of HoI IV, which is meant to be a war game, is the unusual ability of the player to not actually involve themselves in the main war (or even any war at all) without any real consequences. Sometimes the problem with this is related to balance and 'realism', with regard for example the ability of a player UK to simply refuse to get involved in the war on the continent, and instead focus entirely on some other goal (federation for example), without the need to worry. This understandably casts uncertainty about what the goal of the game even should be.
A more egregious example may be if a player chose to be a country like New Zealand "ok so... what's my goal exactly?". In these cases the introduction of an endgame expansion is the perfect opportunity to make clear to players what they're fighting for. My suggestion is thus:
Ideological victories. A final win condition for the game which identifies one of the 3 primary political ideologies as having 'won' the second world war. The way this could work is simple: the game already has a relatively simple system in place to identify countries as being 'major powers'. As far as I know this is only used at the moment for deciding who needs to capitulate and who doesn't to end a war, and diplomacy menu sorting. A single ideology can be identified as having won if the following conditions are met:
- the year is past <some date>
- the world is at peace
- >2/3 of major powers are of the same ideology (idk if it would be helpful to include or exclude puppet governments here but whatever you get it)
The name of the victory would be based upon the ideology. For example democracy gets 'United Nations', Fascist could gets 'New World Order', and Communists gets 'World Revolution'. Or something like that, you don't have to like the names.
Establishing an ideology-based victory condition can provide incentive for a player UK to make sure to get involved in the war, for example. And allow a player NZ to feel like they're still able to consider themselves to have 'won' the game without feeling pressured to form a great big Kiwi empire of some sort.
There should also of course still be individual victory conditions as well, and this can be as simple as just giving every non-puppet major power a spot on the post-war council and a special recognition (probably a national spirit). So that way Soviets and China can still consider themselves to have 'won' as well, even if their ideology didn't win the war. Again for example, any non puppet majors after a democracy victory could be a 'Permanent Security Council member', Fascist victory could have 'hegemons', and communist victory could have 'vanguards'.
This way players can have several different dynamic ideas from a role playing perspective on where they want to take their country, without feeling pressured to just ruthlessly conquer as much as possible or to simply achieve the goals laid out for them in their focus tree.
Depending on just how many birds you want to try to kill with a dlc focused on peace in a war game, this would probably also be a good opportunity to introduce the League of Nations in some capacity, if it ever is going to be introduced. This could once again provide even more incentive for otherwise pacifistic players. If the LoN starts off giving a lot of power to the victors of WW1, the collapse of those systems and mechanics (whatever they may be) could provide incentive for either a player Germany to target their historical enemies, or for a player UK, once again, to defend their status as a world leader to protect their precious ideological victory. Selfish side-note: the LoN would likely also work well with another long-request addition: the Free City of Danzig.
The peace conference system as it stands is gaining increasingly more and more infamy but I just wanted to point out that there's more to gain here if the chance is taken. I believe that there's actually a lot of frustration with the dramatic drop in content and detail in the late game, and that for now most of that frustration is being taken out on the peace system, but that even if the peace system alone were patched, that it wouldn't actually scratch that itch the same way as a thorough late to end game revamp.
- 19
- 7
- 2
