I assume you meant developer right?
I agree, I mean I see some interesting idea in Battlegoats latest game but I was rather disappointed with the previous Supreme Ruler games. It seems that only Paradox can make a great Grand Strategy game.
-
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.
I assume you meant developer right?
I agree, I mean I see some interesting idea in Battlegoats latest game but I was rather disappointed with the previous Supreme Ruler games. It seems that only Paradox can make a great Grand Strategy game.
I don't want this idea at all. I prefer them to concentrate on WWII and it's prelude. Unlike some others though, I do like the idea of a cold war game. Some have said it would be boring with no war, but I don't see it like that. Force build up, development, industry/economics, politics and limited or proxy wars could be really interesting. Many folk enjoy the build up to WWII and the development/building/deployment phase just as much as the combat, so having this in a cold war situation over a 30 year time period, with the occasional crisis and small war could be great. Just not in HOI though.
I also like the idea of a HOI3 style game running from about 1908 (HMS Dreadnought) through WWI. Some have been critical of this, saying warfare on static fronts would be boring too, but I think the big picture in the conflict could be really interesting if it was done well.
I also like the idea of a HOI3 style game running from about 1908 (HMS Dreadnought) through WWI. Some have been critical of this, saying warfare on static fronts would be boring too, but I think the big picture in the conflict could be really interesting if it was done well.
Definitely I am to for HOI III to stay around ww2 era.
Simply it is tuned for that period.
We can allso argue,more philosophicaly,is global war possible after nuclear era?
I think its not, because after 1950 strategic weapons became so powerful that any global war will be anihillation ...
So any realistic HOI III(game about global war) should end by 1950 or so.
Simply it is tuned for that period.
We can allso argue,more philosophicaly,is global war possible after nuclear era?
I think its not, because after 1950 strategic weapons became so powerful that any global war will be anihillation ...
So any realistic HOI III(game about global war) should end by 1950 or so.
But this new GAME/EXPANSION/SCENARIO should not just be about the Cold War! It should be about the history of the Soviet Union. Like Victoria II should be about the Victorian-age (1936-1901).
I'm not saying you should make HoI-III less of a World War II game, but something like HoI-III could be turned into so much more...
It should be made with a fluid timeline like you see in EU-III. Where you can jump into history at any time, take over anyone of the nations of this era and try to change history with either the Soviets, Americans, Germans etc. Soviet history has an 74 years timeline with a multitude of interesting what if ??? scenarios.
I'm not saying you should make HoI-III less of a World War II game, but something like HoI-III could be turned into so much more...
It should be made with a fluid timeline like you see in EU-III. Where you can jump into history at any time, take over anyone of the nations of this era and try to change history with either the Soviets, Americans, Germans etc. Soviet history has an 74 years timeline with a multitude of interesting what if ??? scenarios.
I agree that the Cold War era would deserve it's own game, along the lines of Vicky 2 rather than HoI3. Diplomacy, spheres of influence, espionage and small wars/proxy wars would probably have to feature strongly. There would still be scope for conventional warfare but not on the same scale as that in HoI3. Ultimately it would make for an interesting game if there were a way to enable the Cold War to go "hot" with war in Europe or Asia. Obviously it would be have to be challenging for the player to get his/her country involved in a large scale war.
The more I think about it, the Cold War era sounds pretty interesting but I imagine it would be very complex.
The more I think about it, the Cold War era sounds pretty interesting but I imagine it would be very complex.
If they were to make a cold war game, I'd really want to have the ability to port a save game from HOI3 into it. For that matter I'd love to be able to port a save game file through all of the games. It would be a great way to tie them all together.
If there were to be a cold war game produced I think that a hot war in Europe or elsewhere should be possible. Perhaps the major nuclear nations would try to win by conventional means. Nuclear would be held untilsomeone was definitely losing. Even then we could probably think os a reason, spurious or not why nuclear was never used. After all it is all fiction! many smaller conflicts were very interesting, the Arab/Israely wars for instance - could you beat 6 days?
General sir John Hacketts book the third world war is interesting reading
General sir John Hacketts book the third world war is interesting reading
I agree. Cold War was more a political, economical and even 'prestige' struggle. With a very special dynamic for changes (people in democracies or popular revolts, minorities in insurgencies, elites imposing their point of views by force, "special operations" giving support to factions...) and warfare (more civil wars and regional 'champions' rather than direct clashes between the big ones, with some exceptions -Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan-).
I mean... it would be great that the path opened by Paradox with Sengoku (a CKish Japanese game), and really with Rome (EUish view of Rome republic timeline), could be with a Vickyish Cold War game. Hoping so
Those who always ask for extended timeline did ever play the game in the 1936-1946 period?
If you allow more interwar perioud (i.e. starting from 1933 or even earlier) then the human player can make way too good preparations.
And by 1946 you most probably lost/won the war, if not it will happen in the next 5 or so years. So what would the next 30+ years add? Time to build 100 carrier as Nepal?
If you allow more interwar perioud (i.e. starting from 1933 or even earlier) then the human player can make way too good preparations.
And by 1946 you most probably lost/won the war, if not it will happen in the next 5 or so years. So what would the next 30+ years add? Time to build 100 carrier as Nepal?
You don't have to begin at the beginning of the timeline every game (EU-III and EU-Rome), nor do you have to follow real historic events.
You can begin in 1917 fighting the Russian Revolution and have it spread into Europe. Or, you can begin a game in 1936 and attack Poland or Hitler, thus beginning a Global Revolution instead of the real Second World War. Or, you can choose to start at the outbreak of the Korean War and launch an all out assult on Western Europe. These are just a few of the many possible scenarios within Soviet history.
HoI-II ended up with an extended timeline from 1936 to 1964, without breaking the game.
europa universalis ends 1835
victoria 2 goes from 1836-1935
hoi3 from 1936-1947
so paradox won't let the game start earlier and it ends 1947 because it is a WW2 game.
victoria 2 goes from 1836-1935
hoi3 from 1936-1947
so paradox won't let the game start earlier and it ends 1947 because it is a WW2 game.
If you really think about it World War 2 actually began When the Serbian Arch Duke was assinated triggering WWI and ended with the end of Vietnam. When WWI technically ended the comflicts didn't go away, they simply moved out of Europe and into the colonies. At the end of '45 you still had the Civil war going on in China which was as much a war between the Allies and the Comintern as anything that occured in Europe. In '47 you had the Arab-Isreali war which was also a continuation of events from WWII. Then there was Korea, and before Korea was over the French were all ready fighting the Viet-cong which led to American involment in the '60's. 61 years of war, and it's all interconnected.
It's simple:
If the game was one that it would have cost $ ~100. Who spends so much money on one game?
So we have three games that cost $ 30 for each.
of course there is a one other problem. Someone like WWII but I do not like the Napoleonic Wars
You know, with this reasoning, you could go as far as saying that World War Two started when man invented fire...
well, of course both are connected but world war II did not start together with WW I. however, your argument does not change that that part of world history is covered with victoria II by paradox.
and by the way before WWI we had the wars leading to the unification of germany. i am sure you can connect WWI and the war of 1870/71.
and don't forget napoleon, the vikings and the romans...