Here is a screenshot from a game yesterday playing USA Historical. Germany AI beats Soviet Union May 42. They must have had really good weather.
- 1
Is No Step Back a bad joke?
- Thread starter Stacho
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
- Status
I will dispute this as I've seen it go both ways now and with casaulties being far closer between China and Japan when they are not overrunning China.
- 6
- 1
Another thought has occured to me with the USSR being under industrialized. This is both a yes and also no and I shall explain. If we consider just it's own focus tree and it's own industrial power the answer is definately yes. However, I did notice that the Baltic States when you annex them are a hefty buff to USSR industrialization and I attribute this to their focus trees. Two of them are pretty much right at the start and give 8 civ factories between them and multiple that for each baltic state and you get 24 civ factories. So with this in mind, is the USSR under industrialized once these are annexed? Probably not.
However it is worth noting that while a player would love just getting these, the AI doesn't appear to be able to manage it and it probably would've been better to have this all as one decision the USSR takes for all republics at 75pp and if they say no the red army moves in because it's free real estate.
However it is worth noting that while a player would love just getting these, the AI doesn't appear to be able to manage it and it probably would've been better to have this all as one decision the USSR takes for all republics at 75pp and if they say no the red army moves in because it's free real estate.
Lybia not so much, but the fact that Somaliland and Eritrea doesn't get any railroad, despite the fact that Italians had built lots of it in there and Ethiopia before the war is a joke of bad taste.
- 2
- 1
- 1
To me, NSB feels pretty bugged, late game got even worse than before. I dared to go to war with the allies as Romanov Russia in 1945 and it’s a mess. Allies are still naval invading every 7 seconds. Normally, not a problem: guard the coasts, especially the harbors with a few divisions and that’s it. Well, not anymore! 1 British tank division manages to crash my 5 infantry divisions (7+2) at a level 5 forts harbor. Especially annoying: It looks like enemy troops get less attrition and not as many negative stats when encircled or not connected to a harbor. So I ended up using roughly 400 divisions 7+2 infantry to get those landings under control, not even kidding. I had to go hunting down enemy divisions that just randomly walked from Danzig to Romania - just one division without any stops. That division did not suffer any losses from moving in enemy territory, although it was not connected to any harbour anymore. I encircled about 80 allied divisions in the carpethian mountains for almost a year and neither did they lose org or troops nor did they suffer any encirclement penalties when I attacked. I had to nuke the whole place to get it back. At that point, the game is just frustrating and not playable anymore…
- 3
- 2
- 1
I quite sure that most tanks (maybe light tank not) are able to pierce 7-2s, especially without anti-tank cannons. I not sure what will be the future meta, but I'm using 25 width as standard with quite the success.
But all of that doesn't matter with the current state of the game. Let's wait for a few more updates, because right now, as you said, long games are almost impossible.
I started my own AI simulation as observer with regular difficulty and all default parameters, start in 1936. Some of my observations (patch 1.11.2):
At february 2nd, 1943 the Germans are far away from Stalingrad, Leningrad and Moscow.
USA joined allies in 1942 and Britians are unsuccessfully practicing D-Day since end of 1942.
The Italians are wiped out of Africa (they only have Tripolis at beginning of 1943).
Spanish civil war was won by Noationalists pretty quick after about 1 year.
Since this is a highly dynamic and complex simulation I'd avoid to infer any balance from a small amount of runs.
I you start 1939 the setup and thus the result will be completely different.
So far I like the new/changed systems and I think this DLC & barbarossa patch is great work, even if it needs some more bug fixing and fine tuning. Great job.
- 4
I just tried two games as Poland and there are tons of bugs. A civil war appeared out of nowhere, and the country that I was at war with had the exact same name (Kingdom of Poland) and two divisions. Supposedly it was the Livonian claim, but that had been dismissed years prior. Also I invaded Lithuania/Livonia and when I won the war it just suddenly turned into the Soviet Union.
I love a lot of features introduced in this DLC, but it does not appear to be even close to being ready. I'll come back in a month or two I guess. It'll be ready when Royal Court is released, and Royal Court will be ready when Vic 3 is released, and Vic 3 will be ready when Vic 4 is released.
I love a lot of features introduced in this DLC, but it does not appear to be even close to being ready. I'll come back in a month or two I guess. It'll be ready when Royal Court is released, and Royal Court will be ready when Vic 3 is released, and Vic 3 will be ready when Vic 4 is released.
- 2
- 1
- 1
It's So True. I Will Not Talk About Even Multiplayer. Germany is Dead Now.
- 3
- 1
When I see something like this I just shake my head.
1) Learn the new supply system. Learn about railroads, supply hubs, supply radius, horse vs. truck etc. If they are out of supply it is on you because it's too easy to get it right. I have 72 division facing Poland and all 72 are in FULL supply.
2) So you lose trains like in real life? OMG what a disaster. Put them on interception in all provices and you will greatly reduce the losses. Or build armored trains.
3) Gee they took the exploit away? I don't get Organizer but I do get to 60-80% of the way there by summer 1937. I can get it IF Spain survives but it seldom does.
1) Learn the new supply system. Learn about railroads, supply hubs, supply radius, horse vs. truck etc. If they are out of supply it is on you because it's too easy to get it right. I have 72 division facing Poland and all 72 are in FULL supply.
2) So you lose trains like in real life? OMG what a disaster. Put them on interception in all provices and you will greatly reduce the losses. Or build armored trains.
3) Gee they took the exploit away? I don't get Organizer but I do get to 60-80% of the way there by summer 1937. I can get it IF Spain survives but it seldom does.
- 11
- 8
- 1
It can happen especially if you buffed Germany. Did you? See I can post a screenshot of SOV defeating Germany while I'm the US. Out of context it means NOTHING.
- 4
- 2
- 1
There's a quite good list of learnable traits for Admirals and Generals, but when if ever do they ever gain more than one and Admirals don't seem to get any at all.
Overall the XP & Generals traits gain rate is too low. Playing as Germany late '44 and I still don't have enough XP for naval ship or aircraft design and my Generals haven't learnt any new traits apart from the odd one getting 'Infantry Expert'. Yeah I know it's affected by the terrain they fight on but it's still way too slow for Generals/Admirals to learn new traits, this needs a buff.
This is supposed to a fun game, PDX should drastically increase the traits gain rate for Generals & Admirals by '44 & '45 they should be massively experienced and have more than one (if any) trait.
Overall the XP & Generals traits gain rate is too low. Playing as Germany late '44 and I still don't have enough XP for naval ship or aircraft design and my Generals haven't learnt any new traits apart from the odd one getting 'Infantry Expert'. Yeah I know it's affected by the terrain they fight on but it's still way too slow for Generals/Admirals to learn new traits, this needs a buff.
This is supposed to a fun game, PDX should drastically increase the traits gain rate for Generals & Admirals by '44 & '45 they should be massively experienced and have more than one (if any) trait.
HoI4 is a brutal game to test - the various focus tree combinations possible even in historical, let alone ahistorical, make finding all of them very difficult even with a large number of testers doing a large number of hours. And with mechanics, there's the old chestnut of "fix one bug, make two more" which may be responsible for at least some of the bugs I'm seeing.
I expect that QA and the betas have worked hard to test the game as best as they possibly could in the time they had available, and given the time NSB has been in the oven, I don't imagine that's less than usual (and could well be more). If there's more bugs than usual (and it's too early to tell - I'm a bit of an attention-to-detail nutter, so the buggers jump out at me) I'd put it down to the large changes to the supply system being a much more large/fundamental change than in past DLCs, where mechanics were more "laid on top of" than "fitted underneath".
I need to spend more time with the game to see about the historical NF developments going off the rails, but in a general sense while I've clearly found the UI for the new supply system to be insufficient (and, after looking at the game files, have a few things I'd tweak - particularly given the UI limitations - but that may change with experience) beyond the initial hurdles with the supply system, I'm having a generally very good experience with it, as long as I accept that there are some supply "problems" that are essentially unsolvable, and that I should ignore the notifications for them.
- 4
We must strongly divide two types of complains: plausibility and playability.
Playability is about bugs, balance and so. Historically Axis states were doomed to loose, but it would not be fun to play in multiplayer, nor in singleplayer (at least for casuals). I have no worries here. Playability is crucial and bugs will be fixed.
But plausibility... Is broken and nothing will change it. Developers decided to follow meme paths and not work on historical events which are hard to implement, like Pearl Harbour or Soviet Invasion on Poland. Focus trees are currently too big and complicated to reflect our reality. What worse, by the Poland Dev Diaries they confirmed they are not working with historians. They are developers who create focus trees.
It saddens me a lot, but by looking at sales, it must be a good strategy. They have to sacrifice some salty history maniacs to please a vide audience of casuals. Just pretend it is not a II world war simulation, but a meme strategy game based on it. Which it indeed is!
Playability is about bugs, balance and so. Historically Axis states were doomed to loose, but it would not be fun to play in multiplayer, nor in singleplayer (at least for casuals). I have no worries here. Playability is crucial and bugs will be fixed.
But plausibility... Is broken and nothing will change it. Developers decided to follow meme paths and not work on historical events which are hard to implement, like Pearl Harbour or Soviet Invasion on Poland. Focus trees are currently too big and complicated to reflect our reality. What worse, by the Poland Dev Diaries they confirmed they are not working with historians. They are developers who create focus trees.
It saddens me a lot, but by looking at sales, it must be a good strategy. They have to sacrifice some salty history maniacs to please a vide audience of casuals. Just pretend it is not a II world war simulation, but a meme strategy game based on it. Which it indeed is!
- 4
- 4
Most of the Soviet Civil War content needs some serious tweaking. All of the 70 day focuses should be cut in half to 35, and the paranoia generated from the focuses themselves should be toned down or removed in some cases. There's already enough paranoia gain from the decisions you take whether to expand support or infiltrate more territory.
The system as it exists is so punishing that although there are a lot of options, anything other than giving you army support or a bit of PP to expand your controlled territory is basically useless. The time constraints for Trotsky because of the focus times are so severe that even managing things carefully, both Tukchahevsky and Primakov can be killed in a scripted purge before you have a chance to ignite the civil war. That's frustrating.
All the focuses under the cooperation against Stalin branch are basically worthless since you have such a limited time before paranoia explodes things into a civil war that you should never take those focuses. You have to maximize territorial control and army support, everything else is a trap.
For the Right Opposition things are also screwed up. It takes way too long to get to the point where you can launch the assassination and coup, and it's RNG based. Both times I have attempted it, it has failed despite an 80% chance success rate. Reloading over a dozen times and getting the same outcomes in two different runs suggests that you can't savescum it either, but you shouldn't have to to begin with. Don't make it RNG based. It's not cool to sink 30-45 minutes into the game to begin a campaign only to find out you have to restart because the outcome of a decision that will make or break your entire campaign is random.
There's more that's screwed up with the Right Opposition too. Not merely with balance, but actually outright broken functionality. In my second run, both Bukharin and Rykov were executed in the first scripted Great Purge event(the scripted one, not the random events triggered by paranoia that gives you a choice). Bukharin and Rykov are the only leaders Right Opposition soviet union can even have if you didn't take the Zinoviev focus; and beyond that, it breaks the focus tree since to take focuses after the Civil War in the political branch, either Rykov needs to be alive or Bukharin needs to be the leader. If both are dead, then it just breaks the tree and stops you from progressing.
The supply constraints during the actual civil war are pretty brutal given that you will have no MILs to really build anything with. It's not really a real war in a conventional sense. It's more about who will bleed through their equipment from attrition first.
The problems and balance of the supply system itself is another issue entirely, but it seems that it might make sense to provide the sides in the Soviet Civil War with a spirit strongly reducing supply consumption for the period of the civil war. HoI4's game mechanics do not allow correct representation of the kind of fighting that happened in Siberia in the Russian Civil War anyway, so it is better to(at least temporarily for the civil war itself) make supply consumption drastically reduced so that the war actually comes down to being resolved by fighting rather than a war of attrition where even the victor is bled dry of equipment from lack of supply.
The supply system works best when you have a war between countries that have had a significant period of preparation and build up... which notably you don't get at all in this Civil War.
Definitely seems that there wasn't much testing done on this. Hopefully our concerns and complaints are taken seriously and addressed.
The system as it exists is so punishing that although there are a lot of options, anything other than giving you army support or a bit of PP to expand your controlled territory is basically useless. The time constraints for Trotsky because of the focus times are so severe that even managing things carefully, both Tukchahevsky and Primakov can be killed in a scripted purge before you have a chance to ignite the civil war. That's frustrating.
All the focuses under the cooperation against Stalin branch are basically worthless since you have such a limited time before paranoia explodes things into a civil war that you should never take those focuses. You have to maximize territorial control and army support, everything else is a trap.
For the Right Opposition things are also screwed up. It takes way too long to get to the point where you can launch the assassination and coup, and it's RNG based. Both times I have attempted it, it has failed despite an 80% chance success rate. Reloading over a dozen times and getting the same outcomes in two different runs suggests that you can't savescum it either, but you shouldn't have to to begin with. Don't make it RNG based. It's not cool to sink 30-45 minutes into the game to begin a campaign only to find out you have to restart because the outcome of a decision that will make or break your entire campaign is random.
There's more that's screwed up with the Right Opposition too. Not merely with balance, but actually outright broken functionality. In my second run, both Bukharin and Rykov were executed in the first scripted Great Purge event(the scripted one, not the random events triggered by paranoia that gives you a choice). Bukharin and Rykov are the only leaders Right Opposition soviet union can even have if you didn't take the Zinoviev focus; and beyond that, it breaks the focus tree since to take focuses after the Civil War in the political branch, either Rykov needs to be alive or Bukharin needs to be the leader. If both are dead, then it just breaks the tree and stops you from progressing.
The supply constraints during the actual civil war are pretty brutal given that you will have no MILs to really build anything with. It's not really a real war in a conventional sense. It's more about who will bleed through their equipment from attrition first.
The problems and balance of the supply system itself is another issue entirely, but it seems that it might make sense to provide the sides in the Soviet Civil War with a spirit strongly reducing supply consumption for the period of the civil war. HoI4's game mechanics do not allow correct representation of the kind of fighting that happened in Siberia in the Russian Civil War anyway, so it is better to(at least temporarily for the civil war itself) make supply consumption drastically reduced so that the war actually comes down to being resolved by fighting rather than a war of attrition where even the victor is bled dry of equipment from lack of supply.
The supply system works best when you have a war between countries that have had a significant period of preparation and build up... which notably you don't get at all in this Civil War.
Definitely seems that there wasn't much testing done on this. Hopefully our concerns and complaints are taken seriously and addressed.
- 6
- 2
- 1
Here I am still waiting on them to fix the Battle for the Bosporus bugs....
- 5
- 4
As an old HOI player, I know that every DLC is broken when launched (especially with expansion like this big), that's why I never bother playing until at least the hot fix is out.
- 3
- 2
Damn it, I tried Stalin and Bukharin branches. This is complete nonsense: Stalin's branch is meaningless - you just follow Stalin's branch and that's it, no purge madness, no tricks, no balancing, no tricks to save the right people. This is just a minimal level of paranoia and a few purged people which you cannot influence. Complete nonsense. But Bukharin's line that should prevent the Purge but with getting economic debuffs is a complete Stalinist insane Purge. This tree is really a joke.
Last edited:
- 4
- 3
Pearl Harbour is implemented in the game via Coordinated Strike
- 4
- Status