I have to say that I like startpoint of the nations, but after that I like to see how they change. For me there is little point in just replaying history, so I use mods to make the game more interesting and challenging (for me).
-
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.
Ok, I will stop it here as you desire.
Concerning the last part, I do not have a mod, I have suggestions about the beta LUA files that were presented for public
comments and suggestions in a thread. I originally published my comments and suggestions in that same thread and
I was forced by the Moderator Lothos to delete them and to open a new thread
somewhere else, that's the only reason why my comments are where they are in a separate thread.
in case you are wondering I am testing out your lua files, to see how they perform and might include parts of it in a future patch if works ok (too early to tell though)
Technically, the reorganization to binary divisions did not take place until after the war in Ethiopia. So, Italy should start the game on January 1, 1936 with triangular divisions like everyone else. Also, once the deficiency of the binary division showed itself, a CCNN legion was added to each division to return to triangular divisions.
It does seem that the game has made decisions in the Italian OOB designed to cause it to perform historically, and is that really a bad thing? However, by doing it with a messed up OOB, they made it too easy for a player to fix the mistakes and perform much better than history.
In real life, Italy was in a horrible position. It had no natural resources to speak of. It relied almost entirely on trade with the allies for the resources needed to run its industries. It had no money, having wasted much of it developing colonies that added nothing to its economy. (The oil in Lybia was yet to be discovered). It had a large population, but due to the geography, they had largely not widely adopted the automobile. (There was only 1 vehicle for every 100 Italians, whereas there was 1 vehicle for every 4 or 5 Americans)
That being said, the Italian army was very advanced doctrinarily. They developed their version of mechanized manuever warfare The War of Rapid Decision in 1938 -- based upon their experiences in Spain and Ethiopia, and were way ahead of the other majors in supplying their army with tanks, but this too seemed to hamper them as old mid-thirties tanks were plentiful in the Italian army while the other majors scrambled to catch up with better more modern designs.
So, in the game, the Italian army was nerfed as opposed to the Italian economy. If the economy matched reality, it would be evident to any Italian player that the only realistic option would be to defend the Alps with Alpini and wait for it all to be over. But what fun would that be?
I am happy that you are open to comments from me and others. I will do my best to help make this first-class game better.
By the way I have just updated my suggestions with a new version. I very much hope you can get
something useful from them.
And mine is just : go multiplayer !
That's a totally different experience, with a lot of fun.
If you can find the good partners, no need to worry too much about the AI, nothing is above a good old human brain.
Unless you consider breaking free from the domination of a fascist dictator a success
Comitato di Liberazione Nazionale
If this is the case why do we control production/research/diplomacy, etc? If PI is so bent on historicity, the only thing the players should be allowed to do is shuffle units on the map; units btw, that should only become available when the great god History allows.
OT: The Italians at start are historical. The AI is programmed to make "real" and effective divisions from that point forward. If you give AI Italy even another 6-months before joining the war it will generally toss the UK out of N. Africa and the Mid-East.
Multiplayer in HoI3 could be a much experience though, if more focus had been given to it when the game was developed.
Right now we have tedious long lists of houserules, frustrating matchmaking forcing players to organize over the forum, and a game that require 40 or more hours to play a single war if you want to go slow speed as soon as one of the players is at war.
Even HoI2 had better multiplayer support where you for example could see who has paused and where games are quicker (due lower level of detail).
Some features that should be really nice:
# Hot joining from lobby into ongoing games
# Ability to chat between people in lobby, staging room and ingame
# Gamebalance and fixes more focused towards multiplayer problems.
# Perhaps a simplified map that just contains areas instead (HoI2 style for quicker games).
HOI series has always been very SP-oriented. However, excluding technical issues, many of the other problems that the players experience in MP are just the result of poor balance of certain features/units/whatever. They are simply more accentuated by the fact that the players try very hard to win in MP and min-maxing is the standard procedure.
Now, just to give my two cents here, but most of the people here do know that Italy mostly sucked in WWII, right? Like, sure there were a few brave portions of the army; but as a whole, the Regio Escerito was incompetent as all hell. In my opinion, Italy does too well in most of my games anyway, somehow managing to get to Suez and Palestine (!) all by it's lonesome! Though that could just be blind luck on my A.I's part.
Yes, Italy's performance in WWII was less than stellar, but in my games the Italian AI doesn't get past Alexandria unless I intervene. I don't want Italy to be a powerhouse, but it would be nice if they sucked less.
I think that the bigger problem is the fact that the German AI NEVER sends DAK to North Africa. Therefore, when the Italians start getting pushed back, they will not have a chance to recover and we rarely see the back-and-forth progress that characterised this theatre. Things are generally resolved too quickly in NA - the Axis either conquers Suez easily or gets pushed back to Libya, where their units surrender.
Even when the player is playing as Germany, he has no way of sending units to NA except by giving them as EXP forces to Italy and hoping that the AI will transfer them to NA or doing sth strange like sending TPs to the Med before the war begins.
Even when the player is playing as Germany, he has no way of sending units to NA except by giving them as EXP forces to Italy and hoping that the AI will transfer them to NA or doing sth strange like sending TPs to the Med before the war begins.
This. If I wanted to see what happened in real life I would read a book. Strategy Game =/= Simulation Game
Thanks for the response dark but I find your statement a little disturbing. The game is no fun if the allies/comintern always win like they did in real life. Why would I play a game in which the devs intentionally unbalance the game to appease a vocal minority? I like single player, however your development team has made it impossible to play a non-major axis power with how poor the German/Italy AI is. I mean hell its not even like an Allied victory was a forgone conclusion in WW2.
I'm sure Italy IRL would like that as well. That doesn't mean it will happen though.
I only play the HOI series on multiplayer, and I know a lot of players doing the same. I've played 4 or 5 years of epic multiplayer campaigns of HOI2, even if the game wasn't technically as good as HOI3 (patched, of course).
HOI3 is really stable on multi, provided that you have the good comp and connection as host.
About balance matters, you have mods, their aim are to improve this aspect of the game among others.
Good for you, but statistics tell us sth different. IIRC only 5-10% of players play MP in HOI3. If you take that into account, you will understand why the prime focus is on SP experience.
Yet every MP game has tons of house rules and sometimes even that is not enough to solve some balance issues.
Perhaps if you didn't quote me so selectively you'd see I was talking about historical startpoints and not make a totally irrelevant complaint?