Will HoI4 be more competant than HoI3 at modelling the Pacific?

[Reman]

-Will Japan get bogged down in a decade long WWI-style conflict with China, making it completely ignore the Pacific?
-Will the AI UK be able to do anything besides weakly resist the invasion of France, then sit out for the rest of the fight?
-Will the AI US be able to do anything at all?
-Will this game actually model the other half of WW2, since it calls itself a WW2 game?
-Will this game be more than "Germany BTFO's most of Europe, Germany and Russia get into a fistfight, then the game ends" like HoI3 was?

HoI3 was a European wargame. Will we get a true WW2 game this time?

 

[griffor]

it would be nice, but i suppose if not at least multiplayer seems fun

 

[LordOfWar16]

In HoI III the ai had really big trouble with naval invasions due to the seperate transports. One of the 2 main reasons for dedicated transports being gone, aside from making it easer and less clickintensive, was to greatly help out the AI with naval invasions.

Other than that, with the national "neutrality" essentially being gone, you have much more options as countries like the US or switzerland for example. You are no longer forced to simply watch the war going, untill your neutrality drops low enough so that you can do anything.

Sure, atleast in this week's WWW the italian AI didn't seem to be interested into Lybia at all, but thats why the game is still in alpha overall.

 

[Denkt]

Large strategic areas and few but important naval missions (and air missions) should keep the ai a bit more competitive in the naval war. Naval invasion seems much easier to order now which also helps.

 

[johan-erik]

HOI 3 was less fun when the AI was sailing around with 50-60 ship fleets and their transports in the Pacific. I hope that fleets in HOI 4 are slightly more nuanced, composed and sized according to needs rather than the standard Death star model of 60 ships.

 

[admiral-krause]

What bothered me in previous games (HoI II, AoD) was humans in MP or AI stacking up lots of divisions on tiny islands. 9 divisions on Midway? This island is no more than a landing stripe.

Anyone knows how this is in HoI IV?

 

[Damiani]

What bothered me in previous games (HoI II, AoD) was humans in MP or AI stacking up lots of divisions on tiny islands. 9 divisions on Midway? This island is no more than a landing stripe.

Anyone knows how this is in HoI IV?

I doubt that this would be implemented, but as we know from DD40 regions are now given classifications, so perhaps regions that are classified as "Tiny Islands" or "Enclaves" could have a unit cap so as to prevent impossible stacking on tiny strips of land.

 

[LordOfWar16]

What bothered me in previous games (HoI II, AoD) was humans in MP or AI stacking up lots of divisions on tiny islands. 9 divisions on Midway? This island is no more than a landing stripe.

Anyone knows how this is in HoI IV?

the new supply system doesnt allow it. You can only support so much units/ships/planes in an supply area/harbour/airfield. If your units get out of supply they will start suffering attrition, which will get worse and worse untill they are literally starving.

 

[phantomrider]

Japan is actually fun to play in HOI3 because it has the initiative and the goal is to see if you can defeat the US piecemeal multiple times to keep the US from ever getting to the stage where they simply overwhelm the Japanese. I do agree that combined arms in the Pacific (air sea land) was not well done (in HOI3) and hope for better. The British in HOI3 are no fun to play because they do not effectively control even the commonwealth forces that historically fought as a common military in WWII and there is no way to really set up joint commands with the US that coordinated and controlle armies and army groups in Europe. HOI2 with its assume military control was much better at making the western allies have some opportunity to simulate history. In HOI3 having the UK, South Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand running all over the globe as "independent" forces and no way the really coordinate the US and Great Britain as tightly as they did in reality was a major drawback to single player games.

 

[Admiral Piett]

One of the biggest problems in the PTO was linked with the British AI IMO. Sure, the Second Sino-Japanese War was screwed, and Death Star fleets got old fast, but not having any credible British threat made most of the Southern Advance busy work rather than a war. In all of my Japan games, the most I ever saw defending Malaya and Singapore was one garbage division. ONE. Burma? Maybe a couple divisions. India? Maybe a corps. Maybe. There was no challenge. It was just " a matter of marching" as they say. Once you had control of Singapore, you could use it as a base to completely wipe out the RN as it trickled over to the Pacific piecemeal.

 

[Daelyn75]

Japan is actually fun to play in HOI3 because it has the initiative and the goal is to see if you can defeat the US piecemeal multiple times to keep the US from ever getting to the stage where they simply overwhelm the Japanese. I do agree that combined arms in the Pacific (air sea land) was not well done (in HOI3) and hope for better. The British in HOI3 are no fun to play because they do not effectively control even the commonwealth forces that historically fought as a common military in WWII and there is no way to really set up joint commands with the US that coordinated and controlle armies and army groups in Europe. HOI2 with its assume military control was much better at making the western allies have some opportunity to simulate history. In HOI3 having the UK, South Africa, Canada, Australia and New Zealand running all over the globe as "independent" forces and no way the really coordinate the US and Great Britain as tightly as they did in reality was a major drawback to single player games.

That is my complaint as well. I wish that each nation of the commonwealth would set up a coordinated command with Great Britain leading it as it was historically done. Let the AI nations guard their borders/coasts, but allow extra units to be sent off to the unified command. We especially need this type of thing when the USA get's involved. Say in Europe have a unified command and either Britain or the USA take control of it, well the player if the others are AI, otherwise split it like how it was historically. Historically the USA took overall command of the army, and Britain took overall control of the Air forces and Navy. Germany can also benefit from this sort of set up as well when it comes to Italy and their other allies. A unified command system would work great here.

Other than that, yeah the lack of any real Pacific war always bothered me in previous HOI games. I really hope it is fixed here. I haven't seen the latest WWW, but the one right before the war began last week, showed that Japan hadn't advanced into China at all when they went to take a look. Parts of the game are still not complete, but it's OK, since it is still in Alpha.

 

[phantomrider]

One of the biggest problems in the PTO was linked with the British AI IMO. Sure, the Second Sino-Japanese War was screwed, and Death Star fleets got old fast, but not having any credible British threat made most of the Southern Advance busy work rather than a war. In all of my Japan games, the most I ever saw defending Malaya and Singapore was one garbage division. ONE. Burma? Maybe a couple divisions. India? Maybe a corps. Maybe. There was no challenge. It was just " a matter of marching" as they say. Once you had control of Singapore, you could use it as a base to completely wipe out the RN as it trickled over to the Pacific piecemeal.

Actually while I agree with most of your post in WWII once Prince of Wales and Repulse was sunk and then the Japanese raided the Indian Ocean and sank an RN CV plus some smaller stuff (and the allied combined fleet in what is now Indonesia got wiped out) the RN was essentially absent from the Pacific until 1944.