-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Probably for the same reason that around 30-40 other major disputed or ethnically different regions are not available as wargoals: they were never implemented. The wargoals system was only partially implemented in FtM, and still far from complete in TFH, so you can place a wargoal to conquer an entire country (regions A, B, and C), or ask for a specific region (Region B), but others were simply not implemented (A and C). This means, Germany can't claim JUST Alsace-Lorraine, without taking other pieces, and there are no wargoals for the southern part of France aside from the few border provinces (totally empty and useless in game terms) which Italy can take.
Playing Hungary, I can place a wargoal to conquer all of Czechoslovakia, I can use "Reclaim Cores" to recover the thin strip of game-recognized Cores along the border (the formerly Hungarian land which was historically returned by Germany via the First Vienna conference), or even claim the German-populated Sudetenland further north, but I can't claim either all of Slovakia or the rest of the southern region which was formerly owned by Hungary, and I can't get those without ending up with Ruthenia as well. Other than Bessarabia (a strip of land along the Soviet border), there are no individual wargoals in Romanian land, so I can't even take back cores there without annexing the entire country.
The game is far from complete, and really needed one more expansion before being dropped in favor of a completely new sequel.
- 2
Are there any mods which only add additional wargoals. It really annoying how you cant take south transilvania, kola or burma as well.
I know that HPP added a heap of wargoals (a very extensive and well-implemented aspect of the mod), but I'm not happy with a few of the other mechanics they introduced in the later versions. Not sure about Black ICE, since I can't run it on my system.
Is there a way only using the wargoals they added without any other Change they made?
If it's even possible, I wouldn't know where to begin. I highly doubt it, otherwise I'd gladly take half of the changes, and toss the other half.
I really wish that there was some mechanism to show the actual territory you actually are fighting over with a Acquire Territory claim. I was good at geography, but my last geography class was almost 50 years ago. Highlight the map, summarize the population, resources, etc. and have the ability to build your own territory (much like defining a theater).
Eeeeeeeh. It gets to a point where there's so many changes that need to be made that updating the old version just isn't worth the effort. Given ALL the new stuff they're doing with 4 that fixes a lot of basic problems with 3 I think it makes sense for them to abandon it.
HoI 4 barely fixes anything. If anything most game mechanics are simply being erasred so theres nothing anymore to fix. A lot of the Problems and oddities in HoI 3 could have easily been fixed with a number of tweaks without changing the entire system
- 1
It (hopefully) fixes the need to micromanage combat to do anything other than attrition warfare and it fixes strategic combat, which are the two weakest points of 3 IMO. Both of those could have been fixed with an addition to 3, but I think it probably takes enough effort that making them part of a new game isn't unreasonable. The supply system weirdness will hopefully disappear with the new system as well. The revised division building system isn't a "fix" per se, but it's a very cool feature that is WAY too much of a switch to fit into an expansion.
COULD they have improved 3 further with another expansion? Absolutely, SHOULD they have put the time and effort into that instead of pursuing a massively revised 4th edition? I don't think it would be the best use of their resources. YMMV.
COULD they have improved 3 further with another expansion? Absolutely, SHOULD they have put the time and effort into that instead of pursuing a massively revised 4th edition? I don't think it would be the best use of their resources. YMMV.
The problem is that all HOI games are finished with a lot of bugs. Don't remember actually HOI, but HOI2 has serious bugs, HOI3 has stupid bugs (in TFH ministers dont work, while in FTM they work ok). Not sure, that HOI4 will have no bugs. And instead of fixing it, there will be HOI5. It's a very sad policy of Paradox games.
All companies do that, it's hardly a Paradox thing. Paradox at least has the excuse that they're a relatively small company doing relatively complex games. Anyone remember Aliens: Colonial Marines?
That being said there comes a point where you have to say that the current game can't support the changes you want to make and move on.
That being said there comes a point where you have to say that the current game can't support the changes you want to make and move on.
I dont remember significant bugs in Civ4, TotalWar:Medieval or even Europa Universalis series. It's proved by many games, that fixing bugs is possible.
You mention Total War: Medieval, what about Rome 2? Not every game is buggy at launch, but most companies have released buggy games at one point or another.
I never disputed that bugs can be fixed. Of course they can. However at some point you have to call a game "good enough" and move on. It would be nice if companies had the resources to indefinitely support every game they ever make, but that's not the world we live in. Paradox could probably make another expansion to 3, but that would take resources away from 4 and they're doing a lot more with 4 than an expansion to 3 would support. Including all the things they're changing would require rebuilding the entire game, but no one would pay $60 for an expansion and it would cost MORE for them to be implemented in an existing system.
I never disputed that bugs can be fixed. Of course they can. However at some point you have to call a game "good enough" and move on. It would be nice if companies had the resources to indefinitely support every game they ever make, but that's not the world we live in. Paradox could probably make another expansion to 3, but that would take resources away from 4 and they're doing a lot more with 4 than an expansion to 3 would support. Including all the things they're changing would require rebuilding the entire game, but no one would pay $60 for an expansion and it would cost MORE for them to be implemented in an existing system.
As for me, I dont need new expansion. Just bug fixes. And I don't believe, this needs so much resources. The problem, that evaluation "good enough" doesn't work for HOI games. HOI mechanics is such complex and difficult, that some bugs are opened only after long time of playing (and by most experienced players). And the nature of this bugs, that it ruins all the fun from the game and devalvate all previously obtained fun. And it makes me very disappointed.
After all, its the test of company honor, when the game doesn't work in key features.
Last edited:
Bug fixing does indeed take a fair amount of resources. Everything that gets changed needs to be tested to ensure that there isn't NEW bugs that have been introduced. As mercenary as it sounds there comes a point where it's not economically feasible to continue patching a game, and a company like Paradox that doesn't have Activision or EA money has to make choices like that.
Additionally it's entirely possible that the bugs CAN'T be fixed without major revisions to the guts of the engine. That's likely what would be necessary to fix the supply problems I've run into myself. When you're talking about a major revision to an entire subsystem the cost multiplies.
Additionally it's entirely possible that the bugs CAN'T be fixed without major revisions to the guts of the engine. That's likely what would be necessary to fix the supply problems I've run into myself. When you're talking about a major revision to an entire subsystem the cost multiplies.
Bugs could take much time, but could take a little time also. Since bug I'm talking of is a bug that appeared in TFH, and all things work well in FTM, I believe it's simple oversight. Somewhere you should place additional () or + instead of -.
Sadly, but this talk leads nowhere, because Paradox will not fix it anyway. So, I stop it.
Sadly, but this talk leads nowhere, because Paradox will not fix it anyway. So, I stop it.