Variants - strip armor/features

[Viktor_Vertex]

I like the idea of variants however i see a possible 'limitation'.
As of now if you add armor to a tank, it makes it slower which makes sense. However, if you want to make a very fast variant of a tank, you would both upgrade the engine AND strip armor.
My suggestion is this. Make the default models features like armor, guns, engine etc start at 5, but you can make them anywhere from 0 to 10...
This would be useful for many reasons, adding speed to tanks without adding fuel consumption(Japanese tanks in China).
France could make a super short range but super manouverable fighter plane for example by removing from range stat.
Japan might also want to strip armor from their kamikaze bombers.

What are your thoughts about making a variant by removing some features(since its a trade-off in any direction, removing or adding). I think it would give a bit more depth to variants since more extreme, niche versions of a certain machine become possible.

 

[Raptor83]

IMO: It would likely be impossible for AI to effectively design and use such extreme builds (too big a risk of AI messing up its equipment).

 

[Viktor_Vertex]

IMO: It would likely be impossible for AI to effectively design and use such extreme builds (too big a risk of AI messing up its equipment).

Optimizing a design is just math, something that computers are much better in than humans.

 

[5688]

Does the AI even use variants?

 

[AapoAlas]

Does the AI even use variants?

Hopefully and pretty sure they do, otherwise it would be a somewhat wasted mechanic.

Now on the topic here: Tanks do not consume fuel. Fuel does not exist in the game as an operational resource. No need to worry about increasing usage through adding speed to your tank. Here are the variant options:

Armor: Max Speed -0.12 km/h, Reliability -4.0%, +1.0 Amor per point
Reliability: Reliability +8.0%
Main Gun: Soft Attack +1.1, Max Speed -0.12, Reliability -4.0%, Hard Attack +0.6, Piercing +4.0
Engine: Max Speed +0.24 km/h

You are free to add speed without any downsides. So speed stat is a non-issue. Reliability likewise. Downsizing Armor because you want more speed? One point change gives you more speed from the Speed stat, same with reliability. Same thing with Main Gun. The only possible use I could see would be to reduce the IC required by a little but at the moment variants cost no extra IC anyway so that wouldn't be a thing.

0/5.

 

[gamedude]

Optimizing a design is just math, something that computers are much better in than humans.

You don't understand Paradox's AI. It does some questionable choices.

 

[ArcandSpark]

I really like this idea but the effect of changing stats would have to be different than what they are. Like if adding speed reduced reliability then I would make an infantry support tank by removing the engine stats to have a super reliable tank because all it has to move at is 4kph anyways. Right now that is not really possible.

For the AI tank types could be scripted or the AI could be made no not do any crazy designs and more or less stick with a standard build.

For your idea to work they need to change the stats but I think that they should do it in the next expansion since they will have more data to go off of.

 

[Viktor_Vertex]

It should be noted that stripping armor and guns was historically used, in aviation to increase range.
Yes stats might have to change a bit, but unless the engine is really weirdly written, this should be very easy to implement.

Hopefully and pretty sure they do, otherwise it would be a somewhat wasted mechanic.

Now on the topic here: Tanks do not consume fuel. Fuel does not exist in the game as an operational resource.

You are free to add speed without any downsides. So speed stat is a non-issue. Reliability likewise. Downsizing Armor because you want more speed? One point change gives you more speed from the Speed stat, same with reliability. Same thing with Main Gun. The only possible use I could see would be to reduce the IC required by a little but at the moment variants cost no extra IC anyway so that wouldn't be a thing.

0/5.

Yes but supply does, and changing supply consumption based on variant is logical, so it was done in HOI 3 where techs would increase fuel consumption.
You are free to add speed up until a limit, and at an increasing cost with each upgrade(currently, its any upgrade, but that is technically speaking easy to modify). One possible thing to do is for exp price to change say x per lvl 1 change, 1.5 x per 2, 2x per 3 and so on... In which case it might be more xp efficient to strip (as it was historically done).
Also you are thinking only in tanks.
Aircraft and ships are also affected.

 

[Raptor83]

It should be noted that stripping armor and guns was historically used, in aviation to increase range.
.....

Those were usually temporary field modifications, made due to special circumstances and affected planes were usually later returned to original state.

 

[Orlunu]

Those were usually temporary field modifications, made due to special circumstances and affected planes were usually later returned to original state.

Read up on Japanese aviation development. This is completely the opposite of what happened, designs were permanently and massively stripped of important components to increase range.

 

[Gort11]

Read up on Japanese aviation development. This is completely the opposite of what happened, designs were permanently and massively stripped of important components to increase range.

That sounds interesting, do you have some examples?

 

[Orlunu]

That sounds interesting, do you have some examples?

Probably the most infamous of the modifications was the removal of self-sealing fuel tanks. It is often thought that the Japanese just hadn't developed them, but this is completely untrue. Almost all aircraft were made without them because the standard way of meeting specifications was to design the plane and then strip the design of progressively more important components until it could fit the requirements. This is why, for instance, almost all western literature states that the Ki-43 (the highest scoring Japanese fighter) never had self-sealing fuel tanks, when they were actually produced with them right from the very first aircraft.

The Allies actually stripped out some of the F4F's components as standard, as well, although that one was officially disapproved of. Quite a few planes had machineguns removed from the wings, for manoeuvrability rather than endurance.

 

[Denkt]

Such aircrafts would have very low reability score so to allow you to spend more points into the other areas.

A light tank variant with 5 points in engine and zero into gun and armor will be quite fast.

 

[TheRomanRuler]

Yes please. I really want some kind of "victory fighter" AKA regular interceptor with less range that is designed to only protect industrial areas/other important areas. They would have small range becouse they are only guarding small area that they are not allowed to leave at any event, for example if i want Berlin to be protected i don`t want my Berlin interceptors to move into France. So they really don`t need range, so why carry that extra fuel with them?
Then i would have longer range fighters to fight over air superiority of entire Reich, and then i might even have long range fighters centered in center of Germany which will reinforce any area that is threatened by enemy.

That kind of 3 layer defense has worked extremely effectively for me in HOI3, but i don`t know about HOI4, and i am not air expert by any means.

 

[Gort11]

Three-layered air defense won't work in HoI4. Bombers teleport to their targets, so if you've got fighters over England on intercept, fighters over the Channel on intercept, and fighters over Northern France on intercept, only that last group will get to fight.

 

[Secret Master]

Optimizing a design is just math, something that computers are much better in than humans.

Have you ever played HOI3, Vic2, any version of EU, or CK2?

Because in each game, there are plenty of game mechanics that boil down to optimizing math, and the AI fails all the time.

Just watch Capitalists in Vic2 for 100 years and see what kinds of choices they make when building factories from scratch. Their failure rate is almost hilarious, until you see your own capitalists build their 25th failing fertilizer factory.

Or perhaps divisions fielded by the AI in HOI3. HARM/HARM/MOT/nothing....

Horde and retinue composition by AI rulers in CK2.

The AI fails at math all the time. Not because it can't do the Algebra, but because it can't do "word problems" very well.

 

[potski]

Then i would have longer range fighters to fight over air superiority of entire Reich, and then i might even have long range fighters centered in center of Germany which will reinforce any area that is threatened by enemy.

While naval fleets can be assigned to patrolling in up to three regions, air wings can't. You have to decide which single region they will operate in. If you want them to cover three regions then you will have to split up the air wing.

 

[Viktor_Vertex]

Three-layered air defense won't work in HoI4. Bombers teleport to their targets, so if you've got fighters over England on intercept, fighters over the Channel on intercept, and fighters over Northern France on intercept, only that last group will get to fight.

For now... I reckon that this will be what most of the gameplay-based-outrage on the forums will be about once the game is out, and that it would be "fixed" in a DLC or something.

Because in each game, there are plenty of game mechanics that boil down to optimizing math, and the AI fails all the time.

The AI fails at math all the time. Not because it can't do the Algebra, but because it can't do "word problems" very well.

Maybe, but that is just the fault of Paradox, and not giving the AI neither good templates nor a good objective-setting algorithm. There are many games where AI can beat humans at optimizing and micromanagment.
However, I feel like this isn't important for this topic.
Variants are ingame as is, and there is an AI system, good or bad, to manage them as is...
I'm just proposing that variants go both ways- adding, but also stripping features. There is basically no significant difference in the decision making process of the AI whether you can only add, or both add and remove features(unless it was taught to follow a specific pattern, like just add everything by 1, repeat until out of xp)

 

[aruon]

I'm just proposing that variants go both ways- adding, but also stripping features. There is basically no significant difference in the decision making process of the AI whether you can only add, or both add and remove features(unless it was taught to follow a specific pattern, like just add everything by 1, repeat until out of xp)

this. a good example of a vehicle that is mixed and matched by HOI 4 logic is the KV-1S. greatly upgraded turret, new engine, but reduced armor to stay competitive with the newer T-34 models.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kliment_Voroshilov_tank#KV-1S

 

[Invictus5966]

While naval fleets can be assigned to patrolling in up to three regions, air wings can't. You have to decide which single region they will operate in. If you want them to cover three regions then you will have to split up the air wing.

I think what he is saying is that in the WWW Daniels shorter range planes couldn't cover a zone in China until it was moved closer but longer ranged planes could but less effectively.