Is it the good time to return to this game?

[dyson]

Dear vets,

After bitter experience with HoI4 in it's early versions like 3 years ago and still having a positive sentiment for HoI3 Black Ice I'm coming again here to ask is it worth my time?

Before you tell me gtfo please check the features I appreciated in HoI3:

1 I used to micro manage front lines and order specific province to province movement on division tier to encircle emeny using terrain and mobility. HOI4 comes with battle plans and rather micro managing is suppressed. But is it still possible? I remember total chaos when I tried to do that and units on its own stopped attacking, I could not manage that in HOI3 style at all. What does the game offer now?

2. Navy movements and navy battles. There has been a lot in that topic, I read many complains and practically this looks still to be broken. Is it possible to order your fleet to move from one sea province to another trying to intercept enemy ships?

3. AI. Is it useless and stupid or just totally retarded? Can Japan i.e. advance on Pacific and jump from archipelago to archipelago? Anyone seen invasion of Australia? Can the Brits manage defence in far east and fight for a while at least?
Is italian AI capable of anything like trying to grab Greece or push in North Africa?

So guys, is there a hope for some fun for me?

 

[NuXi]

1. On the topic of micro. It is similar to what it was on release. The battle plans can be frustrating to use, once you are used to what the various plans do, it is possible to add some micro in to compliment the front line system.

For me the big improvement for my micro was discovering (control - h) hotkey that unassigns selected units from any order. For when you don't want to give the units a new battle plan, and you don't want the frontline ai to move them around on you.

Earlier in the game I find that China /Japan will reward good micro. And in the later parts of the war, I often mostly leave my line infantry to the front line system while I manage my tanks.

2. Navy is fairly abstract and while I like the new system, it is not micro friendly. Some missions don't have the navey in a specific sea tile. Just in the whole zone and your boats have to locate them before you can engage. But fleets that are moving to engage, holding position, or in combat, are at a specific tile you can move boats to engage. But it is often better to just have those engaging ships on strike force and they will go intercept when possible (and hide it the most distant port when waiting...)

I don't find much reward in putting to much effort into the navy and I don't know if that is much different in multiplayer.

3. I feel that the ai is better than it was. But it still does plenty of stupid moves.

My feel is that the ai uses naval invasions more often and is more capable at pushing them back rather than waiting to be crushed.

I have seen Japan invade Australia, but I have had many rounds where ai Japan gets bogged down in China and stalls out.

 

[DicRoNero]

1. About the same as it was, really.
2. Navy is as poor as ever. MtG was a huge step down, despite being ostensibly a naval DLC. I'm still scratching my head at how that is even possible.
3. AI is marginally better, but still very poor. *Landwar* AI.

Overall, it might be worth giving it a shot or two w/o bothering to buy DLCs and dropping huge expectations from the start, should you have had any. 'Some fun' is still there, but I guess most people are around simply cause they're interested in WW2 and/or have enjoyed other PDX games. Plus we still have mods and modding.

 

[dyson]

we still have mods and modding.

Thanks for opinion.
Which mods do you recommend? And are they able to at least partially cover flawed vanilla game mechanics?

 

[DicRoNero]

Thanks for opinion.
Which mods do you recommend? And are they able to at least partially cover flawed vanilla game mechanics?

I put mods and modding as separate things on purpose, as i.e. I tried Expert AI and Kaiserreich (those two are very popular) and enjoyed none (for different reasons), but slowly creating/updating my own mod for [mostly] personal use is fun and engaging in itself.

edit: to my knowledge, there are NO mods able to recrify abyssmal Naval AI, and that's just horrible.

 

[CrasherZZ]

@dyson - I'm in the same boat as you. I recently purchased HOI4 on sale after years of lurking in this forum. I was an avid HOI3 micromanager type, and I loved it, so I was very dubious of the Battle Plans and air and sea zones. The more I play HOI4 the more the production, research, national focus, and diplomacy seems familiar.

I find that learning how to draw lines and attacks with the Battle Planner is as much micromanagement as I need because I tend to make short front lines and I'm careful about what divisions to assign to which front and other missions, and then monitor closely the progress of the every combat. In HOI4 you can micromanage battleplans instead of corps and divisions.There is enough going on for a major country fighting on multiple fronts and zones to keep any micromanager busy, especially when you are still learning like me.

I'm not experienced enough yet to get annoyed with any aspects of the less visible details. That may come later. You can see they were really trying to make it more of Grand Strategic game, while "throwing some bones" to the detail-oriented, history buffs. For now, there are plenty enough activities in it that I haven't thought much about how it compares with HOI3.

The most difficult thing so far is figuring out how to manage navy fleets and air wings but I am getting there. If you don't play the US, Japan, or the UK the navy stuff is minor.

The AI isn't really much better than HOI3 but that's not a big deal - the AI of any computer game will never be good as human players who will always be able go figure out it's tendencies and find cheesy loopholes and tricks. Given how complex the game is, the AI is actually not too bad at it.

 

[TalyonUngol]

The AI is extremely stupid, always overextending their lines, declaring wars when they shouldn't be. The AI is just awful.

For example. Your playing as a smaller nation in Europe like Bulgaria. You are fighting Greece and Germany is at war with the allies. All of a sudden, Germany declares war on Greece, dragging you into WW2... which is a game over. Its THAT stupid AI crap that has been ruining my games as of the last expansion. Its honestly getting really tiring.

 

[CantGetNoSleep]

1 I used to micro manage front lines and order specific province to province movement on division tier to encircle emeny using terrain and mobility. HOI4 comes with battle plans and rather micro managing is suppressed. But is it still possible? I remember total chaos when I tried to do that and units on its own stopped attacking, I could not manage that in HOI3 style at all. What does the game offer now?

You should probably still use battle orders and build up the planning bonus, however
(a) you don't have to "play" the order - you can control the units manually
(b) even if you do play the order, you can over-ride the battle order and manually control individual unit(s)
(c) when you do manually control units, the planning bonus will vanish much quicker
The battle order AI likes to fight - i.e. it'll usually pick other units to attack rather than move into the empty gaps. However, do check out the aggressive/cautious options. The aggressive is good if you have total air superiority as it'll increase your overruns a lot. The cautious seems to do smarter things.

2. Navy movements and navy battles. There has been a lot in that topic, I read many complains and practically this looks still to be broken. Is it possible to order your fleet to move from one sea province to another trying to intercept enemy ships?

Yes you can manually move fleets to join existing fights (you first need to deselect whatever order they're on). However, they won't engage enemies on their own if moved manually - only join a fight. That can be pretty tedious/frustrating when you're trying to stop a naval invasion and your naval AI sends your fleet to the other opposite end of allowed sea zones.

3. AI. Is it useless and stupid or just totally retarded? Can Japan i.e. advance on Pacific and jump from archipelago to archipelago? Anyone seen invasion of Australia? Can the Brits manage defence in far east and fight for a while at least?
Is italian AI capable of anything like trying to grab Greece or push in North Africa?

For the majors
- Japan AI isn't that dumb - I've seen AI Japan take over the entirety of Asia, including Pearl Harbour, Australia and New Zealand. But then it sits back and relaxes. Which is probably accurate TBH.
- Britain AI doesn't defend anything in the East and useless in Africa, but okay on d-day/air war. Again, probably historically accurate.
- USA AI is very mixed, I've very occasionally seen it pull off brilliant invasions of Japan, but mostly it just gets mauled in Asia and doesn't do anything to try to counteract. Mixed record on D-Day as well.
- Italian AI usually does better than Italy did historically - naval invading in a lot of places, including Norway and Ireland, and is about 50/50 at winning in Greece and North Africa vs UK AI. Useless against players, but then that's not surprising.
- France AI does a decent job of fighting, but the game has nerfed France so badly, it never survives. Takes silly - but historically accurate - focus tree decisions...
- Russia AI is rubbish. It always overbuilds divisions meaning it never has fully trained fully equipped divisions. Then there's added issue that relocating industry decisions don't relocate anywhere near enough industries and/or manpower so if Germany gets to where it was historically in 1942, Russia will die as it becomes too badly crippled.
- Germany AI is very good at land and air, doesn't really try at sea. Garrisoning is an issue for it, as it is for all AIs.

The biggest issue with AI seems to be its inability to garrison properly and therefore all Axis AIs eventually die through attrition of partisans. It has the effect of the game being over-Axis friendly to over-Allies friendly. Now historically, the game is far to Axis friendly, but for the sake of a game/balance, it probably needs tweaking a little so Axis puts up more a fight.

So guys, is there a hope for some fun for me?

Yes, but the game was probably at its optimal about a year ago, before they brought in man the guns/la resistance which introduced a lot of pointless tedious dynamics.

 

[Áurum]

The biggest issue with AI seems to be its inability to garrison properly and therefore all Axis AIs eventually die through attrition of partisans.

French states have nasty modifiers that ensure resistance never disappears. The AI isn't particularly smart either, in a Byzantium game Germany asked me for more than 1M manpower to garrison France. I accepted and after some time, it asked for more hundred thousands of it. It was an infinite sink of resources, so I ultimately denied.

 

[dyson]

(c) when you do manually control units, the planning bonus will vanish much quicker

Is this possible to change some game files to nullify (or slow the decay) this penalty?

- Germany AI is very good at land and air, doesn't really try at sea. Garrisoning is an issue for it, as it is for all AIs.

I read that maintaining order of occupied territories might consume vast amount of manpower that it starts to be major challenge in war time.
Im fine with altering a bit the game so if I would boost military police suppresion strength would it be the right cheat to suppress partisans more not consuming that much of MP?

Russia AI is rubbish. It always overbuilds divisions meaning it never has fully trained fully equipped divisions

Is there a way to make red army more resilient and alter ther production patterm? Or this is the way how soviets compensate poor equipment with masses (historically accurate)

 

[CantGetNoSleep]

Is this possible to change some game files to nullify (or slow the decay) this penalty?

Dunno - sorry.

I read that maintaining order of occupied territories might consume vast amount of manpower that it starts to be major challenge in war time.
Im fine with altering a bit the game so if I would boost military police suppresion strength would it be the right cheat to suppress partisans more not consuming that much of MP?

If you're playing a fascist nation, there's an easy way round this issue: create a collaboration government (2-3 mission will get compliance > 50% day 1) and then it's really rather trivial
If you're not, or you don't have the time to do that, then just set occupation laws to something like secret police day 1 and slowly reduce them as compliance goes up. It's slow, but it works. Armoured cars are also good in suppression divisions as they dramatically decrease your manpower losses. Finally, you can ask allies/puppets for garrison support.

Is there a way to make red army more resilient and alter ther production patterm? Or this is the way how soviets compensate poor equipment with masses (historically accurate)

There are mods that improve the AI - this one is pretty good: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=741805475
Be warned though: it really does improve the AI, so you'll be in for a challenge.

 

[Harin]

@dyson, you brought up Black Ice. That mod has been updated for HOI4 and is maintained well. It also incorporates the Expert AI 4.0 mod to give the AI some help. Unfortunately, after the DLC, Man the Guns, none of the most popular mods, including Black Ice, has figured out how to deal with the new naval game. That is not surprising, because the developers have not been able to make an AI that can either. The vanilla naval AI almost behaves like it cannot even see all the naval bits we have to play with. On the plus side, AI naval invasions are much better than they were at launch and will refreshingly surprise you the first time you deal with them. Since it is AI though, you will eventually learn how to easily deal with them, but that is true in just about any game's AI.

I do not know what your preference is in the game. If it is the Pacific Ocean and naval warfare, the game is at its weakest. If you like land combat, like the East Front or China, then things are better. Also, there is unconfirmed hope that the very next DLC has a goal of improving land combat and other things related to the land game.

My recommendation would be to give it another try, since you have the game already. Much of the game is better than it was three years ago. The biggest complaint from players is that progress is almost criminally slow, but after your three year nap, you will see improvements. I would just stay away from the DLC Man the Guns and any DLC after in your test games and play a non-naval nation like USSR or Germany. That way the naval portion will not compromise your impressions. If you like your first game, then load up the Black Ice mod, if that is your preference, and do it again. I have had a lot of fun with that mod. After that, you will know if you want to invest in any other mods.

 

[GSP Jr]

Nobody can answer that for you.
Opinions vary widely.

If you are expecting a historically accurate WW II simulator, you will not be satisfied. The AI is not a substitute for a thinking, planning, human.

Regardless of what you want from the game, upgrade it to 1.10.1 and try it out, you might be surprised.

 

[coffeelingfine]

2. Navy is as poor as ever. MtG was a huge step down, despite being ostensibly a naval DLC. I'm still scratching my head at how that is even possible.

The naval AI is still poor but the actual mechanics are far better than pre-MTG

 

[Kadanz]

If you are a bitter hoi 3 player, then the game hasn't changed much in the sense that it added nothing that made hoi 3 a great game for nostalgic hoi 3 players like myself and you.

1) You can micro everything manually even if you don't use the battleplanner at all. I find the battleplanner usefull when I assign a ton of infantry to it and use my tanks on complete manual control to push frontlines where I want. The BP does a good job of plugging the holes with infantry.

The answer is yes it's possible to micro manage. But you don't have the OOB of the previous game to organize your divisions like you're used to.

2) Ehh, better than what it used to be, but still very much abstracted and quite honestly too arcadey for my liking. I don't like how naval battles work in this game, and I equally hate the air war. Naval mechanics are still somewhat clunky and can be hit or miss.

3) AI - there is lots of artificial in this game but not much intelligence. Smart-ass jokes aside, the AI has gotten better compared to what it was at release. Opinions on this may vary depending on who you ask. But I think lots of people can agree with the sentiment that the AI is the most neglected area of this game. It's still prone to doing silly stuff.

Japan does however island hop, in later patches it even invades Australia and even pushes far into india. Italy is sometimes more of a steamroller than Germany is.

All in all this game is still a casual arcadey meme simulater than a historical simulator. I have no expectations anymore that it will get any better in future patches. It's a fun game if you want to turn your brain off from a hard day of work and looking for something casual. I won't recommend it to someone who looks for a historical simulator offering the same challenges countries faced IRL.

Thank god we can now form the byzantine empire though.

 

[CrasherZZ]

As much as liked HOI3, it had lot's of serious problems of it's own but we played it anyway. I don't think HOI4 is worse than HOI3 in that respect, and probably better when it comes to bugs and AI weaknesses.