-
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.
I guess it would be necessary to merge victoria into hearts of iron for that, and that would make a really huge game for now.
Well Pann, you have things to go forward if you can answer the context of some questions you run off to answer.. Perhaps you can convence-me and let me without arguments to revote the ideia of the actual model don't represent all the reality. Your last post you only reeforce the idea of the game expective context. But not explain the issues wich the game let appen and aren't the expectation of the game design. This was my last post porpose.
If you read and resume our discuss start in defending each actual model and sugestion model. When start to miss some answers to fit the some question, this shows some representation to explain and ideias wrong. At this the point was where I break and try to see the biggest subject, the actual representation design model and the representation we can imagine. Maybe If you can answer the question that were missed and show me sustained arguments, you can prove that I'm wrong, I belive that I can accept it, not be stubborn when they appear. I'm only be stuborn when the issue is rounded with other context.
I tryed also to show you, that you can't argue one representation when the game system crash that representation from other full side. Actualy you realised when you said "I was actually only discussing how you use existing IC". So to me the representation has to fit all the game player oportunity managment, and I only accept when is totaly explained.
I'm not stupid to simply see one way, I tried to have a nice disccuss touching all game interface oportunities vs the real word facts. So when the title was realistic economy system I think in all aspects not with the porpose of create a big economy game, but a realistic one.
I will love to ask you, with your knowledge, If you can think all the possibilities of the game which not represent the realism, and please don't fix to the idea of defending the actual model. I've done that when I said "Well I totaly know what you are saying. So in my suggestion obviously the production consumes goods where refesented by a modifier. Also supplies has to consume goods."
Exacly.. I agree in don't create a big model, only a small but which end with the irrealistic and unbalnce oportunities. For me one warfare isn't made by only combat in militar context, is also bomb strategic economic points which end with the coutry capacity to sustain a war. One fast example a few examples of adultered militar startegy in the game:
- you can construct IC in north pole or remote places, however you don't have population/conditions to feet the IC require in that places, so isn't a reality. In military this will do much diference because you secure your production center far way your combat line. So the economy system also affects the warfare strategy.
I aggree that don't has to be an extendel model, with much separations, resources, population, grows, and factor that kill the game warfare context. But I defend one smal sustended model wich give some balance and reality to the game context. Also, I'm not saying my suggestion is the best. Only one Ideia to upgrade.But I suspect better ideias will appear with people as you with your experience.
I hope this is not the finishe of the discuss but jast the new start...hehehehe
NOOO...This will make the much confused and dificult to play, and only give many factors to get no new players. I defend one minimal context upgrade, as FTM is add more resources, may make a smal reajust to the economy model...However I have many people in my comunities talking about it, But is not my ideia, or my love game expective.
I expect a small economy improve to let the game evolve to better war logistic aspects.
Last edited:
Well king.. Is good to know this post have your atention..
I didn't undestand if your "YES" is about the last post or the Topict title question..
If i can help with anything, please tell me..meatime I will wait for the answer of Pann..
Great job and have fun..
After read the diaries.. was showing the modfication in the economy model will be unlikle be change.
The model will keep irrealist and may the unbalace situation still go on.. =(
You end my expectives to FTM.. I hope to have new expectives to other releases..
I will take the liberty of ask you one thing.
how can I use the "IC_TO_supplies" and "IC_TO_consumer_goods" to make it 0. It's not working.. any Ideia?
Thanks
MavGaz,
The thing is that I truly do not understand what part of your initial question/idea/thought I have not answered.
I also think that the initial question is wrong since HoI does not have an economical model. It has an "allocation of ability to produce goods and services for different purpouses".
But, if you want me to explain anything in specific feel free to specify what.
The thing is that I truly do not understand what part of your initial question/idea/thought I have not answered.
I also think that the initial question is wrong since HoI does not have an economical model. It has an "allocation of ability to produce goods and services for different purpouses".
But, if you want me to explain anything in specific feel free to specify what.
I set IC_TO_CONSUMER_GOODS to 0 and now I produce no consumer goods meaning my daily dissent thingy is red despite having 100% of the slider in consumder goods.
Well I will love to listening your opinion on 5 question you don't answered before.
1 - The supplies industry are a specified kind of industry, well yes, are many pieces from the same has the producind sector, but the stuture of building Armors and buildings supplies are much difrent. So how you explain the game interface let be possible in one day all the production is for supplies (meaning the industry is from one kind) and then in the other day you can pull the all industry to do Armors (diferent type of industry network). Also if this represent are pieces/goods, the goods types are diferent.
2 - If you say the consumer goods can represent people effort, this will make confit with the construction of IC, that will mean the construction of IC will grow population in one year. This don't make much sense. Do you still think the representation of CG is people effort?
3 - If you defend the people effort representation in the bars. As the question 1, how you explain the movement of the effort for the difrent kinds of production.
4 - You agree the time delay is realistic but not represented? However you thing is not important.
5 - I aggree with you about the stock of civil goods in war should be minimal.. However if the CG represent goods and effort, in your view, in the game how you explain the respresentation of goods (specialy) and effort when the player put all to CG, when remove dissent and also when you have the dissent in 0%.
6 - ... I will do others, later..
Last edited:
i think the answer to all questions is simple: "it is just a game and not a scientific economy simulation"!
The answer to this is no. Hearts of Iron 3 is at its core a war game not an economic simulator. I have, from the earliest developer diary, always maintained this. The economic part of the game is there purely to support the war game and not a game in itself. As such we have absolutely not plans to change the economic model radically at all. It, in general, performs the design goal we set for it.
Well was crashing only with the Supplies..Consumer goods are working..But the description tab is wrong.. Was the aspect which give thought wasn't working.
Any idea for supplies? and how to fix the tab.. or isn't possible?
thanks for your support King.
You're doing a divide by 0 which is causing the crash. IC_TO_SUPPLIES must be greater than 0.
King, this discussion is with Pann from the reality of the model..where I defend the game is not totaly realist.
I aggree with you.. the core of the game must still war game.. however, the miss of a realistic TINY/MICRO/SINTECTIC economy model is the responsable for the lact of balance between countries. So my desire is improve the model with the objective of give more warfare strategy to the game. Creating more important points to hit, bomb and conquer..
So the objective isn't not create a big economy model.. but yes improve the sintectic one.. I'm trying to create by MOD, using the actual model, and only using the two modiffiers I ask you help.. the only thing may be also improve was the add of one resource that I can't moddify.
I know the core the game and I'm one defender of it..but please try to see as an improvement and no an desire of difrente game..
I aggree with you.. the core of the game must still war game.. however, the miss of a realistic TINY/MICRO/SINTECTIC economy model is the responsable for the lact of balance between countries. So my desire is improve the model with the objective of give more warfare strategy to the game. Creating more important points to hit, bomb and conquer..
So the objective isn't not create a big economy model.. but yes improve the sintectic one.. I'm trying to create by MOD, using the actual model, and only using the two modiffiers I ask you help.. the only thing may be also improve was the add of one resource that I can't moddify.
I know the core the game and I'm one defender of it..but please try to see as an improvement and no an desire of difrente game..
Yes, it is what i suppose so..But I will do it with a tiny value.. it will simulate also.
This is not really the discussion we are having. Essentially we a finite ammount of resources we can devote to game development. We have to make choices on where we will focus because at the end of the day we could always do more. This is true of any game company. Thus we make design decisions based on the type of game we want to make and work accordingly. We deliberately made the economic model simple, in the full knowledge that simplifications would inject unrealism into the model, so we could focus our development attention on things like combat and AI. It was the choice we made, I felt it right then and still feel it is right now.
That is understandable!
Maybe it would be possible if you have more time(like you mentioned in the last Vid-DD) to improve this IC-Modell a "bit".
I would also love to see a "bit" more differentation and detail to the econnomy.
F.e. what other already mentioned with producing heavy stuff and light weapons. Ships etc.. It would be really fun if it would make a difference.
And I'm sure you could implement a smart solution that builds up the existing system.
Kind regards,
Chromos
Yes, King I totaly believed in you..
I recognise I'm a little complicated mind..and lact of ideia of "kip it simple"...hhehehe..This because I'm a very experient player in Hoi3.
I start to find the many of the complicated(to don't say problems) in the game:
the unbalance
AI inefective
emptyness of the rules.
But I believe your work is more to inovate the game options and interface than preocupation with reality.
Maybe was a strategy to get the modders working in the reality.
I'm a experience and micro managemenet player and I'm thinking in one good improve on building and segmentation(not extend, or addicional) of the economy will create a very intresting strategy game play..but this will create chalenges in AI also.. so I'm afraid you are right..
However I will think in a good sugestion to make tou you.. if you are intresting.. thinking in all parameters to the game design.
I want to send the congratulations for the work you and Paradox team have done.
King Regards.