Italy Map a little "silly"

[unmerged(15350)]

Two words... GRAND STRATEGY... as opposed to a tactical sim.

HOI isn't a Grand Strategy game, based on the scale of the units involved (Divisions, single naval units) it is Grand Operational. There is way too much detailed management involved for it to be Grand Strategic. Paradox can call it Grand Strategic, but that doesn't make it so. That is part of the design problems, especially with playablility. Much of the design focuses on the details, when it should be focusing on "Grand" issues.

EuroFront (Columbia Games) is closer to Grand Strategic, and it uses Corps/Armies and hexes; but even it is Grand Operational, as there is a lot of detail involved in combats, and moving of units.

 

[unmerged(15350)]

Are you beta?
It works with some titles, it doesn't work with others. In my personal opinion, hexes are only useful with turn-based games. HoI was real-time though...

HOI is not realtime, it IS turn based. Each turn is one hour. It tries to look like a realtime game, but that is an illusion.

 

[Disturbman]

HOI is not realtime, it IS turn based. Each turn is one hour. It tries to look like a realtime game, but that is an illusion.

yeah sure and my life is turn based to, each turn is one hour it tries to look like a realtime but it's only an illusion since i know that i'm living in a tube where machines took my ennergy to powered themselves.

 

[Rey]

yeah sure and my life is turn based to, each turn is one hour it tries to look like a realtime but it's only an illusion since i know that i'm living in a tube where machines took my ennergy to powered themselves.

BTW, you aren't really posting here... :rofl:

 

[unmerged(16031)]

HOI is not realtime, it IS turn based. Each turn is one hour. It tries to look like a realtime game, but that is an illusion.

To my undrestanding all the players make theirs orders at the same time...

 

[Pkunzipper]

yeah sure and my life is turn based to, each turn is one hour it tries to look like a realtime but it's only an illusion since i know that i'm living in a tube where machines took my ennergy to powered themselves.

ROTFL :rofl:

HOI isn't a Grand Strategy game, based on the scale of the units involved (Divisions, single naval units) it is Grand Operational. There is way too much detailed management involved for it to be Grand Strategic. Paradox can call it Grand Strategic, but that doesn't make it so. That is part of the design problems, especially with playablility. Much of the design focuses on the details, when it should be focusing on "Grand" issues.

EuroFront (Columbia Games) is closer to Grand Strategic, and it uses Corps/Armies and hexes; but even it is Grand Operational, as there is a lot of detail involved in combats, and moving of units.

HOI is not realtime, it IS turn based. Each turn is one hour. It tries to look like a realtime game, but that is an illusion.

Someone is beginning to behave as a troll here....

1st) As Copper Nicus said we aren't here to defend Paradox... But how can you criticize in this manner a game without having played it and after only a bunch of beta screenshots....???

2nd) The difference between operational and strategic is that a starategic game is made up of many operations. Operational has regimental-sized units, and its scale range from a dozen of km to all the russian front, and rarely you will be able to manage your country diplomacy, economy and research efforts...

3rd) About your 1hour turn based statement.... it doesn't need to be commented!
If you pause eevry hour, then you'll have a turn based game, but I don't think your Multiplayer partners will be very happy of this


Bah.... anyone willing to play a PBEM HOI game with me??

 

[unmerged(30686)]

HOI isn't a Grand Strategy game, based on the scale of the units involved (Divisions, single naval units) it is Grand Operational.

Semantics :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

 

[Montemurro]

10 rofl smilies! You must have been laughing quite a lot.

 

[unmerged(30686)]

10 rofl smilies! You must have been laughing quite a lot.

Must have got carried away - only meant to put five

 

[Zanza]

HOI is not realtime, it IS turn based. Each turn is one hour. It tries to look like a realtime game, but that is an illusion.

As it is impossible to use infinitesimal small time spans in computers due to technical restrictions, no game will ever be real time by your definition. As a standard microprocessor is only able to handle mere microseconds, you'll never even come close to real time. You'll always have "turns" inside the game engine. A FPS is also turn based, each frame is a new turn...

 

[Bandit109]

This is hysterical! With each thing he says, he digs himself deeper into a hole. I think he just dug his way to China with that last statement about HOI being turned based :rofl:

Also, as far as HOI not being grand strategic I'll just say this: In tactical games you are Patton, in grand strategic games like HOI you are Rosevelt (Or perhaps some super president that controls everything ).

 

[unmerged(17657)]

HOI isn't a Grand Strategy game, based on the scale of the units involved (Divisions, single naval units) it is Grand Operational. There is way too much detailed management involved for it to be Grand Strategic. Paradox can call it Grand Strategic, but that doesn't make it so. That is part of the design problems, especially with playablility. Much of the design focuses on the details, when it should be focusing on "Grand" issues.

EuroFront (Columbia Games) is closer to Grand Strategic, and it uses Corps/Armies and hexes; but even it is Grand Operational, as there is a lot of detail involved in combats, and moving of units.

Very well said. My sentiments exactly about HOI (and also, about Victoria) when it first came out. While it advertised to be a grand strategic game (and there are elements of it in the game makeup), the scale and management is just wrong. It is hard to imagine Churchill or Stalin being engrossed or investing their time in, for example, in the formation of individual divisions/brigades and in the deployment/order of every single unit on the map. If it is truly a grad strategic game, give an *option* to the player of delegating a significant portion of the tedious management to the AI (like computer generals) to allow the player to really sit back and take in the situation from a grand strategic point of view, or being able to at least focus on the more urgent fronts rather than scrambling back and forth. As it is right now (and HOI2 looks to be a little better, but essentially the same), it still casts the player in all roles. It is quite similar to Victoria, where I often feel like a factory clerk trying to make sure that resources are always present. That is vastly different than being a Bismarck or a Gladstone.

 

[unmerged(17691)]

I think the turn based stuff which look like real time should be called fake timed or whatever

Back to map of Italy, I thought pola would be a different province but, well...

 

[Vethantis]

The point of the game is to have fun, not to conform precisely to the generally accepted definition of a Grand Strategic wargame. The term is probably used because it better fits the game than any other relatively well known label. If that bothers you, then you should go and gripe on a forum or something until you feel better. Er, wait...

If the tedium, rather than the management, is the problem (and I heartily agree that HOI 1 could easily become tedious), well then... why don't you wait and see what's in store with HOI 2 rather than passing judgement based on a few screenshots?

If, on the other hand, your problem is that you don't like the game design, I'd recommend playing a different game rather than telling everyone here how much you hate having to pick brigades and research options. I love having more in-depth options like that, myself, and apparently a lot of other people do too.

 

[unmerged(30686)]

The point of the game is to have fun, not to conform precisely to the generally accepted definition of a Grand Strategic wargame. The term is probably used because it better fits the game than any other relatively well known label. If that bothers you, then you should go and gripe on a forum or something until you feel better. Er, wait...

If the tedium, rather than the management, is the problem (and I heartily agree that HOI 1 could easily become tedious), well then... why don't you wait and see what's in store with HOI 2 rather than passing judgement based on a few screenshots?

If, on the other hand, your problem is that you don't like the game design, I'd recommend playing a different game rather than telling everyone here how much you hate having to pick brigades and research options. I love having more in-depth options like that, myself, and apparently a lot of other people do too.

I couldn't have put it better myself - nicely summed up

 

[Zanza]

It is hard to imagine Churchill or Stalin being engrossed or investing their time in, for example, in the formation of individual divisions/brigades and in the deployment/order of every single unit on the map.

Hitler always did things like that.

to allow the player to really sit back and take in the situation from a grand strategic point of view

Wow, that would be boring for me. What exactly would you do in the game? What level of management would be modeled by a "grand strategy" game? Wouldn't it be enough to make say ten decisions per month on something your aides report you? It's not as if the majority of work of a nations leader would be extremely interesting, reading statistics and new laws, proposals for project etc.

 

[unmerged(34297)]

migth as well make the game AI ws AI and you just watch!!
That would be quit boooooring don't u think? o

 

[unmerged(17657)]

Hitler always did things like that.


Wow, that would be boring for me. What exactly would you do in the game? What level of management would be modeled by a "grand strategy" game? Wouldn't it be enough to make say ten decisions per month on something your aides report you? It's not as if the majority of work of a nations leader would be extremely interesting, reading statistics and new laws, proposals for project etc.

Not exactly true. Hitler, despite his megalomaniacal tendencies, still had to have people (lots of them) assisting him in running the military. He may have loved to push unit markings across the map in his Wolf's Lair, but the truth is that even he could not find the time and energy to micromanage everything. And look at his physical and mental state at the end of the war for trying to do all that--a total wreck.

To your second point, I have already emphasized that it would be nice to have an *option* in the game to have the AI at least watch over a quite front for you. It doesn't have to be good, but at least it would allow you to focus more of your energies on what is more important at hand. I think that most HOI gamers would agree that at some point in the game, especially if they are playing a major power like UK, Germany, or Russia, the micromanagement of hundreds, if not thousands, of divisions, squadrons, and flotialls get overwhelming and the ability to focus on a crucial front is curtailed. Of course, for those who love this kind of management just turn the option off, but having a choice would really be a boon to the game, I think.

I am basically taking the attitude of the above poster who advised to wait for the game to come out and then judge it. Based on what I have seen the game seems to have some features to relieve the massive management in HOI1, but I am not too sure if they are enough to make the game *that* much better. It remains to be seen.

 

[unmerged(14683)]

I am basically taking the attitude of the above poster who advised to wait for the game to come out and then judge it. Based on what I have seen the game seems to have some features to relieve the massive management in HOI1, but I am not too sure if they are enough to make the game *that* much better. It remains to be seen.

Indeed, we have to wait...
Of course each player got his own "micromanagement tolerance". And as a game that is actually "Grand Strategy" (politics, economy, production R&D) mixed with "Grand Operational" (level of combat detail) it will never be so easy in handling like Axis and Allies for example...

 

[vertinox]

I don't have to wait. A few more provinces are unlikely to have a major effect on game play. Other changes might, but a few more provinces won't. As an example (from someone else); as Finland you can't surround and destroy Soviet divisions (as happened historically), there just aren't the provinces to do it, you would need 2-3 times as many provinces between Leningrad and Helsinki; which is 4-9 times as many total provinces.

It is an issue of density. If 20-30+ divisions are getting piled up in provinces, it isn't a WW2 game of manueaver, it is trench warfare.

Once you have that many provinces, you might as well have hexes (or squares).

The encirclement destruction on small scale is (IMO) abstracted through techs and doctrines. Large scale encirclements (IE: 50,000-100,000 your 20 to 30 divisions) can be done but has to be large scale like what happened on the Eastern front or at Dunkirque etc which basically were historically wide area encirclements.

And what I would like point out that WW2 did have large stackups of forces (200,000-500,000 of men) within small areas such as Stalingrad and Kursk. WW2 had plenty of "trench" like warefare as well (just with better gear and techniques).