"things I dislike" - post things about the previews you dislike here **READ OP EDIT**

[Centurion1973]

Battle plans could suck if you hand over to the AI control of 20 or 30 Divisions and the AI makes a right old mess of moving them and while its clear you can make a very detailed plan and effectively have manual control the problem I have..........

Is trying to grasp the concept behind game play that involves the creation of what are in effect not the actual movements of your units, it is only later after you have started to execute your plan that the real interaction between the player and the enemy AI will take place. So for example you could create an extremely detailed plan and never even penetrate the enemies front line and while that is an unlikely occurrence it does illustrate the problem that all the detail you have poured into making the plan could be a waste of time.

Of course this may mimic real life but its very unusual for a game to have a player invest time in game play that has not happened yet and that may never happen, very odd still trying to grasp the idea.

I dont intend to "just hand over 20-30 divisions to the AI" and making a good battleplan for a large offensive doesnt (from what we have seen so far) take any more time, than giving orders to units in HoI3, at the start of major offensive.

I plan to interfere with unit orders, if i think there is a good reason for it, but I generally like reallistic features like battleplans.

If you make a plan for an offensive and your units dont get past initial frontline, you planned it poorly.

 

[Poh]

Is trying to grasp the concept behind game play that involves the creation of what are in effect not the actual movements of your units, it is only later after you have started to execute your plan that the real interaction between the player and the enemy AI will take place. So for example you could create an extremely detailed plan and never even penetrate the enemies front line and while that is an unlikely occurrence it does illustrate the problem that all the detail you have poured into making the plan could be a waste of time.

Of course this may mimic real life but its very unusual for a game to have a player invest time in game play that has not happened yet and that may never happen, very odd still trying to grasp the idea.

Isnt this the whole point which can make it the greates thing ever? You have to make a decision based on the information you have at hand and then it might to really well, might work or might just fall apart because the opponent has found the plan or has somehow countered the plan you made.

 

[Lech Kaczynski]

Isnt this the whole point which can make it the greates thing ever? You have to make a decision based on the information you have at hand and then it might to really well, might work or might just fall apart because the opponent has found the plan or has somehow countered the plan you made.

What is I have ten divisions and I have them move towards warsaw, I have 10 divisions to defend, what if I simply make a very small axis of attack and wipe out one stack, then take penalties and wipe out smaller stacks whack a mole style, so doesn't react. This could easily exploited if the AI takes 10 divisions moves in a line, doesn't want penalty from manually moving units pick off one division at a time. Like I said eu4 whack a mole.

Or all my smaller divisions go to single point and simple stack attack Victoria style. Let's say they attack toward warsaw and that is end point simply another way to move units to a point, more efficient stackpvinh basically

 

[Centurion1973]

If one side have spread their forces, they risk getting into problem if enemy concentrate forces against individual units - just like IRL.

If you make a stupid plan , be prepared to suffere the consequences.

I dont expect penalty for manual order to be very big (just enough to motivate players not to do it without a good reason) and choice (whether to intervene or not) is yours.

 

[Lech Kaczynski]

If one side have spread their forces, they risk getting into problem if enemy concentrate forces against individual units - just like IRL.

If you make a stupid plan , be prepared to suffere the consequences.

I dont expect penalty for manual order to be very big (just enough to motivate players not to do it without a good reason) and choice (whether to intervene or not) is yours.

We talking about the AI here, ever play against russia in eu like as Lithuania for example. I can see the AI using single divisions and throwing them along some attack axis, towards some objective maybe suicidally, maybe it will make one large stack. Anyway .....

There are some limitations to the Clausewitz engine, if they lower amount of divisions, and lower organization, I would expect combat more similar to eu4. Those divisional hq were probably a blessing and curse, for the AI.

I simply expect it would be very difficult to program, that's why its annoying the pvp is sooo bad in their games.

 

[Drewbdu]

Funny, in my eyes this describes HOI3 pretty well and is one of the reasons I'm glad they're changing things for HOI4 .

This. At least in HOI 4 they're making it so the information that is shown is information that actually matters. In HOI 3 it was just micromanagement for micromanagement's sake.

 

[jju_57]

Battle plans could suck if you hand over to the AI control of 20 or 30 Divisions and the AI makes a right old mess of moving them and while its clear you can make a very detailed plan and effectively have manual control the problem I have..........

Seems like there are two complaints.

1) I don't want the AI to do anything as it will mess with my plans.
2) I don't want to micromanage everything

Well sorry but either the AI will handle it and you have to deal with it or you micro. This is EXACTLY the same thing that happened in HOI1, HOI2 and HOI3. But PDS hopes the BP will minimize the flaws of the AI.

 

[Centurion1973]

We talking about the AI here, ever play against russia in eu like as Lithuania for example. I can see the AI using single divisions and throwing them along some attack axis, towards some objective maybe suicidally, maybe it will make one large stack. Anyway .....

There are some limitations to the Clausewitz engine, if they lower amount of divisions, and lower organization, I would expect combat more similar to eu4. Those divisional hq were probably a blessing and curse, for the AI.

I simply expect it would be very difficult to program, that's why its annoying the pvp is sooo bad in their games.

Even in HoI3, AI wasnt that stupid....

Besides you control width of frontline for that group - so if you assign 12 Inf division on frontline of 4 provinces, it wont be advancing with single division per province. If you assign 10 division to frontline 10 provinces wide, dont be surprised, that your forces are spread out.

 

[Lech Kaczynski]

Even in HoI3, AI wasnt that stupid....

Besides you control width of frontline for that group - so if you assign 12 Inf division on frontline of 4 provinces, it wont be advancing with single division per province. If you assign 10 division to frontline 10 provinces wide, dont be surprised, that your forces are spread out.

Well, this is more complicated now I think for the AI than it might at first appear, we will see. You have to understand that the AI will be playing by somewhat same rules, I am not sure whats that will look like. I dont think there are historical levels of units, but we will see, you aren't going to have 400 divisions to distribue on the eastern front for example. I dont know that for a fact but from most screenshots it appears this way,.

 

[Centurion1973]

By assigning units within battleplan some width of frontline and where they should go severely restricts AI options to screw up that plan, because those units will be restricted to that frontline and direction/target.

Eastern front in HoI3 was around 50 provinces wide and pretty much nobody attacked USSR with much less than 150 divisions (and often many more). We were told, that HoI4 will have similar number of provinces (around 10% higher)

And for big battles, players always concentrate their forces, so places where they attack, usually have all frontage used.

 

[Poh]

What is I have ten divisions and I have them move towards warsaw, I have 10 divisions to defend, what if I simply make a very small axis of attack and wipe out one stack, then take penalties and wipe out smaller stacks whack a mole style, so doesn't react. This could easily exploited if the AI takes 10 divisions moves in a line, doesn't want penalty from manually moving units pick off one division at a time. Like I said eu4 whack a mole.

Or all my smaller divisions go to single point and simple stack attack Victoria style. Let's say they attack toward warsaw and that is end point simply another way to move units to a point, more efficient stackpvinh basically

I dont even think i understand what you are saying. But if you try something obscure why wouldnt the AI react to it? Even if i make a battleplan where the AI have to advance along a long front, if you punch a hole in that front, do you just think the AI will ignore your amassed troops and the fact that you punched a whole? Okay ofcourse it all also depends on the amount of units, how thin they are strenced etc.

Well, this is more complicated now I think for the AI than it might at first appear, we will see. You have to understand that the AI will be playing by somewhat same rules, I am not sure whats that will look like. I dont think there are historical levels of units, but we will see, you aren't going to have 400 divisions to distribue on the eastern front for example. I dont know that for a fact but from most screenshots it appears this way,.

Have we seen screenshots that isnt 1936 Germany trying to invade Poland?

 

[Modestus]

Battle plans are not the actual movements of your Divisions they are the intended movement of your Divisions so part of the game play involves making movements for Divisions that are essentially imaginary. You have no idea if any of those Divisions will reach their goals and the more elaborate the plan the more likely you will need to change it.

Once that plan is executed you become an observer monitoring the actual movements of your Divisions whereas in HOI III your actual movements are your plan and you can change it as you wish. The penalty in HOI IV for intervening in a plan cannot be punitive as it makes little sense to penalise a change to a plan that makes that plan better.

Yes we can all come up with excuses why there should be a reason why this Division gets penalised for moving into that province instead of this one but it makes little sense to do so.

So while it looks nice to draw arrows and assign divisions to those arrows and call it a battle plan what is it really but only an extra layer of management that you will almost certainly have to change and if you want the enemy AI to be any good you hope you will have to change.

 

[Centurion1973]

Battle plans are not the actual movements of your Divisions they are the intended movement of your Divisions so part of the game play involves making movements for Divisions that are essentially imaginary. You have no idea if any of those Divisions will reach their goals and the more elaborate the plan the more likely you will need to change it.

Once that plan is executed you become an observer monitoring the actual movements of your Divisions whereas in HOI III your actual movements are your plan and you can change it as you wish. The penalty in HOI IV for intervening in a plan cannot be punitive as it makes little sense to penalise a change to a plan that makes that plan better.

Yes we can all come up with excuses why there should be a reason why this Division gets penalised for moving into that province instead of this one but it makes little sense to do so.

So while it looks nice to draw arrows and assign divisions to those arrows and call it a battle plan what is it really but only an extra layer of management that you will almost certainly have to change and if you want the enemy AI to be any good you hope you will have to change.

I dont see some mild penalty for changing orders, as problematic - IRL ordering whole division to change planned movement or attack at least resulted in loss of ORG (in game terms) and often caused logistical problems and temporarily reduced coordination between elements of that division.

 

[jju_57]

Let's see if I understand the objections now.

1) I want the OOB/CoC because that represents real life and is authentic.
2) I don't want the BP because I want to be able to change my plans with no penalty and no delay even if 100,000 troops are involved.

 

[HeilLoki]

Scenario 1: You draw a complex battleplan with a billion different operations. It takes you an hour to draw it. You're proud of yourself and you know, this plan will be great. You click "execute" and the AI skrews up everything, because that's what AIs are known for. Now you need to do everything yourself anyways. You get penalties, because you intervened. Battle plan was useless. 1 hour work for nothing.

Scenario 2: Just like the first one, but this time the AI doesn't suck. You watch the AI, look after them (enough Panzers and rifles for them) and that's the game. Well, that wasn't fun.


Scenario 3: You draw a battleplan in 1 second (basically: Assign all, arrow to Moscow, done). Your plan is crap and the AI skrews up. You now need to manually control your units anyways.

Scenario 4: Just like the third scenario, but this time the AI is good enough to break the enemy, despite the fact, you're a terrible general with terrible battleplans. Where's the game? Fun factor: -17.000


Is there any scenario I forgot about? I just don't see how battleplans can be fun & useful at the same time.


I fear that Scenario 1 and 3 are the most reasonable to expect. I fear that battleplans will be as meaningful as in HOI3 or a way of removing the "war part" from this game... Well, that's rather unfortunate for a game that's about a world war.

And just to be clear: I love Paradox and I don't think, they are dumb, mean or evil. I think they love their games at least as much as their fans love their games, but I have a bad feeling about this. And I don't like having a bad feeling about HOI4, because I love this series.

 

[Lech Kaczynski]

I dont even think i understand what you are saying. But if you try something obscure why wouldnt the AI react to it? Even if i make a battleplan where the AI have to advance along a long front, if you punch a hole in that front, do you just think the AI will ignore your amassed troops and the fact that you punched a whole? Okay ofcourse it all also depends on the amount of units, how thin they are strenced etc.



Have we seen screenshots that isnt 1936 Germany trying to invade Poland?

I'm concerned it may make the AI more exploitable, directly linked to battle plan mechanics.

 

[Heatth]

Is there any scenario I forgot about? I just don't see how battleplans can be fun & useful at the same time.

You forgot all the scenarios where you adjust the battleplans in the middle, not because the AI screwed up, but because you didn't have all the information and/or the enemy countered your plans efficiently.

Also, I am not sure how this "manual control penalty works" (first time I've heard was in this thread), but I am pretty sure being able to adjust your battleplan was already confirmed and I doubt there will be any penalty incurred.

 

[Centurion1973]

Scenario 1: You draw a complex battleplan with a billion different operations. It takes you an hour to draw it. You're proud of yourself and you know, this plan will be great. You click "execute" and the AI skrews up everything, because that's what AIs are known for. Now you need to do everything yourself anyways. You get penalties, because you intervened. Battle plan was useless. 1 hour work for nothing.

Scenario 2: Just like the first one, but this time the AI doesn't suck. You watch the AI, look after them (enough Panzers and rifles for them) and that's the game. Well, that wasn't fun.


Scenario 3: You draw a battleplan in 1 second (basically: Assign all, arrow to Moscow, done). Your plan is crap and the AI skrews up. You now need to manually control your units anyways.

Scenario 4: Just like the third scenario, but this time the AI is good enough to break the enemy, despite the fact, you're a terrible general with terrible battleplans. Where's the game? Fun factor: -17.000


Is there any scenario I forgot about? I just don't see how battleplans can be fun & useful at the same time.


I fear that Scenario 1 and 3 are the most reasonable to expect. I fear that battleplans will be as meaningful as in HOI3 or a way of removing the "war part" from this game... Well, that's rather unfortunate for a game that's about a world war.

And just to be clear: I love Paradox and I don't think, they are dumb, mean or evil. I think they love their games at least as much as their fans love their games, but I have a bad feeling about this. And I don't like having a bad feeling about HOI4, because I love this series.

1. What about scenario, where AI mostly does as it is ordered and player intervene only when something unexpected happens (which isnt all that rare, unless you are invading Luxemburg)?

2. Nothing is stopping you from removing penalty for manual control and pretending that battleplans dont exist - just like playing HoI3.

 

[Centurion1973]

You forgot all the scenarios where you adjust the battleplans in the middle, not because the AI screwed up, but because you didn't have all the information and/or the enemy countered your plans efficiently.

Also, I am not sure how this "manual control penalty works" (first time I've heard was in this thread), but I am pretty sure being able to adjust your battleplan was already confirmed and I doubt there will be any penalty incurred.

Podcat said, that manually controlled unit will have some penalty (or lack bonus for executing battleplan). I dont expect that penalty to be big - just big enough so that player doesnt interfere with ongoing battleplan without a good reason.

 

[Histenchist]

I'd be willing to bet that the battleplan-system either will be scrapped before release, or it will be removed in close-to-release-dlc. They already changed the system a couple of times because it didn't work/it wasn't fun enough.