Is HOI 4 still a Hearts of Iron.

[seattle]

In HoI 1 you had to manually reinforce each division IIRC.
That and tons of other micro managing nuisances doubled the playing time. It didn't double complexity though. Common mistake.

 

[grandad1982]

Your statement is 100% false. HOI IV is way more micromanagement intensive than HOI III TFH and I proved it in this thread if you only cared to see the posts/video. In fact HOI III TFH is what you are looking for since it is the only HOI game where the player only micromanages whatever he/she likes to micro and the AI can do the rest.



OMFG We don´t need to do 50K clicks to organize the Soviet OOB, that fraking OOB can be functional in ~5 minutes or less and with barely any clicking! We also don´t need to do more than a handful of clicking to update the composition of the starting Soviet divisions to something more effective IF we know what we are doing! Let me know if I have to do another video to prove my point!



I am sorry but I have to say that the level of ignorance, misinformation and even poison towards HOI III TFH in this forum goes through the roof. Fraking unbelievable.

Hyperbole much?

 

[Secret Master]

The 50k clicks to set up an OOB for the Soviet Union in HOI3 are why I only played them once (and why I didn't finish that campaign).

The pros had a dedicated Soviet save game on January 1st, 1936 with an OOB that was set up properly and efficiently so they could get to the business of actually running the Soviet Union.

I agree with you. Barros' comments not withstanding, getting the Soviets all set up was never a fun part of playing the Soviets. Even assigning leaders was a waste of time if you had a hole in your memory and forgot which generals you were purging. (Did I assign this guy to a corps or Siberia? I can't remember. Well, better just purge some more. It's the only way to be sure.)

If it's one thing we should all be able to agree upon is that in HOI4, swapping templates to change divisions to a new composition is much better than the HOI3 "swap out brigades manually" mechanic.

 

[safe-keeper]

That is my main problem, this is not COH! This is not tactical action strategy game, this is strategy about big strategic decisions and operations. When I want to play Company of Heroes I play that game and there I want to see 3d soldiers and all that stuff.... but when I want to feel like I am in HQ planing big war operations I want to see different immersion.

You're entitled to that opinion, of course, just keep in mind that it is just a matter of taste, the same way it's a subjective opinion if someone wants modern role-playing games to be pixelated or 8-bit, like Undertale and Artifact Adventure.

I don't mind people saying 3D models are immersion-breaking or that they prefer their counters to be a certain way, what I don't understand are the people who seem to believe the game is objectively worse because of them. Which is kinda like me getting mad at the Zelda devs for having the gall to make Breath of the Wild a 3D game with 2017-level graphics.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

Hyperbole much?

No, not by a single bit.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

I agree with you. Barros' comments not withstanding, getting the Soviets all set up was never a fun part of playing the Soviets

Why wouldn´t my comments stand? Arranging the Soviet OOB to an acceptable level of efficiency does not have to take a shitton of time if we don´t want it. The positions that matter the most are the army groups, theater and armies arguably in that order which means only a few clicks to customize even the biggest order of battle (...); this combined with AI reorganization amongst other stuff (...) lets us create the OOB in less than 5 minutes instead of hours.

The pros had a dedicated Soviet save game on January 1st, 1936 ...
If it's one thing we should all be able to agree upon is that in HOI4, swapping templates to change divisions to a new composition is much better than the HOI3 "swap out brigades manually" mechanic.

It is funny you talk about pros when apparently you don´t know what I am talking about when I say updating the division composition of ALL Soviet divisions to something more effective with only a few clicks in HOI III TFH or do you? Or did you disagree with something else that I said?

We also don´t need to do more than a handful of clicking to update the composition of the starting Soviet divisions to something more effective.

 

[Art1985]

You're entitled to that opinion, of course, just keep in mind that it is just a matter of taste, the same way it's a subjective opinion if someone wants modern role-playing games to be pixelated or 8-bit, like Undertale and Artifact Adventure.

I don't mind people saying 3D models are immersion-breaking or that they prefer their counters to be a certain way, what I don't understand are the people who seem to believe the game is objectively worse because of them. Which is kinda like me getting mad at the Zelda devs for having the gall to make Breath of the Wild a 3D game with 2017-level graphics.

For me this makes game worse. I want to see good 3d models in action games and I want to see options to enable more schematic view in strategy games. I don't ask for something new, I ask for option that always was in hoi games.

 

[Secret Master]

Arranging the Soviet OOB to an acceptable level of efficiency does not have to take a shitton of time if we don´t want it. The positions that matter the most are the army groups, theater and armies arguably in that order which means only a few clicks to customize even the biggest order of battle (...); this combined with AI reorganization amongst other stuff (...) lets us create the OOB in less than 5 minutes instead of hours.

Yes, I watched your five minute video on Germany and the OOB. No surprises there. The German OOB is not the mess that the Soviet OOB is in 1936.

I loaded up HOI3 and spent an instructive 21 minutes and 54 seconds swapping out divisions in the OOB to make it something close to acceptable. It is exactly how I remember it. The salient points:

1) Even after 21 minutes, I still hadn't put leaders in all positions yet. I had only reached the point where I had deleted all useless HQs, consolidated the OOB down to something manageable, and made sure I didn't have stray divisions in weird positions, like the pointless GAR division under STAVKA itself, or the 1 division CAV corps that start under Kiev theater. (Those aren't even the stupidest things in the OOB.) I suppose I could let the AI put them in positions, but I haven't seen the AI promote generals so they can be assigned to useful positions when I have it manage leader assignments. (Or it just doesn't know who to promote to fill the coveted Army Group position.) And the AI sure as Hell isn't going to stack leader traits for specialized formations like Panzer armies.

2) It still took 21 minutes, even though I put everything in the Far East under the theater HQ and eliminated the lower HQs and created a mega theater from Afghanistan to Manchuria. Going into more detail would have taken more clicks and more time, but it's the Far East theater.

3) I kept both Archangel and Leningrad theaters, saving clicks. I could have taken time to optimize the Finnish border further, but I didn't feel like spending more time painting theaters.

4) My optimizations yielded an increase in officer ratio, rising from 98% to 111%. It also yielded 100 extra manpower. You might not care about officer ratio, but I sure as Hell do, especially if I intend some kind of early war shenanigans.

5) Had I run the game, I'd later on have to play "Did I purge the general?" with the OOB after the purge fires.

6) None of these OOB optimizations take into the time one might invest in creating armored armies. That involves more time rummaging around the Soviet OOB, hunting for all the motorized and armored divisions, and putting them under the correct HQs.

7) Letting the AI set the OOB does not solve all of the Soviet OOB's problems. The AI won't spend time deleting all those useless HQs, and you and I both know the AI is not very adept at keeping divisions and HQs in range of each other in large areas like the Soviet Union, unless you create phantom theaters to squeeze units to the front in the active theater.

It is funny you talk about pros when apparently you don´t know what I am talking about when I say updating the division composition of ALL Soviet divisions to something more effective with only a few clicks in HOI III TFH or do you?

Okay, so I just went back into TFH, and I tried to update a couple of triangle infantry divisions to a better template. My choices were to either disband them completely and build new divisions, or swap brigades around. Swapping brigades around takes some clicking, especially when you don't have the ART you want built yet, but you want your divisions to be ready to receive it.

In HOI4, I selected the entire Red Army in 7 clicks and turned every single division into a new template. And it took 7 clicks because none of the divisions are assigned to a group of any kind. Had this been a real game, it would take less to convert the templates over, because the infantry divisions would automatically be updating their templates as I modified them progressively with experience.

I can't convert 153 triangle divisions in HOI3 into a new template that has a 2xINF, 1xART, 1xAT configuration in 7 clicks. (or a 2xART configuration, if that's how you want to roll)

I can add brigades via production, but swapping out existing brigades to change the configuration takes more time and effort.

 

[Sarmatian]

Perhaps this is where personality types impact game enjoyment. I don't disagree that the Soviet OOB was a CHORE to manage.

However, when we are forced to take time to make choices, our relationship with the game deepens.

Those 5 Soviet division commanders we hand picked to hold down a special province...that increases our emotional attachment to the game and immersion, and our interest in the outcome of that battle.

Of course, clicking 50,000 times to set up your army isn't fun either. There is some balance here, and it is easily possible that I'm more sentimental than some regarding my division commanders .

I think this is the crux of it.

People weren't necessarily liking the game system, but it allowed them to "feel" like a WW2 commander-in-chief. I do remember (as a much nicer experience) setting up German OOB, three army groups, like it was in reality but sprinkled with something that was just "my own", like putting a personal favourite commander higher up in the command chain.

It spoke to my WW2/general history inner geek, but besides that, game was a huge letdown. Frankly, I think that is the main reason some people have fond memories of the game. For those who don't remember, the game was almost unplayable at start. Lag was a huge issue. AI in HOI 4 is a mastermind of strategy compared to HOI 3 AI. Then the issues with supplies... oh my God, when I remember that. In the mentioned USSR game, units standing in the province bordering Moscow were out of supply, on January 2nd, 1936. Then the weather (365 days of heavy rain in entire Pacific).

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

Yes, I watched your five minute video on Germany and the OOB. No surprises there. The German OOB is not the mess that the Soviet OOB is in 1936.

I loaded up HOI3 and spent an instructive 21 minutes and 54 seconds swapping out divisions in the OOB to make it something close to acceptable. It is exactly how I remember it. The salient points:

1) Even after 21 minutes, I still hadn't put leaders in all positions yet. I had only reached the point where I had deleted all useless HQs, consolidated the OOB down to something manageable, and made sure I didn't have stray divisions in weird positions, like the pointless GAR division under STAVKA itself, or the 1 division CAV corps that start under Kiev theater. (Those aren't even the stupidest things in the OOB.) I suppose I could let the AI put them in positions, but I haven't seen the AI promote generals so they can be assigned to useful positions when I have it manage leader assignments. (Or it just doesn't know who to promote to fill the coveted Army Group position.) And the AI sure as Hell isn't going to stack leader traits for specialized formations like Panzer armies.

2) It still took 21 minutes, even though I put everything in the Far East under the theater HQ and eliminated the lower HQs and created a mega theater from Afghanistan to Manchuria. Going into more detail would have taken more clicks and more time, but it's the Far East theater.

3) I kept both Archangel and Leningrad theaters, saving clicks. I could have taken time to optimize the Finnish border further, but I didn't feel like spending more time painting theaters.

4) My optimizations yielded an increase in officer ratio, rising from 98% to 111%. It also yielded 100 extra manpower. You might not care about officer ratio, but I sure as Hell do, especially if I intend some kind of early war shenanigans.

5) Had I run the game, I'd later on have to play "Did I purge the general?" with the OOB after the purge fires.

6) None of these OOB optimizations take into the time one might invest in creating armored armies. That involves more time rummaging around the Soviet OOB, hunting for all the motorized and armored divisions, and putting them under the correct HQs.

7) Letting the AI set the OOB does not solve all of the Soviet OOB's problems. The AI won't spend time deleting all those useless HQs, and you and I both know the AI is not very adept at keeping divisions and HQs in range of each other in large areas like the Soviet Union, unless you create phantom theaters to squeeze units to the front in the active theater.



Okay, so I just went back into TFH, and I tried to update a couple of triangle infantry divisions to a better template. My choices were to either disband them completely and build new divisions, or swap brigades around. Swapping brigades around takes some clicking, especially when you don't have the ART you want built yet, but you want your divisions to be ready to receive it.

In HOI4, I selected the entire Red Army in 7 clicks and turned every single division into a new template. And it took 7 clicks because none of the divisions are assigned to a group of any kind. Had this been a real game, it would take less to convert the templates over, because the infantry divisions would automatically be updating their templates as I modified them progressively with experience.

I can't convert 153 triangle divisions in HOI3 into a new template that has a 2xINF, 1xART, 1xAT configuration in 7 clicks. (or a 2xART configuration, if that's how you want to roll)

I can add brigades via production, but swapping out existing brigades to change the configuration takes more time and effort.

Nearly all HQs can be disbanded with a ~dozen clicks or so; with that in mind I doubt very, very much I´ll need more than a few seconds to get rid of them all. If the whole process takes more than 5 minutes it will only be because the units don’t strategically redeploy fast enough due to the Soviet Union being so gigantic (or my computer not being fast enough, pick your poison); not because of time needed for tedious clicking.

Another thing: I never talked about 2INF+1ART+1AT I specifically said “update the starting divisions to something more effective with just a few clicks”. HOI IV can only be matched or even beaten by HOI III TFH WRT division reorganization under some very special circumstances (…) Anyway and before I do yet another video to at least enlighten (the HOI grandmasters ) @Dalwin and @safe-keeper I am interested to know how you (since I know very well how I am going to do it) would add the brigades coming out of production to the divisions . Please explain the process as if I was hopelessly dumb (and maybe I am). Thanks.

 

[Dalwin]

I presume that you are talking about HOI4 and not HOI3 since I think you know that I no longer play the latter.

That means that it is not literally brigades coming out of production, but all the same principles can be applied with the template system and usually with less hassle than it took in HOI3 if you are planning large scale changes.

How I do it really varies a lot depending on the nation, the year, and the situation. Perhaps I am the Soviets and it is late '41 and I have decided that I need more units that are capable of actually hurting the German tank units. I can copy my infantry template, add some AT to it and prioritize the unit type for replacements to make sure that it gets the newest AT guns that I have rolling off the assembly line.

I can now go up and down the line to the sectors that are most threatened and upgrade a few infantry units here and there to the AT template. For me this is so much easier than the old system.

Earlier on you will have times when you are changing the entire force, like adding artillery to your main line infantry. Those involve a simple edit to the existing template and voila it is done for all 250-300 divisions in just a few clicks. You may have to wait a bit for production to catch up so that all units have their guns. You may even have to do a bit of training so that they are proficient with their new unit configuration, but that is the worst of it and it all comes in a couple of orders of magnitude easier than such a change to all units would have taken in HOI3.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

I presume that you are talking about HOI4 and not HOI3 since I think you know that I no longer play the latter.

That means that it is not literally brigades coming out of production, but all the same principles can be applied with the template system and usually with less hassle than it took in HOI3 if you are planning large scale changes.

How I do it really varies a lot depending on the nation, the year, and the situation. Perhaps I am the Soviets and it is late '41 and I have decided that I need more units that are capable of actually hurting the German tank units. I can copy my infantry template, add some AT to it and prioritize the unit type for replacements to make sure that it gets the newest AT guns that I have rolling off the assembly line.

I can now go up and down the line to the sectors that are most threatened and upgrade a few infantry units here and there to the AT template. For me this is so much easier than the old system.

Earlier on you will have times when you are changing the entire force, like adding artillery to your main line infantry. Those involve a simple edit to the existing template and voila it is done for all 250-300 divisions in just a few clicks. You may have to wait a bit for production to catch up so that all units have their guns. You may even have to do a bit of training so that they are proficient with their new unit configuration, but that is the worst of it and it all comes in a couple of orders of magnitude easier than such a change to all units would have taken in HOI3.

No I actually thought you were a HOI III TFH grandmaster too since you and @safe-keeper auto disagree with me even when I am only talking about HOI III TFH. AFAIK I was the 1st dude who conquered the whole world as minor power (Portugal, Albania and later Luxembourg) when fellow forum-members were saying this:

I look forward to seeing how you manage to pull this one off. If conquering the world was digging a hole to the center of the Earth, doing it with Portugal would be like using a fork to do the digging. Good Luck

(I am sorry for quoting you here but I never forgot your words)

One or two weeks after HOI IV was released I was conquering the whole world as Luxembourg by 1947 or so shortly followed by a Tannu Tuva WC just to name a few; at that point after understanding everything that mattered about HOI IV I decided to let it rest because I felt like I already had played everything it had to offer (...)

My point is: you guys clearly must know these games much better than me so given my knowledge of said games you can only be grandmasters.

I know that you won´t agree with me (you already said so by respectifully disagreeing) but updating hundreds of divisions in HOI III TFH sometimes only requires a few clicks which clearly matches HOI IV in that regard.

 

[Secret Master]

Nearly all HQs can be disbanded with a ~dozen clicks or so;

I don't want to run around blindly disbanding HQs. There are plenty of HQs worth keeping.

If we scrap 100% of HQs and let the AI redo the OOB (which is not what I want to do, because it doesn't organize it or assign leaders in a way I find acceptable), then we have to deal with a bunch of understrength HQs that will eat up a small amount of IC reinforcing. (Or you can sit there watch them shatter upon accidental contact with the enemy. You're call.)

Another thing: I never talked about 2INF+1ART+1AT I specifically said “update the starting divisions to something more effective with just a few clicks”.

Then you and I have different ideas on what constitutes "effective." My infantry divisions in HOI3 TFH (as a major) arusually either 2xINF/2xART or 2xINF/1xART/1xAT, depending on my mood, IC, and operational needs.

At this point, the argument you wish to make boils down to "There's not a lot of micro, because I optimize my gameplay to reduce that micro. If you try to utilize the game's mechanics to optimize in some other way, you deserve the micro you inflict on yourself."

In that case, there's no more argument to be had here; HOI4 reduces micro on some of the things I care about. It doesn't do that for you. We'll just have to disagree.

One or two weeks after HOI IV was released I was conquering the whole world as Luxembourg by 1947 or so shortly followed by a Tannu Tuva WC just to name a few; at that point after understanding everything that mattered about HOI IV I decided to let it rest because I felt like I already had played everything it had to offer (...)

I have never claimed to be the best (or even in the top 10 of best players) of either HOI3 or HOI4. I wouldn't even claim to be the best in my MP group. Hell, I've been on the losing side several times in MP over the past year; I requested the US for our current game so I could wrack up a win over the summer. (And it looks like in our current game the Soviet player is going to show the rest if us up with his skill at trolling the Axis via SCW and lend-lease to the Chinese; I'm going to end up playing second fiddle to his manipulation of all three Axis powers.)

I normally wouldn't bring this up, but if you want to brag about your credentials, then I guess I should brag about mine. I literally wrote the book on HOI3 TFH strategy. It's on sale right now for $4.99 from Amazon, iTunes, Paradox itself, and other places where fine reading materials can be found; it's an e-book, but you don't need a Kindle or Nook to read it. It's geared more towards newer players, but I'm sure students of Soviet history and culture will find plenty of easter eggs to chuckle over as they read. And the interaction between the junior officers and their instructor is a great example of what not to do in pedagogy.

My book is also the 3rd result on Google for "the communist campaign." I don't know if that makes it better or worse, since it beats out millions of other hits for communist campaigns. But it's nice being on the first page of hits for a non-exact search.

My point is: you guys clearly must know these games much better than me so given my knowledge of said games you can only be grandmasters.

Until this post of mine, you were the only one making direct comments about bragging about ones own skill level.

 

[Dalwin]

Maybe his name should be in a "special" color to indicate his mastery, so that those of us who disagree with most of what he says, will not bother.

 

[Axe99]

I normally wouldn't bring this up, but if you want to brag about your credentials, then I guess I should brag about mine. I literally wrote the book on HOI3 TFH strategy. It's on sale right now for $4.99 from Amazon, iTunes, Paradox itself, and other places where fine reading materials can be found; it's an e-book, but you don't need a Kindle or Nook to read it. It's geared more towards newer players, but I'm sure students of Soviet history and culture will find plenty of easter eggs to chuckle over as they read. And the interaction between the junior officers and their instructor is a great example of what not to do in pedagogy.

My book is also the 3rd result on Google for "the communist campaign." I don't know if that makes it better or worse, since it beats out millions of other hits for communist campaigns. But it's nice being on the first page of hits for a non-exact search.

That's very cool .

While I'm nowhere near the player of you or Barros, I also found organising the Soviet (or British) OOBs at the start of the game pretty fiddly (although it's pretty fiddly organising the British OOB at the start of HoI4 as well, albeit less so than in its predecessor). I was also very, very leery of leaving anything OOB-wise to the AI (I never even mastered giving it resistance suppression, although I know it was possible - it just never seemed overly interested in suppressing the partisans I wanted it to).

That said, on topic, if we're talking "is HoI4 a HoI game?", HoI3 was the only one in the series with anything like that kind of OOB, so HoI4 still stands reasonably in the series even if we're just judging it on that feature alone.

 

[virre]

Your statement is 100% false. HOI IV is way more micromanagement intensive than HOI III TFH and I proved it in this thread if you only cared to see the posts/video. In fact HOI III TFH is what you are looking for since it is the only HOI game where the player only micromanages whatever he/she likes to micro and the AI can do the rest.



OMFG We don´t need to do 50K clicks to organize the Soviet OOB, that fraking OOB can be functional in ~5 minutes or less and with barely any clicking! We also don´t need to do more than a handful of clicking to update the composition of the starting Soviet divisions to something more effective IF we know what we are doing! Let me know if I have to do another video to prove my point!



I am sorry but I have to say that the level of ignorance, misinformation and even poison towards HOI III TFH in this forum goes through the roof. Fraking unbelievable.

Well since I like Hoi3 tons more then hoi4, and think hoi4 is a step back and not forward I can only agree with you.

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

I don't want to run around blindly disbanding HQs. There are plenty of HQs worth keeping.

If we scrap 100% of HQs and let the AI redo the OOB (which is not what I want to do, because it doesn't organize it or assign leaders in a way I find acceptable), then we have to deal with a bunch of understrength HQs that will eat up a small amount of IC reinforcing. (Or you can sit there watch them shatter upon accidental contact with the enemy. You're call.)

There are no HQs worth keeping at the very beginning of the game because they are considered regular brigades; having regular brigades at peace and with high neutrality increases the amount of IC needed for consumer goods. Since the Soviet Union basically does not have to spend IC in building supplies (...) even the army group HQs would be useless to keep around. It is interesting that you´ve mentioned IC when disbanding ALL HQs early on should save at least 9-10 IC every single day. On top of this then there is the purge, by not having HQs it will save you clicks. Later down the road (when the purges are over and the neutrality is near 0) creating the HQs for the entire Red army will be a breeze by using AI reorganization and optimized OOBs (...) and optimized TH HQs boundaries (...)

Then you and I have different ideas on what constitutes "effective." My infantry divisions in HOI3 TFH (as a major) arusually either 2xINF/2xART or 2xINF/1xART/1xAT, depending on my mood, IC, and operational needs.

Maybe we have different ideas on effectiveness but most likely we don´t; with that out of the way over here said effectiveness was geared towards saving RL time by keeping around some less than optimal 3INF+ART+AT divisions. 3INF+ART+AT is definitely more effective in combat than the 3INF that the Soviets start with, don´t you think? Besides when looking at the big picture they won´t matter much unless we are playing at very hard difficulty (...) or a MP with a competent player. Btw you still haven´t said how you would add the brigades to divisions coming out of production.

At this point, the argument you wish to make boils down to "There's not a lot of micro, because I optimize my gameplay to reduce that micro. If you try to utilize the game's mechanics to optimize in some other way, you deserve the micro you inflict on yourself."

In that case, there's no more argument to be had here; HOI4 reduces micro on some of the things I care about. It doesn't do that for you. We'll just have to disagree

I have a brain and a campaign to play so I usually use that brain (not always though ) to decide the level of min/maxing that I have to do to achieve the objective of said campaign. So sometimes I micro everything down to the last detail while some other times I feel it is perfectly fine to min/max much less (like keeping some less than optimal divisions around in order to avoid a shitton of clicking). Sometimes I need an optimized OOB, sometimes I don´t (for whatever reason) so I may attach everything under the TH HQ (again for whatever reason). Sometimes I want or need to handle every single division myself while sometimes I give everything for the AI to handle. Sometimes I need to handle trade personally sometimes it does not matter therfore I give it to the AI. This is the beauty of HOI III we only manage what we want to manage which makes the game more enjoyable since it does not force us to do something that we don´t want/don´t need to do.

HOI4 reduces micro on some of the things I care about. It doesn't do that for you. We'll just have to disagree

One of the very few things that HOI IV brought that reduces the micro (by a lot) were the templates. I already said it in this thread that I wish HOI III TFH had it. Beyond that and a better fleet UI everything else requires more clicking. This is not an opinion, it is a fact. For example ever tried to form a single front line as Italy in the north of Italy or the Balkans? Whereas in HOI III TFH we only need to paint the provinces at the frontline in HOI IV it simply can´t be done. You are forced to create a myriad of sometimes very small fronts that you don´t need or want. It´s a bloody micromanagement nightmare by comparisson with its predecessor.

I have never claimed to be the best (or even in the top 10 of best players) of either HOI3 or HOI4. I wouldn't even claim to be the best in my MP group. Hell, I've been on the losing side several times in MP over the past year; I requested the US for our current game so I could wrack up a win over the summer. (And it looks like in our current game the Soviet player is going to show the rest if us up with his skill at trolling the Axis via SCW and lend-lease to the Chinese; I'm going to end up playing second fiddle to his manipulation of all three Axis powers.)

I normally wouldn't bring this up, but if you want to brag about your credentials, then I guess I should brag about mine. I literally wrote the book on HOI3 TFH strategy. It's on sale right now for $4.99 from Amazon, iTunes, Paradox itself, and other places where fine reading materials can be found; it's an e-book, but you don't need a Kindle or Nook to read it. It's geared more towards newer players, but I'm sure students of Soviet history and culture will find plenty of easter eggs to chuckle over as they read. And the interaction between the junior officers and their instructor is a great example of what not to do in pedagogy.

My book is also the 3rd result on Google for "the communist campaign." I don't know if that makes it better or worse, since it beats out millions of other hits for communist campaigns. But it's nice being on the first page of hits for a non-exact search.

I know very well what you´ve done and I know you are very knowledgeable WRT these games (and I respect you for that) so there was no need to pull that card (at least not for me). I don´t like to brag and I was not really bragging (at least I don´t think so); my point was: maybe to say that if I was able to do those things maybe my words are worth some consideration? Maybe I am not crazy, maybe I know what I am saying?

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

All jokes aside, managing HOI3 gave me a headache, and letting AI do the work gave me brain aneurism. I love HOI4's simplicity combined with depth

 

[BarrosRodrigues]

View attachment 290900
and letting AI do the work gave me brain aneurism

That is because you did not know how to set up the AI in order for it to perform at an acceptable level of efficiency.

 

[Shinkuro Yukinari]

Trust me, I did, somehow. And let's not even start on the process of setting up. I played Yugoslavia as my first game and I lost my temperance after 30 minutes. God forbid I ever play USSR