So what do you all want to see in HOI3 -(no death camps, terror bombings, or purges)

[Bullfrog]

There's no such thing as a sherman division or a panther division. They just happen to be two weapon systems within the entity known as the armored division. At best there were a handful of tank battalions within such a division, as well as battalions of infantry, units of artillery and anti-tank artillery, logistical support, etc. To focus only on the tanks is incorrect.

As for division numbers, IMHO the problem isn't the cost of the divisions but the manpower cost/system. Most infantry divisions, for example, were 15,000+ men whereas in HoI2 they cost only 10 manpower. That, and the manpower system assumes that the manpower pool is constantly growing, whereas in reality (while it is growing on the whole) a lot of people are leaving it as well. HoI2 didn't represent this to any great extent, leading to unnaturally large manpower numbers whereas in history manpower was the real bottleneck (even the Soviet Union was suffering by the end of the war).

all true but the idea is not that there should be a generic division costing the same IC and MP. If SOV had cheaper but lesser Inf divisions compared to the rest of the world that would be an example. If GER had more expensive Arm divisions but suffered accordingly compared to the USA, that would be another. The hope is less standardization and more individual force composition.

 

[MrCrush]

People allways want more and more, but still it should remain compact enough so new people aren't daunted about a massive amounth of data that they need to go through (like Victoria and Supreme ruler 2010/2020).
Basicly I want to have a lot of options to tweak with, but I think much of it can be automated without it really affecting your country's performance (in a bad way that is).
Some things I'd like myself to be added in-game.

- Evolving recources: Recources are pretty much set in stone at the start, techs and events can change them, but in general thats about all, perhaps giving the player the ability to administrate resource production on provinces up to a certain degree.

- The idea that battles could influence dissent/politics would be very interested, however I think it should have an "OFF switch".

- The idea about more permanent effects of war weariness/damage should be displayed in several ways damage to infrastructure/factories should be harder to "recover" from, there sould be a "manpower" counter and a "population" counter (manpower basicly is the available manpower for militairy recuitment, while "Population" the available "workforce"
* Manpower basicly provides military recruits (and reserves can count partly as workforce [say 50% efectiveness])
* workforce influences things like resource production and IC (effectiveness decreases from a certain point however) and both values influence manpower/workforce growth.
* Additionally both manpower and workforce should be stats that can be affected by things like stratigic bombing, nuke attacks, etc.
* Both values are regulated by a specific slider government policies and events.
* natural things like famine, poverty, etc.. should allso have some effect here.

- Make sea battles a bit more fun, sea combat is still a bit dull here it has some nice bits but theres still alot of improvement here make capital raiders effective without escort and escorts more suited when engaging anti-sub warfare, sea defense, make subs "less visible", etc..

- Evolving research: personally I think tech teams should gain experience while they research stuff which in turn improves their research speed/effectiveness, furthermore tech teams should have some profficiency in every type of research, but not all have the same value (and experience is gained in that area when a tech team completes a tech in which these areas are used according to the difficulty, but some random factor should be added as well [to add, a "decay" factor should be added as well], furthermore make some tech teams "randomly" pop up to give more flixibility to smaller countries.)

- The espionage stuff, personally I wasn't too excited about this, but it has its nice bits, perhaps let the espionage system work a bit more like the research model, with individual spies with their own strenghts weaknesses, etc...

Okay this is about the first I could come upon, there's lots more in here, but too much to name atm, but one thing thats most important for HOI3 is, give it alot of depth, but keep it simple enough to manage.
HOI2 had a splendid balance of this, it could have used some more depth, but all in all this barely was anything close of an issue.

 

[unmerged(21973)]

My 5 cents

When the nazis annexed countries like france and checkoslovakia they also got a lot of free equipment, and routing an army should also produce this.

Have armygroups, ie select an armygroup and u select all the unit stacks or give it prority to more modern weapons. Perhaps have precoded battleplans like "fall gelb" etc for newbies that the AI could carry out. Perhaps count the people on the home front as a resource to be managed (not energy).

Build more things in your provinces like army recruiting centers, flight academies etc.

 

[Bullfrog]

People allways want more and more, but still it should remain compact enough so new people aren't daunted about a massive amounth of data that they need to go through (like Victoria and Supreme ruler 2010/2020).
Basicly I want to have a lot of options to tweak with, but I think much of it can be automated without it really affecting your country's performance (in a bad way that is).
Some things I'd like myself to be added in-game.

- Evolving recources: Recources are pretty much set in stone at the start, techs and events can change them, but in general thats about all, perhaps giving the player the ability to administrate resource production on provinces up to a certain degree.

- The idea that battles could influence dissent/politics would be very interested, however I think it should have an "OFF switch".

- The idea about more permanent effects of war weariness/damage should be displayed in several ways damage to infrastructure/factories should be harder to "recover" from, there sould be a "manpower" counter and a "population" counter (manpower basicly is the available manpower for militairy recuitment, while "Population" the available "workforce"
* Manpower basicly provides military recruits (and reserves can count partly as workforce [say 50% efectiveness])
* workforce influences things like resource production and IC (effectiveness decreases from a certain point however) and both values influence manpower/workforce growth.
* Additionally both manpower and workforce should be stats that can be affected by things like stratigic bombing, nuke attacks, etc.
* Both values are regulated by a specific slider government policies and events.
* natural things like famine, poverty, etc.. should allso have some effect here.

- Make sea battles a bit more fun, sea combat is still a bit dull here it has some nice bits but theres still alot of improvement here make capital raiders effective without escort and escorts more suited when engaging anti-sub warfare, sea defense, make subs "less visible", etc..

- Evolving research: personally I think tech teams should gain experience while they research stuff which in turn improves their research speed/effectiveness, furthermore tech teams should have some profficiency in every type of research, but not all have the same value (and experience is gained in that area when a tech team completes a tech in which these areas are used according to the difficulty, but some random factor should be added as well [to add, a "decay" factor should be added as well], furthermore make some tech teams "randomly" pop up to give more flixibility to smaller countries.)

- The espionage stuff, personally I wasn't too excited about this, but it has its nice bits, perhaps let the espionage system work a bit more like the research model, with individual spies with their own strenghts weaknesses, etc...

Okay this is about the first I could come upon, there's lots more in here, but too much to name atm, but one thing thats most important for HOI3 is, give it alot of depth, but keep it simple enough to manage.
HOI2 had a splendid balance of this, it could have used some more depth, but all in all this barely was anything close of an issue.

Very good, let me add the following:
I disagree with the research thing. I also think that the espionage needs tweaking, but a lot, not a simple upgrade.
The units are key here...I realize that smaller units are more work but it also means more realism and fun for us veterans.
The naval aspect needs a huge overhaul. I agree.
The quick loss of MP (aside from building, rather permanent loss) could be responded with dissent, or events that are likely to land you in trouble.

 

[unmerged(103702)]

When the nazis annexed countries like france and checkoslovakia they also got a lot of free equipment, and routing an army should also produce this.

Ooh this would be nice. Encirclements giving free stuff would be nice.

 

[Danielefc]

Make units require money as well as supplies. Units in a capitalist country with a professional army would cost more money in upkeep than soviet conscripts.
This would make money more interesting in the game and could also cut down a bit on the huge armies fielded by countries like Brazil in the late game. Plus you could have situations where countries basically go bankrupt after the war and can not afford to keep their colonial empires.

Good one!

 

[Tomdidiot]

Oh, and link Shipbuilding capacities to shipyards. This would be more realistic because during WWII, countries like the UK had to stop building capital ships for more essential ships (convoy transports, for example). This would also mean that it wouldn't be possible for a country without significant shipyards, but lots of IC (say a unified Nationalist China), from suddenly pumping out a massive amount of cruisers.

 

[Chaplain]

Oh, and link Shipbuilding capacities to shipyards. This would be more realistic because during WWII, countries like the UK had to stop building capital ships for more essential ships (convoy transports, for example). This would also mean that it wouldn't be possible for a country without significant shipyards, but lots of IC (say a unified Nationalist China), from suddenly pumping out a massive amount of cruisers.

Yes, definitely. GREAT idea.

 

[dannyboy2016]

Oh, and link Shipbuilding capacities to shipyards. This would be more realistic because during WWII, countries like the UK had to stop building capital ships for more essential ships (convoy transports, for example). This would also mean that it wouldn't be possible for a country without significant shipyards, but lots of IC (say a unified Nationalist China), from suddenly pumping out a massive amount of cruisers.

I agree with this 100%.

 

[unmerged(70654)]

HOI2 arma is nearly flawless - I would just continue to complicate the game and add additional layers of detail, for example, it would be awesome to create custom divisions, selecting all the individual battalions. It might be cool to create custom ships too, selecting all the components and personnel, to create grand "flagships" like the Bismarck.

A small quibble - I think engineers should give a 20% bonus to attacking forts and coastal fortifications, historically they were experts in clearing obstacles and fortifications, having flamethrowers, TNT and composition B. Engineers were the most important tool of any beach landing, they needed to blow up the beach obstacles so that the tanks and heavy equipment could land, and were critical in assaulting bunker systems. Engineers should also have the option of manually destroying infrastructure, just add "scorched earth operations" as a mission type, which would reduce infrastructure by 10% every month to that has a division with a engineer battalion in it.

Another feature you might want to consider is a amphibious assault vehicles battalion.

It might be interesting to have military academy tech trees which add skill points to generals - it wouldn't improve pre-existing generals, but it could add skill points to up and coming generals yet to be deployed into the pool.

It might be interesting to have guerrilla warfare trees for countries like communist china and free france - or to make a special set of rules for them.

Perhaps the biggest flaw of HOI2 arma is the lack of consequence for using nuclear weapons - using them should negatively influence relations and have major longterm consequences. The AI should build them but be wary to use them as human players. Nuclear weapons seem to be an incomplete feature in arma.

I really, really ,really, really hope that HOI3 does not take the same direction as Rome did (Which imo is the worst paradox title to date) and oversimplify the game. One of the greatest things about HOI2 is the pure breadth of gameplay, how you can utilize literally dozens of different strategies, there is very little restriction on your strategic sense. Just add more and more options! Read real AARs and think "can a player do everything described in my game?" If the answer is no, add the features, if yes, polish!

 

[unmerged(70654)]

Ooh this would be nice. Encirclements giving free stuff would be nice.

It would be cool if you had the option of "capturing" vehicles - for example if you move troops into an airport it makes much more sense that the air units are transferred to the invading country instead of being instantly vaporized. Also it would make sense if you had an option of capturing tank, mechanized divisions at 1 strength (all the vehicles would still be in place but the men would have to be reinforced by the capturer). Even though you shouldn't be able to capture infantry divisions, you should be able to capture their brigade addons - why would all the artillery battalions dissapear? They would at least be smelted down and converted into metal, and more realistically, would be captured and circulated into the fight.

 

[unmerged(80599)]

4. if its possible: Unique Techtrees for every great nation

I have to actually disagree with this. As a veteran of Rome: Total War and Medieval 2: Total War, I know it can be very limiting to be forced down a doctrinal path. Play the Byzantines, for instance, and, yippee, your tech tree maxes out in the thirteenth century. I'm in favour of preserving total freedom.

As for my own suggestions, I think it's been said before

- I agree with those who have already said that the game must not be dumbed down. It must be complex, not complicated.

- The AI definitely must be improved. It's too reactive and currently fairly incapable of planning actual operations.

- There should be a mechanism that limits the number of divisions the AI can churn out whilst at peace. It is very disconcerting to see a post-Bitter Peace Soviet Union in around 1950 with hundreds upon hundreds of divisions. Maybe divisions could continue costing manpower; or, possibly, there could, above a certain threshold, be an inverse relationship between effective IC and manpower in divisions (to simulate everyone sitting around in uniform rather than working).

EDIT: Oh yeah, and I want the acceptall cheat to be called 'neville' again, purely for comedy value. Made me chuckle every time.

 

[Raczynski]

It would be cool if you had the option of "capturing" vehicles - for example if you move troops into an airport it makes much more sense that the air units are transferred to the invading country instead of being instantly vaporized. Also it would make sense if you had an option of capturing tank, mechanized divisions at 1 strength (all the vehicles would still be in place but the men would have to be reinforced by the capturer). Even though you shouldn't be able to capture infantry divisions, you should be able to capture their brigade addons - why would all the artillery battalions dissapear? They would at least be smelted down and converted into metal, and more realistically, would be captured and circulated into the fight.

In most case, the units in danger of being captured would rather destroy their equipment than let it pass to the enemy. Happened at Dunkirk, during the Polish campaign

 

[daemonofdecay]

In most case, the units in danger of being captured would rather destroy their equipment than let it pass to the enemy. Happened at Dunkirk, during the Polish campaign

Yeah, it would be better handled by random event (Hey, free supplies! or Hey! Free SP-AT!) or historical event (in the case of Germany taking Czechoslovakia and France, for instance).

 

[Myth]

all true but the idea is not that there should be a generic division costing the same IC and MP. If SOV had cheaper but lesser Inf divisions compared to the rest of the world that would be an example. If GER had more expensive Arm divisions but suffered accordingly compared to the USA, that would be another. The hope is less standardization and more individual force composition.

But that could be a function of sliders, techs and ministers as it is in HoI2, right?

 

[unmerged(88283)]

If you con't post sensibliy don't post, the thread will be locked if you keep this up.

King

 

[Geredis]

I'd like to see usable counters that don't show up only at the highest zoom levels.

Also, maybe an -inability- to select the exact date of starting? Simply selecting from maybe 10-20 start dates is enough. Maybe '36, '38, every six months thereafter for the 6 years of the historic war (a further 12 scenarios)..a '47, '51, '56, and '57 scenario provided it follows the same Armageddon timeline of '36 until 1960.

 

[sapper66]

factories locations that are tooled to produced individual tanks..etc.....
division stats that track actual tank and pieces of equipment numbers... similar to the old game "War in russia"....

or

the ability to set your own oob setup for divisions by selecting how many of which type of brigade are in the division...

 

[TheCrimsonMajor]

-Greater optimization so we don't have any slowdowns on a decent rig, especially late game.

-Better Visuals. I know this isn't all that relevant to the Hearts of Iron series, which is built on great gameplay and historical accuracy, but a few graphical improvements such as better sprites, a more vibrant map, better weather, and better historical pictures couldn't hurt.

-More historical and ahistorical (within reason) events. SMEP is a good example of how Hearts of Iron can have much better events.

-A better representation of the many other costs of running a nation besides military needs and consumer goods.

 

[Admiral_Nelson]

I would love a system of statistics. When I'm in battle, record the strength losses I take and inflict and translate that through a very simple conversion process into tanks, vehicles, men and planes lost. It would just add so much flavour, to check the statistics and know I have 1,830,200 men at arms, have killed 200,000 Soviets, and captured 345,000 more, and that my airforce has 1,200 fighters, 600 interceptors... etc etc.

It wouldn't be that hard to record it and it would just add so much more flavour to the game, as well as provide a more personal connection. I don't know about you, but I get very connected to commanders and divisions throughout a game, especially if they do something amazing, and I think this would allow me to get more in touch with the armed forces as a whole.

It would be lovely. Not game changing, just flavour.