There should be the option of removing/moving IC

[Adonnus]

There should be the option of removing/moving IC, and other things, in enemy territory or territory that you control.

One of the things that annoyed me sometimes in previous Hoi games was the inability to remove any buildings once they've been constructed, to prevent their use by the enemy.

This should be for 2 reasons:

- So you can raid enemy territory, dismantle their forts/IC/infrastructure, and retreat, setting up the area for future attacks. Otherwise there's no real value in raiding the enemy if you can't weaken them in the long term!
- So you can weaken the enemy by destroying advantages they can acheive by reoccupying their territory.

Historical examples: the plan for the Dieppe raid, the Soviet transfer of industry to the east (which was previously represented by event, and I have no problems with that here, but the ability to do it elsewhere and on a custom scale would also be nice), dismantling the Maginot line, scorched earth strategies in general and Hitler's, admittedly largely unfulfilled, order to remove everything in the path of the Soviet advance.

Edit: as people have suggested there should be a downside too, it takes time to dismantle and move the factory and the enemy can capture it intact during this period. Also production is disabled while transferring. As for the downside in raiding... well destroying a factory may be much quicker, but you will only get, say, a small amount of materials scavenged. That and you won't be able to use it for obvious reasons.

Soo please can we be able to do this?

 

[Vidkjaer]

HOI4 will give the option to destroy a factory, so here is your scorched earth tactic.

 

[Axe99]

Aye, if they could make it work I think this'd be great, particularly given the more sandbox nature of HoI4. I doubt the mechanic would be tricky from a coding perspective, but teaching the AI to use it sensibly is likely the big hurdle.

 

[Donkey Kong]

I see the possibility of this being abused in multiplayer. A losing power destroying most of his factories, while claiming its part of a grand strategy. There's a thin line between using this as a tactic and simply avusing the system.

 

[jpd]

I see the possibility of this being abused in multiplayer. A losing power destroying most of his factories, while claiming its part of a grand strategy. There's a thin line between using this as a tactic and simply avusing the system.

Hehe.

I did that once in a game of Victory! The Battle for Europe. I was yugoslavia, and I was invaded by Greece. Couln't win the war, so I started a controlled retreat, moving all supplies (including food) to locations that were not connected to the automatic logistics distribution. And methodically destroyed all industry.

In the end, my opponent got to occupy my lands, but could not use it anymore. Almost all industry war demolished, and most population (needed to operate the factories) had starved.

He was not amused

But, to this day, most players of the game still remember this move .... (it was almost 10 years ago)

 

[SchwarzKatze]

I see the possibility of this being abused in multiplayer. A losing power destroying most of his factories, while claiming its part of a grand strategy. There's a thin line between using this as a tactic and simply avusing the system.

How's that abusing? If you think your opponent is going to annex you that's what you'd do. If you have a deep interior you could transfer the industry and demolish the infrastructure like USSR or China, if you don't, like Germany, you could order to destroy everything, except that Speer disobeyed IRL.

 

[Adonnus]

I see the possibility of this being abused in multiplayer. A losing power destroying most of his factories, while claiming its part of a grand strategy. There's a thin line between using this as a tactic and simply avusing the system.

Likewise, I don't see how this can be considered abusing. You are going to lose anyway so it's not like this gives you an unfair advantage?

 

[Issac1709]

How's that abusing? If you think your opponent is going to annex you that's what you'd do. If you have a deep interior you could transfer the industry and demolish the infrastructure like USSR or China, if you don't, like Germany, you could order to destroy everything, except that Speer disobeyed IRL.

But there needs to be a cost associated with it.

 

[Alex_brunius]

Well it would be bad if you could instantly and permanently destroy an industrial center like the Ruhr with a single click...

That would certainly count as abuse since it would be impossible to do in reality.

 

[Adonnus]

Well it would be bad if you could instantly and permanently destroy an industrial center like the Ruhr with a single click...

That would certainly count as abuse since it would be impossible to do in reality.

A cost, perhaps in money, and a certain amount of time, or a progress bar that does it over time.

 

[Gort11]

Not to mention that the order might be disobeyed.

Maybe the best way to do it would be to give a National Unity hit for each destroyed factory - it's basically admitting that the war is going badly, after all.

 

[SchwarzKatze]

But there needs to be a cost associated with it.

Well it would be bad if you could instantly and permanently destroy an industrial center like the Ruhr with a single click...

That would certainly count as abuse since it would be impossible to do in reality.

I agree, it can either be portrayed as part of movable IC or independent from it

1. Part of movable IC
   
   "Dismantling industry" would basically be doing half of the transferring process, packing the industry up but not unpacking it. There may be some problems with this depending on how the mechanic is implemented, if keeping the IC in storage has no cost, then people may play horde, if it does then there should be a way to permanently dispose of the IC once in storage.
   
   
2. Independent mechanic
   
   IMO the best way to do this is to have "current" IC decreasing fast while "maximum" IC decrease slowly, for example a 9.00/9.00 IC would reduce to 7.50/8.50, 6.00/8.00, 4.50/7.50, all the way to 0.00/6.00, then 0.00/5.50... all the way until it's 0.00/0.00. The fast part is quick to do, quick to reverse damage like smashing pipes and cutting cables, while the slow part is irreparable like scrapping machineries and tearing down facilities.
   I think this would allow achieve a balance between "slow & useless" and "fast & OP" by having both a short term effect to deny opportunistic enemies of an easy loot (since you'll have to actually repair things in HoI4) but not doing much to enemies who's determined to stay, and a slow but permanent effect to screw your enemies for the rest of the game. On the other hand, this also prevents commando raids to demolish an entire city on their wake.

 

[mursolini]

The only "non-abusable" method could be to force a country to pay with civilian industry for it.

You will have a "destroy something" project, that would be complete similarly to "build something" project.
A more expensive "transfer" something project could also exist.

I also don`t think we should be able to completely destroy anything, just badly damage it, as many of pieces that are required for a factory or fort are already done, and can`t be destroyed easily, for example ground works like roads would take ridiculous amount of time to redo.

Let`s say "destroying" would cost 20% of price to build a building, and would reduce the building to 20-30% requiring extensive repairs. In this case, it is not nearly as abusable, as it would be both unrealistic to destroy everything due to lack of capacity of civilian industry, and it would require major take away from your war effort.

Transfer could cost around 40% of cost cost to build, and reduce factory to same damage status as destroyed one. Advantage: you get to keep the building. Disadvantage - you have to pay for it, it might be unworthy in the end.

 

[Alliegorical]

It should take time, cost civilian industry for the duration of the dismantling, provide metal (and maybe other resources?) for the same duration, and if the building(s) being dismantled lie within your own core provinces, it should cost national unity. Simple.

 

[ArcandSpark]

So in core territory there is a national unity hit, it costs civilian industry to move it, it's a slow process and goes in stages where the factory shutting down is fast so that you don't get any IC out of it but the packing up is slow. It takes a long time to destroy the industry but you can only destroy it to 25% of what it was (rounded up).

Moving and setting up costs civilian IC and takes a while to set up since there is a lot of work in doing the ground work for the factory.

I don't think I missed anything other than how the storing of the factories would work. I don't think there is a mechanic for that right now.

 

[Alliegorical]

It takes a long time to destroy the industry but you can only destroy it to 25% of what it was (rounded up).

I'm not convinced that this needs to be a rule. Otherwise, everything you said seems legit.

 

[safe-keeper]

Shouldn't be too hard to build an industry evacuation system around Hearts of Iron 4's railroad syst-- oh, wait.

More seriously, though, yes, there definitely should be "industrial evacuation" in the game. It should require you to have the means to do so resource-, manpower, and industry-wise, and there should be some "attrition" to IC that you move, but yes, it should be definitely be included.

Also, once evacuated, I suppose industry should take a while to re-build.

 

[mikal1991]

Shouldn't be too hard to build an industry evacuation system around Hearts of Iron 4's railroad syst-- oh, wait.

More seriously, though, yes, there definitely should be "industrial evacuation" in the game. It should require you to have the means to do so resource-, manpower, and industry-wise, and there should be some "attrition" to IC that you move, but yes, it should be definitely be included.

Also, once evacuated, I suppose industry should take a while to re-build.

I agree. If you dismantle and move lets say 10 IC (round number) to another area, when its "rebuildt" those 10 IC should be worth some % less hence loss to attrition such as loosing/damaging equipment on the way or items getting lost in the process. Or simply the fact that you for some reason just couldnt remove all the equipement/buildning materials

 

[ArcandSpark]

I'm not convinced that this needs to be a rule. Otherwise, everything you said seems legit.

What if, once Germany takes France, they move all of the industry out of France and brings it to Germany. France no longer needs to be defended and it would make the situation for Germany easier for defence against invasion and strategic bombing. There would still be the raw materials (how much I don't know) but those could be less important given the trade off.

If industry is left behind then a recaptured France wouldn't be useless and there would still be need to defend it from being invaded again.

It's a cool idea but it could be a fatal mechanic to the game too.

 

[Giovanni1234]

What if, once Germany takes France, they move all of the industry out of France and brings it to Germany. France no longer needs to be defended and it would make the situation for Germany easier for defence against invasion and strategic bombing. There would still be the raw materials (how much I don't know) but those could be less important given the trade off.

If industry is left behind then a recaptured France wouldn't be useless and there would still be need to defend it from being invaded again.

It's a cool idea but it could be a fatal mechanic to the game too.

We could move just the IC of the national's provinces like china and Urss did.