Rework on Historical Mode? (Developers Please Respond)

[tom_jones]

its not a historicity complaint, its a realism complaint. there must be something restricting the AI from launcing in unrealistic theatres, some sort of supply distance penalty, based on navy.

Keep on mind people are mainly flipping out because they saw tag "Japan" where Finland used to be, while that tag is apparently a work of a few divisions operating there.

Because it's clearly, physically impossible for Japan to send a transport ship or two with troops over to Europe, getting that through waters with enemy ship presence; this is only something Australia and New Zealand are allowed to and capable of doing.

 

[PanosB3]

Keep on mind people are mainly flipping out because they saw tag "Japan" where Finland used to be, while that tag is apparently a work of a few divisions operating there.

Personally for me that is just the tip of the iceberg... With the Crimean D-Day and the border gore being the base. North africa was also a beautiful painting in the video. At least it reassures me to see Switzerland staying neutral.

 

[joethepro36]

Keep on mind people are mainly flipping out because they saw tag "Japan" where Finland used to be, while that tag is apparently a work of a few divisions operating there.

Because it's clearly, physically impossible for Japan to send a transport ship or two with troops over to Europe, getting that through waters with enemy ship presence.

Japan landing several divisions of troops by going through allied shipping lanes via india, cape of africa past spain, past france and through the baltic is just cray cray.

 

[tom_jones]

Japan landing several divisions of troops by going through allied shipping lanes via india, cape of africa past spain, past france and through the baltic is just cray cray.

Allied shipping lanes in the east were hardly protected/blockaded on the level Germany tried (and still failed) in the Atlantic, let's not pretend a transport or two could never make it through. Somehow people aren't up in arms the game lets all those convoys still move around during the war, with only part of them (if that) getting sunk. Heck, historically you had German raiding "merchant" operating for ~16 months out there in the Pacific and Indian Ocean, in 1940, and she made it back home to boot.

Spain is either neutral or part of the faction, France at that point in time doesn't exist and is in fact a handy landing spot to disembark and continue by trains, instead of the Channel/Baltic nonsense. All in all it's considerably less of logistics issue that people make it sound/believe.

 

[Johan]

Sadly, this may very well be what happens. I am already experiencing buyer's remorse and remember how that very soon after HOI II was released I went back to playing the original until HOI III came along. It would seem that I am simply not a big fan of the "streamlined" and "more of a sandbox" style of the even numbered HOI titles.

In fairness this has been a slow but progressive change in Paradox's designs away from wargame style designs and toward video game style designs. I am sure that they are more aware of their market than I am and for every long term customer such as myself that is turned off by this approach there are at least 1.01 new customers that are attracted.

These complaints seem to come up at every single game we release.

I remember posting weeks before hoi1 getting released that it was supposed to be a game, not a historical simulation.

I've been in charge of gamedesign since day #1 at paradox, and i dont like oldschool wargames with hexes. I enjoy games like civilization and Starcraft.

 

[Diomedene]

These complaints seem to come up at every single game we release.

I remember posting weeks before hoi1 getting released that it was supposed to be a game, not a historical simulation.

I've been in charge of gamedesign since day #1 at paradox, and i dont like oldschool wargames with hexes. I enjoy games like civilization and Starcraft.

I understand your point. I have been playing your games for almost 15 years now (HoI 1.2 /EUII )so I have seen variations on this statement from you many times. My point was that this vision has become more pronounced over the 15 years or so that I have been enjoying your games and that it has increasingly lessened my enjoyment of many of those games. I certainly don't expect things to change for me but I am saddened that they have drifted from the qualities that attracted me to your earlier Paradox games.

#edit: *sigh* typos and I didn't get them all

 

[mestoth]

My main concerns are the French capitulation in April 1936 and this video which another forum member has already posted:


In addition to that a few WWW moments concern me like Japan migrating to New Zealand/The Spanish civil war ending in just 1 month.

In WWW it wasnt Japan (as AI) migrating. It was LetterZ doing a last ditch effort to still be useful after he lost his mainland the USA by the other player involved (who's name I forget!)

Historical focus being 100% being on would not constrain a human player - otherwise you may as well not play HOI4 - just watch a World War 2 simulation rendered in the HOI4 engine. The moment you as a player do anything at all, it will be different than the real war!

 

[Johan]

I understand your point. I have been playing your games for almost 15 years now (HoI 1.2 /EUII )so I have seen variations on this statement from you many times. My point was that this vision has become more pronounced over the 15 years or so that I have been enjoying your games and that it has increasingly lessened my enjoyment of many of those games. I certainly don't expect things to change for me but I am saddened that they have drifted from the qualities that attracted me to your earlier Paradox games.

Yeah, I see your point.

We've grown a fair bit in that time, and developers I've recruited have obviously been closer to my design philosophy.

The again, we have guys at the office who thinks TOAW is the greatest game ever.

 

[Bernard Black]

This realism vs historicity debate is quite old and i am a bit saddened to see it been taken up with more gut feeling than thought in some posts.

HoI is an alternative history simulator because the player will change history from the day he starts the game, if you want to shackle the AI to a historical path you need to shackle the player as well, because he is the most ahistorical influence in a game.

Everyone has a different opinion of what he deems historical plausible or pure fantasy, but you need to ask yourself how can you set your idea of historical plausibility in hard rules for the game and the ai. Allowing just the amount of freedom for the AI that you feel comfortable with while still letting it react to a changing environment. Germany going for Danzig or War in 1939 would be silly if a player SU had already taken Poland.

Since a lot of decisions in the game are chance based getting weird outcomes are not only expected, given the amount of players and games played they are necessary to happen. Like rolling several sixes in a row in a dice based game or hitting a superlucky shot in World of Tanks, when the gods of RNG have given you just the right number on the normal distribution. In an infinite universe the unlikely becomes certainty, so France falling in 1936 because of randomness is not an issue as long as it remains a rare outcome. Should it possible? I think yes, but it shouldnt be typical, so one game is not telling us anything. This part comes down to numbers tweaking and i think we can expect that after launch as we have seen it for all the other PDX titles.

Another point which has been touched upon is our view on historical accuracy and plausibilty informed by the historical record. Since we know the way history spun out we tend to see it as the most likely or sometimes even the only possible outcome, disregarding all the other possible ways events could have gone at the time. But just because we know the historical facts of 1938 that doesnt mean they were unavoidable at the time or were not seen as "pure fantasy" some years prior.

Japan landing troops in Finland however i do agree shouldnt be possible but under the most extraordinary circumstances. Not because the AI shouldnt want to help out there but because the costs should heavily outweigh the gains. Bringing divisons over several thousand kilometres through hostile waters AND keeping them supplied is a huge logistical undertaking and there should be mechanics reflecting that.

Regards

 

[a.wenk]

Historical focuses means ai will pick focuses in a certain order and that some critical events will be weighted very much towards the historical outcome (giving up danzig for example is not happening). Stuff like Sudetenland are heavily weighted to go historical as long as player is not trying to exploit using basically empty divisions and such.



Pure historical mode by definition will be unhistorical because players will not play historical when they know exactly what will happen. For example, why bother building up an army to be able to take over austria/czechs if you know they will just fold every time no matter how weak you are etc.
Also, for the Ai to be adaptable at all there needs to be flexibility. Otherwise you get HOI3 ai that collapses as soon as something goes in a different direction from history.

Ai for a game like this is an enormous task, and a task that never ends either. So yeah of course we will be improving it. but a game is not a timelapse of AI stuff, you are supposed to be there actually playing it.

HOI4 is much more of a sandbox than HOI3 and we have always been very open about that in hours and hours of streams. If that is not what you want HOI3 is still around.

I'd still be happy to play hoi 3 but it stopped working on Windows 10

 

[mdw1985]

After reading through the thread, i can just shake my head...

I really like the approach, that the devs take on HOI IV. They set an historical playground and give us this sandbox to play in. Sure, they could do it like that, that the AI always behaves strict historical. But what kind of game would that be? Yes, a boring one! If Germany would always attack in the same way, Pearl Harbor would always take place in 1941 and the US would always invade the Normandy, what kind of fun would that be concerning the replayability of the game?

If i would want a strict historical game, why should i want diplomacy and not script it? Why should i want choices in production and construction and not just let the game handle it automatically.

What people tend to forget, is, that the specific outcome of WW2 hasn't been set in stone from the beginning. It is numerous choices from Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt and so on, which could have been different. It is tons of battles, which could have led eventually to different results (what if Rommel would have succeeded over von Rundstedt and Germany put his tanks near the beaches of Normandy?). And with the choices we make in HOI IV we create different outcomes many times. And this creates not only fun, bit also a huge replayability of the game, which - as i tend to think - will bring me hours and hours of fun.

And i also see people complaining, who already bought the most expensive version of the game in preorder and wonder, why the game will not be exactly the fulfilling of their own specific visions.

The devs put tons of hours and work in the game. And the AI surely is not perfect, but there truly is NO game with a perfect AI. Ever played Total War anyone?

I saw the www streams and i know what i can expect from the game. I get a polished, fun and sometimes unpredictable game, which will also be THE BEST ww2 gramd strategy game on the market...

 

[Diomedene]

I'd still be happy to play hoi 3 but it stopped working on Windows 10

There must be something else going on, I run windows 10 and played HoI III a few days ago.

 

[a.wenk]

There must be something else going on, I run windows 10 and played HoI III a few days ago.

I already deleted the game hoi 3 from steam since he took pre-order hoi 4 as I thought hoi 4 it will be like the previous version only with better graphics and advanced AI

 

[a.wenk]

have to wait for a modification for black ice hoi 4

 

[mathers]

This realism vs historicity debate is quite old and i am a bit saddened to see it been taken up with more gut feeling than thought in some posts.

HoI is an alternative history simulator because the player will change history from the day he starts the game, if you want to shackle the AI to a historical path you need to shackle the player as well, because he is the most ahistorical influence in a game.

Everyone has a different opinion of what he deems historical plausible or pure fantasy, but you need to ask yourself how can you set your idea of historical plausibility in hard rules for the game and the ai. Allowing just the amount of freedom for the AI that you feel comfortable with while still letting it react to a changing environment. Germany going for Danzig or War in 1939 would be silly if a player SU had already taken Poland.

Since a lot of decisions in the game are chance based getting weird outcomes are not only expected, given the amount of players and games played they are necessary to happen. Like rolling several sixes in a row in a dice based game or hitting a superlucky shot in World of Tanks, when the gods of RNG have given you just the right number on the normal distribution. In an infinite universe the unlikely becomes certainty, so France falling in 1936 because of randomness is not an issue as long as it remains a rare outcome. Should it possible? I think yes, but it shouldnt be typical, so one game is not telling us anything. This part comes down to numbers tweaking and i think we can expect that after launch as we have seen it for all the other PDX titles.

Another point which has been touched upon is our view on historical accuracy and plausibilty informed by the historical record. Since we know the way history spun out we tend to see it as the most likely or sometimes even the only possible outcome, disregarding all the other possible ways events could have gone at the time. But just because we know the historical facts of 1938 that doesnt mean they were unavoidable at the time or were not seen as "pure fantasy" some years prior.

Japan landing troops in Finland however i do agree shouldnt be possible but under the most extraordinary circumstances. Not because the AI shouldnt want to help out there but because the costs should heavily outweigh the gains. Bringing divisons over several thousand kilometres through hostile waters AND keeping them supplied is a huge logistical undertaking and there should be mechanics reflecting that.

Regards

Problem is with random based decisions is that if I prefer to play a "what if Yougoslav coup did not happen, and yugos stayed a faithful axis member - as playing as the yugos" and by 1940 all deviation happened, then I can not do that.
What proponents of sandboxy vs historical do not seem to appreciate is that the problem is the unnecessary random when player do not intervene. If all Mayor players are AI (Russia, Italy, Germany, France, UK) then Anschluss, Partitioning of Czechslovakia, Rheinland, Molotov Rittentrop Danzig should happen 100% as they happened. There is no such engine that would make actual history plausible anyhow. There was so much strange decision around letting Hitler expand like he managed to.

Of course if player does something highly unhistorical, then sandbox from there on, but till player plays historical best of his ability, history should follow. To have a real WW2, not only an EUIV in tank age.

Or as alternative give us the slider based daily starting option to start our sandbox experience.

 

[mathers]

have to wait for a modification for black ice hoi 4

Though most probably it will not be the Black Ice project.

Same way as CORE was never migrated from HoI2->HoI3

 

[Bernard Black]

I disagree with

If all Mayor players are AI (Russia, Italy, Germany, France, UK) then Anschluss, Partitioning of Czechslovakia, Rheinland, Molotov Rittentrop Danzig should happen 100% as they happened.

Because

There was so much strange decision around letting Hitler expand like he managed to.

These decisions were strange at the time and not a given; other reactions were not only thinkable but also not improbable.

But disregarding any matter of opinion we are still faced with the problem of properly defining what we want. See when you write

but till player plays historical best of his ability, history should follow

what do you mean in game terms? i have an idea what you have in mind, so lets see what problems you would face with that.

"history should follow" could mean with no player interaction a Match should always play out the same and end with an occupied germany in 1945. So we hard script every country according to the historical records. From build up over production until warfare and diplomacy because how else can we ensure that events will fold out as they did.
That would be simple enough but how would you determine how historical the human is playing? We would have to compare the actions of the human player to our scripted roadmap for the respective country and then what? How much freedom will you give the player before you switch from scripted to dynamic AI? More than the AI gets? And how would you measure the players deviation from history?

No matter how you would solve this, you would get as many angry forumites complaining about the way you did it, because it goes deep at the core of what you want this game to be and surprise surprise different people want this game to be different things.

They could just make more historical start dates ,to cater to your desire for very specifc scenarios at specific points in time. But they were not much used in Hoi3 and therefore dropped in this iteration. But maybe with the dynamic AI that demand is now higher.


See i don't want to tell people how much historical inaccuarcy they have to be comfortable with, because thats for everyone for himself to decide. But i would like a bit more substance to what they wish for, how game rules could be set up to achieve this and what problems would come with that. Because just saying I dont like this AI behaviour or outcome as some on this forum do, isnt really getting us anywhere.

Regards

 

[mathers]

I disagree with

See i don't want to tell people how much historical inaccuarcy they have to be comfortable with, because thats for everyone for himself to decide. But i would like a bit more substance to what they wish for, how game rules could be set up to achieve this and what problems would come with that. Because just saying I dont like this AI behaviour or outcome as some on this forum do, isnt really getting us anywhere.

Regards

I played from HoI1 to HoiIII.
I have no problem if it also contains this more sandbox than HoI3 mode. But the Historical mode should at least as historical as its precedessors. I know HoI was never good at modeling turn of tide in 1943. But till 1942 it used to get the good balance capture the important aspect of historicalness.

I disagree with
Because
"There was so much strange decision around letting Hitler expand like he managed to."
These decisions were strange at the time and not a given; other reactions were not only thinkable but also not improbable.

Bu

Yet those happenings led to WW2.
If Hitler gets couped before Nazis start to expand then there is no WW2

In 1936-1948 without a WW2 or between totally different participants? Or as an within EU small war, when Czech and French win straight away? (Or ahistoric balance if they do not despite trying....)

Not my piece of cake.

I have no problem with sandboxy variant. But Historical mode do not need chances at its focus outcomes.

But what I really do not undarstend, is the forum mood. As if we "historic mode fan" would request something totally new to the series instead of do not deviate that much from the roots conservatism

 

[mdw1985]

I played from HoI1 to HoiIII.
I have no problem if it also contains this more sandbox than HoI3 mode. But the Historical mode should at least as historical as its precedessors. I know HoI was never good at modeling turn of tide in 1943. But till 1942 it used to get the good balance capture the important aspect of historicalness.

Yet those happenings led to WW2.
If Hitler gets couped before Nazis start to expand then there is no WW2

In 1936-1948 without a WW2 or between totally different participants? Or as an within EU small war, when Czech and French win straight away? (Or ahistoric balance if they do not despite trying....)

Not my piece of cake.

I have no problem with sandboxy variant. But Historical mode do not need chances at its focus outcomes.

But what I really do not undarstend, is the forum mood. As if we "historic mode fan" would request something totally new to the series instead of do not deviate that much from the roots conservatism

And your last words are the problem. It isn't your nor is it my position to request anything. The devs decided to fulfil their vision of the game, which results we all can see now in the game. If they decide, to take another route in the future, we have to respect that. And if you don't like it, just don't play the game or make a mod for it.

 

[mathers]

And your last words are the problem. It isn't your nor is it my position to request anything. The devs decided to fulfil their vision of the game, which results we all can see now in the game. If they decide, to take another route in the future, we have to respect that. And if you don't like it, just don't play the game or make a mod for it.

Why.

I know that they do not must to do it just becouse we request it. But everyone has right of requesting something, and voicing their opinion. Especially if it simply something back to the roots. Arent many SW fan of old hated Episode 1?

But if they want to stay in business for long they listen to their fans. Especiallz if thez already implemented a selection option, and in Hoi3 they were forced based on feedbacks to implement similar (The fact you could not jsut invite everyone to Axis once they become close enough was not in at release. I recall putting together 30+ country Axis)

I, you or any customer do not have to respect sensibility of any developer. We pay for their work. We are their customers. And some of us quite loyal, (I just counted I have 3 instance of CK2 for example. Despite i just put 20 hour in that as far I recall. I play mostly HoI since 1st release.) and spent quite a lot during the ages.

Yet we (and of course news to PAradox as well) has the right to express our opinions. And we do not need censorship by ones like you on the forum who stop discussions with sarcastic, fanboyish comments either claiming "devs are gods" or using exagarration to ridicule adverse opinions.

And especially since it is a switch we are looking for, I do not see why is it a bad idea since only 30% of the users would love it. I saw more expensive features for smaller chunks of the fanbase. Or is it only me who did not use espionage in HoI2 at all (Other than for self defense?) and for Early Anschluss in HoI3?