Minors and technology ahead of time, are they having the desired effect in HoI4?

[Happy Trigger]

It's common to people ask how to counter submarines 3 and 4, or how to defend against ahead of time tanks using infantry. Normally between majors, because they have a lot of fronts to cover, they end with similiar tech trees, which garantee them ways to defend against each other. On the other hand, minor are being able to get their hands in technology ahead of time by many years, completely changing the balance of the war.

How many times Manchuko and Australia, as example, get their hands in submarines 3 or 4 and severely hurted their enemies? Or how many times, South Africa and a Axis minor, get their hands in heavy-tanks 2 befores the soviets and the germans did? Isn't odd that these minor countries, that weren't able to develop/produce that kind of technology by their on in WW2, being more effective and sometimes decisive than majors in the game?

Not only that, but their lack of war experience, for sure, would impact in their development. So, why are they being able to get high-end technology without facing any of the necessities that the war brought, like it did to the majors?

I had done a suggestion a few days ago, but i would like to hear your thoughts.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/insert-a-limit-research-speed-after-1939-to-simulate-the-development-of-new-tech-under-peace-and-war-times.1389846/

 

[SophieX]

Isn't that abstractly implemented by the numbers of starting research-slots ( majors mostly 4, minors mostly 2 ) ?

Research - Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki

hoi4.paradoxwikis.com

 

[Eh up me duck]

The HOI 4 research system is in major need of an overhaul precisely due to the reasons you mention.

I understand that minors should be able to get ahistorical results - it would be a pretty boring game otherwise. But the idea that the only difference between the USA's nuclear program and Romania's is a 100 day research speed bonus is clearly absurd.

 

[bitmode]

Isn't that abstractly implemented by the numbers of starting research-slots ( majors mostly 4, minors mostly 2 ) ?

Research - Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki

hoi4.paradoxwikis.com

That is only a 50% penalty. Almost all countries increase their research slots by one even before the war starts, reducing the penalty to 40%. Many of the larger minors start with three slots and the Commonwealth countries have close to an effective extra slot due to tech sharing bonuses. At the same time, minors can ignore some technology branches due to their strategic, economic or resource situation.
You'll be hard-pressed to find instances where a minor would legitimately need to buy a license from a major. They are swimming in research output compared to (already very generous) industrial output.

The HOI 4 research system is in major need of an overhaul precisely due to the reasons you mention.

I understand that minors should be able to get ahistorical results - it would be a pretty boring game otherwise.

I agree and as I've said in previous threads about the topic: a minor being played by a human is the exception. Even if the player does play a minor, there are dozens of AI minor countries in the game. By default, minors should be balanced to be objects, not subjects. Then there can still be special game rules or settings to make them more powerful in the hands of a player in singleplayer.

But the idea that the only difference between the USA's nuclear program and Romania's is a 100 day research speed bonus is clearly absurd.

You forgot the Romanian focus for +25% construction speed on nuclear reactors...

 

[Happy Trigger]

Isn't that abstractly implemented by the numbers of starting research-slots ( majors mostly 4, minors mostly 2 ) ?

Research - Hearts of Iron 4 Wiki

hoi4.paradoxwikis.com

Minors can, and sometimes has the luxury, to research a single object the entire match. Like New Zeland researching and producing submarines. While Japan is still research and producing 1936 ships, and has only half of the doctrine researched, New Zeland can produce a large number of submarines 3 and 4 and finish the Trade Interdiction doctrine before Japan declare war on the Allies. Effective destroying all japanese convoys in the region and literally winning the war without send one infantry unit to the front.

 

[Farquarsen]

Another absurd ability is a fourth world country like Sudan without a modern university can research the electronics tech tree. IRL, those countries could and did buy radios from the majors, but not licensed. Ludicrous to think a minor could manufacture and license a mechanical calculating key punch machine. And Radar, the very secret 'weapon' Britain used against the Luftwaffe? Or the V2?

 

[Riekopo]

To make it more fun for the people who want to play Minors. But personally I don't like it and would maybe like an option to make them more realistically limited. The one thing I think should be looked into though is this: in real life there was a lot of military hardware donations and licensing going on. But that doesn't really seem to happen in a historical way in the game.

I think there should maybe be an option to tell the AI to do its historical lend lease and licensing. Or make them Focuses and Decisions.

 

[Spelaren]

It'd be so boring if the minor tree's got rebalanced, it'd be less sandbox and just a boring slog.

 

[Col.Klink]

It's common to people ask how to counter submarines 3 and 4, or how to defend against ahead of time tanks using infantry. Normally between majors, because they have a lot of fronts to cover, they end with similiar tech trees, which garantee them ways to defend against each other. On the other hand, minor are being able to get their hands in technology ahead of time by many years, completely changing the balance of the war.

How many times Manchuko and Australia, as example, get their hands in submarines 3 or 4 and severely hurted their enemies? Or how many times, South Africa and a Axis minor, get their hands in heavy-tanks 2 befores the soviets and the germans did? Isn't odd that these minor countries, that weren't able to develop/produce that kind of technology by their on in WW2, being more effective and sometimes decisive than majors in the game?

Not only that, but their lack of war experience, for sure, would impact in their development. So, why are they being able to get high-end technology without facing any of the necessities that the war brought, like it did to the majors?

I had done a suggestion a few days ago, but i would like to hear your thoughts.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/insert-a-limit-research-speed-after-1939-to-simulate-the-development-of-new-tech-under-peace-and-war-times.1389846/

At first my reaction was essentially in agreement that some sort of change could be done in game as far as complicated equipment like tanks and submarines are concerned, then I remembered a real world example that sort of disproves all this, the Australian Sentinel Tank: Australia lacked even an auto industry but because they became convinced that the UK nor the USA would never actually send them some tanks they rolled up their sleeves and designed a surprisingly decent medium tank, they didn't have any expert help from their allies either. The funny thing is that they basically figured out the hard part which is the main body of the tank, transmission ect but because they didn't have an auto industry they really lacked an engine that could drive it. So they just bought Cadillac V8 engines off the international market, connected 3 of them together and jammed it in!

What this really demonstrates is that a minor with a concerted national effort COULD produce something as difficult to design and manufacture as a tank! The manufacture part is a key point, because people have brought up in the past that say Chinese factions shouldn't even be able to make tanks because their industry just was lacking the skill. Well, in this alt history world you could conceivably with enough focused national effort get even a minor nation with low industrialization to the point that it could make a tank, or weld together a U-Boat.

 

[sekelsenmat]

At first my reaction was essentially in agreement that some sort of change could be done in game as far as complicated equipment like tanks and submarines are concerned, then I remembered a real world example that sort of disproves all this, the Australian Sentinel Tank: Australia lacked even an auto industry but because they became convinced that the UK nor the USA would never actually send them some tanks they rolled up their sleeves and designed a surprisingly decent medium tank, they didn't have any expert help from their allies either. The funny thing is that they basically figured out the hard part which is the main body of the tank, transmission ect but because they didn't have an auto industry they really lacked an engine that could drive it. So they just bought Cadillac V8 engines off the international market, connected 3 of them together and jammed it in!

What this really demonstrates is that a minor with a concerted national effort COULD produce something as difficult to design and manufacture as a tank! The manufacture part is a key point, because people have brought up in the past that say Chinese factions shouldn't even be able to make tanks because their industry just was lacking the skill. Well, in this alt history world you could conceivably with enough focused national effort get even a minor nation with low industrialization to the point that it could make a tank, or weld together a U-Boat.

I'll disagree, the engine is the key part and the most complex/hardest one. Australia wouldn't be able to buy them if it wasn't in the allies, so it wasn't really a totally independent design.

In reality china built zero tanks during ww2, and nearly zero airplanes. Even the rifles were licensed Mauser's

We should have an option to curb minor research. Maybe a simple -25% debuff would be enough?

 

[Col.Klink]

I'll disagree, the engine is the key part and the most complex/hardest one. Australia wouldn't be able to buy them if it wasn't in the allies, so it wasn't really a totally independent design.

In reality china built zero tanks during ww2, and nearly zero airplanes. Even the rifles were licensed Mauser's

We should have an option to curb minor research. Maybe a simple -25% debuff would be enough?

Originally I was going to suggest classes of research with difficulty based upon that. Like China *did* license a lot of rifles, it also was one of the first countries to develop a self loading rifle that actually worked, the General Liu rifle in 1916. The only reason why the rifle wasn't manufactured literally was because the designer suffered a stroke and died so even though the rifle had been adopted, even though the machinery was there it just went nowhere after that.

The board that reviewed the rifle was confident that China would with further effort be able to refine steel to the appropriate standard for the rifle (not have to import it) and make ammunition of consistent quality. Considering that the imperial government utterly collapsed in 1911 and the reviewing governing body was the Kuomintang army (Think Cheng Kai Shek in HOI4. The "China" faction in game) this is a very impressive feat!

But making car engines? That's another level there involving at least some very very basic electronics ect.

Point is that there is no reason why a minor shouldn't be able to be advanced in small arms technology.

 

[Federkiel]

I'll disagree, the engine is the key part and the most complex/hardest one. Australia wouldn't be able to buy them if it wasn't in the allies, so it wasn't really a totally independent design.

In reality china built zero tanks during ww2, and nearly zero airplanes. Even the rifles were licensed Mauser's

We should have an option to curb minor research. Maybe a simple -25% debuff would be enough?

The assessment that few minors developed significant designs of war materiel in comparison to the majors during ww2 is correct in real history.

But after thinking it over, i am very sceptical on dumbing any country down. As an example: Since JAP has been moronized (having a static research malus one cannot get rid off in historical focus play), i really cannot bring myself to play them anymore. Before their focus tree has been reduced to near uselessness, playing Japan was interesting and had still had it's challenges (i don't speak of those silly 1937 invasions of the USA employed by powewrgamers). Japan had and still has to spread it's research capabilities to all imagineable branches but now the game tells us:

Japanese are below average intelligence. More stupid than others...
British and Americans are highly intelligent and mentally superior regarding all fields of science - even more after one or two sole scientists have fled from a fascist country into them.

I find that ridiculous and even appalling.
To find a better balance in terms of power in the game, no nation should be labelled as being permanently inferior to others. Therefore research capabilities can be better reflected by the number of research slots and not bonuses / maluses to people.

 

[Col.Klink]

The assessment that few minors developed significant designs of war materiel in comparison to the majors during ww2 is correct in real history.

But after thinking it over, i am very sceptical on dumbing any country down. As an example: Since JAP has been moronized (having a static research malus one cannot get rid off in historical focus play), i really cannot bring myself to play them anymore. Before their focus tree has been reduced to near uselessness, playing Japan was interesting and had still had it's challenges (i don't speak of those silly 1937 invasions of the USA employed by powewrgamers). Japan had and still has to spread it's research capabilities to all imagineable branches but now the game tells us:

Japanese are below average intelligence. More stupid than others...
British and Americans are highly intelligent and mentally superior regarding all fields of science - even more after one or two sole scientists have fled from a fascist country into them.

I find that ridiculous and even appalling.
To find a better balance in terms of power in the game, no nation should be labelled as being permanently inferior to others. Therefore research capabilities can be better reflected by the number of research slots and not bonuses / maluses to people.

Didn't Japan have really some of the best naval tech in the world in 1941?

They certainly had the best heavy machinegun in the war. More accurate than the others and they issued them with 4-6 magnification optics standard. Something other armies haven't done till modern days. Lol, I actually don't remember ever using the optics mounts we had for our m2s in my unit....

I haven't played Japan much so I hadn't realized that this was a problem, and that CLEARLY is a problem. When Manchukuo has a research advantage over freaking Japan, that is a serious serious serious damned problem!

 

[Federkiel]

Didn't Japan have really some of the best naval tech in the world in 1941?

They certainly had the best heavy machinegun in the war. More accurate than the others and they issued them with 4-6 magnification optics standard. Something other armies haven't done till modern days. Lol, I actually don't remember ever using the optics mounts we had for our m2s in my unit....

I haven't played Japan much so I hadn't realized that this was a problem, and that CLEARLY is a problem. When Manchukuo has a research advantage over freaking Japan, that is a serious serious serious damned problem!

Yes, they had quite a few innovative designs. In the long run they could not keep up with the USA who also profitted from tech sharing in the Allies faction (this and a sixth research slot add a lot to their comfortable starting situation) but putting the USA and UK 21% to 25% research speed above JAP when it comes to air research really is annoying. Only with a specific focus choice this can later be reduced to 11% to 15% disadvantage in air research.

A general -5% malus regarding all fields of research in comparison to all regular countries cannot be removed in historical focus play. Therefore even Bhutan and Liberia can develop the A-Bomb quicker than Japan. This is true for every other field of science as well...


EDIT: Got confused by the numbers of a multitude of modifiers and edited it for correction after checking HoI-wiki again. Hopefully i got it right now.

 

[sekelsenmat]

Yes, they had quite a few innovative designs. In the long run they could not keep up with the USA who also profitted from tech sharing in the Allies faction (this and a sixth research slot add a lot to their comfortable starting situation) but putting the USA and UK 21% to 25% research speed above JAP when it comes to air research really is annoying. Only with a specific focus choice this can later be reduced to 11% to 15% disadvantage in air research.

Maybe it is annoying, but it is historically correct: Japan did fail completely to develop better engines in late war and as a consequence better planes.

The only thing wrong is that minors should be even more strongly debuffed then Japan, since obviously Japan was superior technologically to any minor.

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Philippine_Sea

 

[Col.Klink]

Maybe it is annoying, but it is historically correct: Japan did fail completely to develop better engines in late war and as a consequence better planes.

The only thing wrong is that minors should be even more strongly debuffed then Japan, since obviously Japan was superior technologically to any minor.

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Philippine_Sea

Yeah.... Arguing that they didn't isn't the same as they couldn't. You can make arguments about the early war victories creating complacency in Japan while pushing the USA to replace it's shit early war aircraft, the sheer demand for the aircraft later creating a stressor on producing what they did have, the american bombing campaign destroying the capacity to not only manufacture but innovate, the fact that Japan couldn't replace the fighter pilots it lost anyway instead making the kamikaze missions literally the most effective operation they could do due to a flying skills gap, the fact that America was systematically cutting Japan off from the resources that it would need to fly aircraft much less manufacture them....

But in the end your telling me the country that developed a submersible aircraft carrier, a technology that the USA found so advanced that they destroyed it for fear of the Russians learning of it couldn't develop a better aircraft engine? That was beyond their ability? And yes, btw the USA stole the Japanese submersible carrier technology, combined it with German rocket science and atomic bombs and created the mega weapon that became the cornerstone of the MAD doctrine.

Japan was in fact capable of incredible feats of mechanical engineering. Developing a better aircraft engine was not beyond them.

Yes, they had quite a few innovative designs. In the long run they could not keep up with the USA who also profitted from tech sharing in the Allies faction (this and a sixth research slot add a lot to their comfortable starting situation) but putting the USA and UK 21% to 25% research speed above JAP when it comes to air research really is annoying. Only with a specific focus choice this can later be reduced to 11% to 15% disadvantage in air research.

A general -5% malus regarding all fields of research in comparison to all regular countries cannot be removed in historical focus play. Therefore even Bhutan and Liberia can develop the A-Bomb quicker than Japan. This is true for every other field of science as well...


EDIT: Got confused by the numbers of a multitude of modifiers and edited it for correction after checking HoI-wiki again. Hopefully i got it right now.

Yeah I just looked at the debuff. The "militerism" debuff makes no sense. By that sense (military dumb, civilians smart or whatever) then Germany, Italy and the Soviet Union all should have similar penalties...

 

[Happy Trigger]

I don't know if you guys had read my suggestion in the link, and i believe too that the Sentinel tank is a good show of dedicated research indeed, even shared technology (because of the engines). But my point is that the Australia had divisions fighting the war in Africa almost at the start of it. So, you could argued that they had a demand because of war to develop new armaments, that wouldn't exist otherwise. That is my idea:

"I would like to suggest that all technology after 1939 have its research bonuses reduced to a total of 50%, that could be increased to 100% using army/airforce/navy experience (something between 50~100 exp). -> Applicable only to technology, for all nations.

That would emulated both, the needs of the battlefield and the difficulties to develop new things. That would create a more realistic environment at the start of the war, with people more concerned with their 1939 tanks and 1936 planes. Upgrades would be as much important than rushing the developement of the next generation, and the old tech would stop being treated like garbage after a new generation went in production.

Even doctrines would get a more important role than now. Players would have to choose between an upgrade, develop a new tech, or expend points to improve their doctrines."

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/insert-a-limit-research-speed-after-1939-to-simulate-the-development-of-new-tech-under-peace-and-war-times.1389846/

 

[Col.Klink]

I don't know if you guys had read my suggestion in the link, and i believe too that the Sentinel tank is a good show of dedicated research indeed, even shared technology (because of the engines). But my point is that the Australia had divisions fighting the war in Africa almost at the start of it. So, you could argued that they had a demand because of war to develop new armaments, that wouldn't exist otherwise. That is my idea:

"I would like to suggest that all technology after 1939 have its research bonuses reduced to a total of 50%, that could be increased to 100% using army/airforce/navy experience (something between 50~100 exp). -> Applicable only to technology, for all nations.

That would emulated both, the needs of the battlefield and the difficulties to develop new things. That would create a more realistic environment at the start of the war, with people more concerned with their 1939 tanks and 1936 planes. Upgrades would be as much important than rushing the developement of the next generation, and the old tech would stop being treated like garbage after a new generation went in production.

Even doctrines would get a more important role than now. Players would have to choose between an upgrade, develop a new tech, or expend points to improve their doctrines."

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/insert-a-limit-research-speed-after-1939-to-simulate-the-development-of-new-tech-under-peace-and-war-times.1389846/

If I understand what your trying to achieve I actually like the motivation there. At current everyone with full research slots generally develops the timeframe appropriate weapon and so the technology development just sort of.... cancels.

but going for a system which experience is a major motivating factor and countries really are more about targeting the development of technologies to solve problems that they are actually dealing with is much more interesting and probably would improve the gameplay a great deal.

 

[Gort11]

I've often thought it was a bit dumb that minors with a couple of tech slots can be cutting edge on stuff like fighter planes and infantry equipment.

I'd like to see technologies affect stuff beyond their own unit type. For example, researching engineer companies could give a small bonus to movement and combat in rough terrain, even if the unit in question has no attached engineer company, representing that while the unit may not have specialist engineers, the capabilities do exist somewhere. (Obviously attaching a company would give a much larger bonus) This would reward nations with lots of research slots a bit more.

The biggest offenders are aircraft and ships, though - I just have a cutting-edge fighter, CAS plane and light cruiser, and that's it.

 

[Happy Trigger]

If I understand what your trying to achieve I actually like the motivation there. At current everyone with full research slots generally develops the timeframe appropriate weapon and so the technology development just sort of.... cancels.

but going for a system which experience is a major motivating factor and countries really are more about targeting the development of technologies to solve problems that they are actually dealing with is much more interesting and probably would improve the gameplay a great deal.

You get it perfectly right. I think it's possible to have a lot of improvement using things that are already on the game.