One disappointing thing about HOI compared to CK,EU,VIC

[Czert]

yeah, lets hope for cold war dlc, mayby even some pre.war (1933 or mayby even earlier start date) will be very nice. who will not love to ready for war ethipia to be able to kick italian asses ?
and full agree, will love to see some results of ending that great war (especialy if you lose it as gemany and will be splited, or mayby even just tranformed as whole to democratic/commie goverment).

 

[Czert]

Dan 'Podcat' Lindt actually hinted that an korea dlc could be possible (NOT that they are making one, to be clear), but that an cold war dlc would require different mechanics which would drift into victoria territory. It could be possible that we would see one for korea for example, but there are always plenty of mods that extend the timeline of the game.There is plenty of replayability aswell and because if that i am fine with it if i end the campaign in 1948 or 1950 for example. The game doesnt have an strict enddate overall.

The tech trees can easiely be expanded into the 2000's if someone puts the effort in, but adding more than 10 years doesnt really seem to be worth it since, as you said, its likely that most people have painted alot of the world in their color by that time already anyway, unless you behave of course and dont choose total annexation on everyone and force rather generous demands on your enemy, like only taking elssas-lothringen and the Champagne from France and the former german colonies in africa. Without puppeting them of course.

It is an different story if you played one of the minors of course, that doesnt really have the capacity to basicly do a world conquest in 12 years for example. Maybe you want to play china and controll asia yourself or brazil and want to conquer south america, etc.

well, i dont necesary see problem in sumating korean/vietnam war, after all what was difference in germans sending legion condor to spain in 36 and un sending troops to korea in 50 ? or to us intervention in vietnam ? after all us didnt have posibility to send here thier whole army.

 

[CHRIS3169]

Just me. I don't really think a cold war game would be that fun with the clausewitz engine. Small, localized conflicts (with some exceptions), spying, economy, pushing and whooing 3rd world countries. That kind of thing needs a different kind of engine imo.

Anyone else immediately imagine Ric flair whoo chopping Africans after reading that?

 

[CHRIS3169]

Small conflicts like Korea and Vietnam would definitely be tough since there's no room to maneuver, especially in the middle of Vietnam where there's one tiny strip of land connecting North and South. It'd pretty much come down to having all your troops in 1 or 2 provinces. Korea wouldn't be so bad if China jumps in before North Korea falls and actually expands the war into Chinese territory.

 

[Price21]

Maybe if they just made the provinces smaller in Korea and Vietnam as well as making them very hard to traverse by increasing attrition through bad infrastructure and too make it even harder for the proxy wars to end quickly, make it so powers receive penalties (like public backlash) if they send too many men by limiting it so you can only send battalions of troops to help in the proxy wars.

 

[Number 7]

Maybe if they just made the provinces smaller in Korea and Vietnam as well as making them very hard to traverse by increasing attrition through bad infrastructure and too make it even harder for the proxy wars to end quickly, make it so powers receive penalties (like public backlash) if they send too many men by limiting it so you can only send battalions of troops to help in the proxy wars.

it still begs the question of: Why?

Why put a several decade extension into a hearts of iron game where the mechanics have to be massively restricted just to keep some arbitrary proxy conflicts that wont have any real impact on your country except korea / vietnam is going to be a puppet of the winner and if you're the loser you wont be able to buy resources from them. Although both the USSR and USA are net suppliers to the resource market and really dont need any other country to sell to them in the first place in hoi mechanics...

i don't get the fetish people have for suggesting shoe-horning in the cold war into hearts of iron. hearts of iron 4 is not east vs west. a cold war game deserves its own mechanics that make sense, and the mechanics of hearts of iron don't support any kind of compelling proxy war / cold war situation.

hearts of iron should stay focused on the final days of hot wars and world war 2. Not because a cold war game wouldnt be fun, but because a hearts of iron 4 cold war wouldn't make any sense from a game mechanics perspective

(Not to mention the fact that manpower, factory numbers, technologies, equipment stockpiles will all go crazy when you increase the scope of the game several-fold)

 

[Price21]

it still begs the question of: Why?

Why put a several decade extension into a hearts of iron game where the mechanics have to be massively restricted just to keep some arbitrary proxy conflicts that wont have any real impact on your country except korea / vietnam is going to be a puppet of the winner and if you're the loser you wont be able to buy resources from them. Although both the USSR and USA are net suppliers to the resource market and really dont need any other country to sell to them in the first place in hoi mechanics...

i don't get the fetish people have for suggesting shoe-horning in the cold war into hearts of iron. hearts of iron 4 is not east vs west. a cold war game deserves its own mechanics that make sense, and the mechanics of hearts of iron don't support any kind of compelling proxy war / cold war situation.

hearts of iron should stay focused on the final days of hot wars and world war 2. Not because a cold war game wouldnt be fun, but because a hearts of iron 4 cold war wouldn't make any sense from a game mechanics perspective

(Not to mention the fact that manpower, factory numbers, technologies, equipment stockpiles will all go crazy when you increase the scope of the game several-fold)

Well the OP sort of nailed the answer for that, being which in HOI its centered (rightly so) on the buildup to war and the war itself although once you achieve victory that's it and it goes back to the blank slate where you start a new game ;p You don't really get to cherish that hard fought victory and continue your nation, it just finishes there pretty quickly as well ;d.. although if they added a Korean War Expansion or something of the like extending the game length, it would allow you to not only have more game time but to be able to achieve better playthroughs as nations and not just 4 - 7 hour sessions for one game in its entirety.

The Korean War could be easily handled with the HOI Mechanics, the only thing which they'd need to introduce which is new to the game is Proxy Wars and New Technologies maybe even an expansion on the Focus Tree, I don't think any of that requires too much of a change to the games base mechanics. I don't think anything past the Korean War would be suitable though, I know I mentioned the Vietnam although I regret it. I think only the Korean war can be handled appropriately with the HOI Mechanics. The Korean War adds to the game what I think it needs, a longer timespan, I know the game is a WW2 Simulator but the Korean War can be added in as DLC.

 

[Bronterre]

From what I can see of HOI4 from what we've been told it seems the best of the HOI series to be able to do the cold war, but I think it would be better if they did a separate game which went into it more as I think it would be more then DLC. It would be nice if you could have DLC to dovetail HOI4 into it like CK2 and EU4.

 

[Adonnus]

Eh, converting provinces/assigning governors of my religion or culture/managing overextention always felt like a huge chore to me. I'm glad you don't need to in HOI4.

 

[Axe99]

I get the OP's frustration - but HoI is a wargame, not an empire-builder like CK2, EU4 or Vicky, so it should feel different, and if it didn't then people would say HoI4 was EU5 (oh, wait..... ). Rather than lots of little 'war - peace - war' patterns, it's more a 'campaign - buildup - campaign' rhythm instead, where they pay-off is winning.

As others have said, HoI isn't that well suited to a cold war style game - I'd think it would be better suited expanded back to earlier in the 1930s, to allow for more of a build-up, but the 'heart' of HoI is the big broo-ha-ha as the factions beat down on each other for dominance.

Basically what I'm trying to say is such an engaging and fun filled campaign has little pay off. It would be an AWESOME dlc if they extended the timeline another couple decades, extended techs and allowed us to play out the long term consequences of allies and enemies we made in the war, the fate of both the victors and the vanquished, the ever changing spheres of influence established after the war, and the continued push between the two remaining ideologies. Can't wait til June 6th!

I wouldn't say there's little payoff (if you've won - or lost - after a titanic struggle, that's a lot of enjoyment had, with a clear result), but I do think there's value in better 'summing up' the win. I'd love an 'end of war' screen, where at the end of the war, or in 1948, it summed up the state of my nation - how much did the people suffer to get that win (things like how long countries were at different war laws), how many victory points they and their alliance controlled, whether they're the dominant faction or there's two competing factions like there were historically. Did the world descend into thermonuclear war? What proportion of the nation's manpower did the victory cost? There's lots of metrics by which a campaign could be judged more or less successful.

Then, while we're playing, we're not just playing for a binary 'win/loss', but for a far more granular win that the game would be able to quantify for us. It would also make 'short' expansions up to Korea make sense, as it's a few more years to try and get that 'dominant faction' thing happening.

 

[mbarbaric]

as much as i'd like to see cold war game, hoi is no serious corner stone for that. it sure will be done by some mod in one or other way, but that won't work in cold war context.

take vietnam war for example. why is this war a symbol of sort for cold war? not at all for battles or military campaign. it is fundamental part of cold war because of it's effect on the USA and internal situation there. pressure building up from within and from outside and the way it influenced USA's policies as well as it's credibility/prestige. that simply can't be simulated by hoi and shouldn't be expected.

 

[Czert]

it still begs the question of: Why?

Why put a several decade extension into a hearts of iron game where the mechanics have to be massively restricted just to keep some arbitrary proxy conflicts that wont have any real impact on your country except korea / vietnam is going to be a puppet of the winner and if you're the loser you wont be able to buy resources from them. Although both the USSR and USA are net suppliers to the resource market and really dont need any other country to sell to them in the first place in hoi mechanics...

i don't get the fetish people have for suggesting shoe-horning in the cold war into hearts of iron. hearts of iron 4 is not east vs west. a cold war game deserves its own mechanics that make sense, and the mechanics of hearts of iron don't support any kind of compelling proxy war / cold war situation.

hearts of iron should stay focused on the final days of hot wars and world war 2. Not because a cold war game wouldnt be fun, but because a hearts of iron 4 cold war wouldn't make any sense from a game mechanics perspective

(Not to mention the fact that manpower, factory numbers, technologies, equipment stockpiles will all go crazy when you increase the scope of the game several-fold)

why ppl want to put it in cold war ? because they want cold war period ? and this is onlyest chance, except mod since original stand alone cold war game was canceled.

 

[Number 7]

why ppl want to put it in cold war ? because they want cold war period ? and this is onlyest chance, except mod since original stand alone cold war game was canceled.

that's my point though - a hearts of iron cold war game is not going to be a proper cold war game, its going to be a sad, poor representation of actual cold war mechanics. you still have all this world war 2 designed mechanics in a world where people dont fight like its world war 2 anymore.

think of it this way, its like using hearts of iron mechanics to play EU 4. it doesn't fit. you need a real cold war game designed around it, you can't just staple on a couple of decades onto a different game series and have it be a compelling, fun experience that adds to hearts of iron 4.

 

[GhengisKhan]

Agreed HoI4's mechanics become outdated for the confilicts after WW2 and it would work poorly at best. For a cold war game your going to need tons more diplomatic and espoinage and the unit scale will need to be much smaller than div size to be accurate.

 

[Czert]

that's my point though - a hearts of iron cold war game is not going to be a proper cold war game, its going to be a sad, poor representation of actual cold war mechanics. you still have all this world war 2 designed mechanics in a world where people dont fight like its world war 2 anymore.

think of it this way, its like using hearts of iron mechanics to play EU 4. it doesn't fit. you need a real cold war game designed around it, you can't just staple on a couple of decades onto a different game series and have it be a compelling, fun experience that adds to hearts of iron 4.

well, i must repeat myself. separate cold war game will not happen, so onylest chance is to mod it or have dlc for it. and i will like dlc than nothing.

 

[Price21]

They could even just make a dlc segmenting a small part of the Cold War like the Korean War, and that doesn't change the base mechanics of HOI too much at least I don't believe it will.

 

[imperial.]

I'll be buying the
game and DLC's if they do this.

 

[imperial.]

I really hope someone makes a mod with a "no-time-limit". I'd really want to try to get world domination with Spain or at least try to recover all historic pieces of land that were once Spanish (or maybe a faction of Spanish speaking speaking nations). Anyway, I want and need more years to be able to do it!

I'd love to play a world domination game with Spain actually. In Eu4 my Colonial Spain play was the size of Americas! XD

 

[CHRIS3169]

I get the OP's frustration - but HoI is a wargame, not an empire-builder like CK2, EU4 or Vicky, so it should feel different, and if it didn't then people would say HoI4 was EU5 (oh, wait..... ). Rather than lots of little 'war - peace - war' patterns, it's more a 'campaign - buildup - campaign' rhythm instead, where they pay-off is winning.

As others have said, HoI isn't that well suited to a cold war style game - I'd think it would be better suited expanded back to earlier in the 1930s, to allow for more of a build-up, but the 'heart' of HoI is the big broo-ha-ha as the factions beat down on each other for dominance.



I wouldn't say there's little payoff (if you've won - or lost - after a titanic struggle, that's a lot of enjoyment had, with a clear result), but I do think there's value in better 'summing up' the win. I'd love an 'end of war' screen, where at the end of the war, or in 1948, it summed up the state of my nation - how much did the people suffer to get that win (things like how long countries were at different war laws), how many victory points they and their alliance controlled, whether they're the dominant faction or there's two competing factions like there were historically. Did the world descend into thermonuclear war? What proportion of the nation's manpower did the victory cost? There's lots of metrics by which a campaign could be judged more or less successful.

Then, while we're playing, we're not just playing for a binary 'win/loss', but for a far more granular win that the game would be able to quantify for us. It would also make 'short' expansions up to Korea make sense, as it's a few more years to try and get that 'dominant faction' thing happening.

An endscreen similar to all the factions being summarized like at the end of Fallout New Vegas would be pretty epic. I think they'd have to just go with a detailed ledger though, since anything with audio or video would have millions of different end results, from the guy that conquers the entire world as Okinawa, to the guy who renames USA as South Canada, Asia as West Canada, and Europe East Canada.

 

[Bobemor]

Give it 5 years and when V3 and HOI4 are merged into a single game it'll easily be able to manage The Cold War period.