Wish-list for Hearts of Iron 3

[unmerged(49327)]

I wonder when will Paradox start working on HoI3. I hope they already did it

Let's help them a bit! Give them ideas for the upcoming bestseller

So here's some:

-Much more "what if?" event!

-Expandable resource sources. I mean like building facotries. Spend 5 or 10 IC on building a mine which improves the excavation by about 10%. So it could be profitable for the already rich in resources province and where isn't any important amount of minerals there isnt worth it. for example: 100 oil > 10 over 1 year > 120 oil. and 5 rare > 10 ic over 1 year > 6 rare.

-Random resource deposit discoveries event based on real geographical data.

-Random leaders with pictures (like in victoria but with black and white photos of less known officers) with skills and feats too. A minor country should have a commanding genius not only the major powers.

-Option to invest in teach teams based on the actual skill. For example with a tech team with skill 3 costs less to make it skill 4 than a skill level 7 team to make it level 8. Also addable tech team feat (like Training, Piloting, etc) for huge amount of money (invest).

-A little bit more complex diplomacy. A lttle bit more complex intelligence system.

 

[HMS Enterprize]

I would sugest some kind of limit that prevents a country to constantly bulid divisions in peacetime.I'm sure that US didn't have 50+ armored divisions after war and during the war.

Its the endless carriers that make me laugh, UK does that too also...

 

[OptimusP]

Longtime player and reader and i couldn't resist this thread so here goes.

-Create-a-Division sounds neat but don't do it on a brigade or battalion level. Template is a good idea though and i'll suggest another way to create your own divisions that's easy for both players and the developer. My idea is to split the division creating in 3 parts being the Main part, the Flanking part and the Support part. The Main part consist of three parts, one being the most important or Head and giving the division it's main attributes. As a example i'll be building a infantry division. I select Infantry as the Head and then i have two smaller parts to fill in, now here comes the shine: these smaller parts must be filled in with infantry but can be filled in with marines or mountenaires or just plain infantry. So i have a plain Infantry Head and fill the other two with marines, this gives a bonus to river crossing and marsh fighting and the sort to the whole division using the marine parts as a spearhead, same goes for the mountaineers. In case of an armor division these smaller parts needs to be filled with armor units like Heavy tanks, TD's and so forth.

The Flanking part can not be filled with the same category as the Main part. in my example of the infantry division i can't fill in the Flanking part with infantry but with armor. This armor being everything: AC's, TD's, HT's, LT's MT's,...Infantry division should only receive 1 Flanking part, armor division receive 2 so you can fill it with mech inf and marines or Mot and Mountain inf. The advantages of these flanking parts speak for themselve i suppose.

The Support part is actually a copy of the brigade system except the AC, HT, VHT and TD left out (since those can be assigned trhough the Flanking part). Infantry gets 2 Support parts, Armor only one. For Infantry the Support part also determines if it's Mech or Mot by filling one of the support parts with Mech or Mot leaving a extra to be filled with art, at or whatever. You can also assign 2 Mot to this inf division giving the extra bonus that the supplying of this division doesn't drain any TC. You cannot fill the 2 Support parts with both Mech or one Mot or one Mech for balancing reasons.

This system gives you flexibility, ease of use and no fiddling around on battalion level or what not. Also the Support Parts can be easily unassigned and re-assigned to another division like the brigade system.

Also i want a ability to link CAS divisions to an HQ-equipped army (also make the HQ one the options you can chose as a Support part) so the CAS moves with that army and attacks when it's attacking or comes aiding when it's defending. Offcourse i don't really know how you people use your HQ in your army make-up. i use HQ's in all of my 9-division armies

-Modified engineerThe engineer i would like to see modified to actually make them usefull. keep the speed bonus and add the ability that the division it is assigned to dug-in twice as fast and up the dug-in level to 30 for the division when assigned with the engineer.

- Unique Ministers I want to see some real uniques ministers instead of those idealtypes. Give each major country a maximum of two, maybe three. An Example: Albert Speer, assigned as Armaments minister in 1942 when things in Russia where getting clogged up, manages to more then triple the ammunition output in a very short time. So instead of just giving him only the +10%IC bonus, also give him a +10% supply, a -5% production time and a +5% TC bonus. Another Example: Winston Churchill, give the guy a +5 Decryption bonus and some Intelligence bonusses closely linked with partisan activity, Charles de Gaulle, give him a +5-10 dissent in Occupied France bonus or something.

-Exclusive units Besides giving everyone some accurate units (German Panzers being better then Allied and so forth) also add in some unique units like a elite SAS units for UK or the ET (Experimental Tank) for Germany. These units being very expensive and long to produce.

-Technology I would like to see two things changed with the tech-part. One being able to research individual parts like a new '43 submachine gun used by your '39 inf. also i don't want to see "Basic opticals" being researched three times for my LT's, MT's and HT's.
two being techteams helping each other. If you have one team researching something and does not cover all the aspects with it's specialities but another techteam that's researching something else has that speciality ad isn't using it for it's research...then the first techteam gets help from the second and gets a 25% bonus? So this only applies on the tech teams you are using, not the ones who are idle. Also If the second techteam does have a speciality the first doesn't but needs to use it in it's own research it can still be "shared" with the first techteam as long as the second isn't researching that component that needs that speciality.

-Manpower and Labor Add something like LC (Larbor Capacity) which gets filled by lowering MP in a non-combat manner and which should add on annual since you're Manpower drops annually of soldiers having served their prescribed duty. Offcourse this ManPower drain lowers in wartime. Upping LC can be done with prisoners and other means. Also i would like a garrison function that automatically assigns new garrisons to provinces without me doing a lot of micro-management. You set up the criteria (provinces with a airport, who have a higher IC then, who have a higher revolt chance then, when MP is lower then X stop making garrisondivision and so forth) and the order of these criteria and after that distance from your capital will determine which province gets a garrison first. So if you set "all provinces with a airport" and below that "all provinces with a IC Higher then X" it will first send garrisons to all occupied provinces that have airports no matter how far and then send garrisons to provinces with a IC higher then X.

That's all for now, let you know if i come up with other stuff.

 

[unmerged(41649)]

SAS didn't fight on a level of division combat

 

[hellfish6]

Longtime player and reader and i couldn't resist this thread so here goes.

-Create-a-Division sounds neat but don't do it on a brigade or battalion level. Template is a good idea though and i'll suggest another way to create your own divisions that's easy for both players and the developer. My idea is to split the division creating in 3 parts being the Main part, the Flanking part and the Support part. The Main part consist of three parts, one being the most important or Head and giving the division it's main attributes. As a example i'll be building a infantry division. I select Infantry as the Head and then i have two smaller parts to fill in, now here comes the shine: these smaller parts must be filled in with infantry but can be filled in with marines or mountenaires or just plain infantry. So i have a plain Infantry Head and fill the other two with marines, this gives a bonus to river crossing and marsh fighting and the sort to the whole division using the marine parts as a spearhead, same goes for the mountaineers. In case of an armor division these smaller parts needs to be filled with armor units like Heavy tanks, TD's and so forth.


The Flanking part can not be filled with the same category as the Main part. in my example of the infantry division i can't fill in the Flanking part with infantry but with armor. This armor being everything: AC's, TD's, HT's, LT's MT's,...Infantry division should only receive 1 Flanking part, armor division receive 2 so you can fill it with mech inf and marines or Mot and Mountain inf. The advantages of these flanking parts speak for themselve i suppose.

The Support part is actually a copy of the brigade system except the AC, HT, VHT and TD left out (since those can be assigned trhough the Flanking part). Infantry gets 2 Support parts, Armor only one. For Infantry the Support part also determines if it's Mech or Mot by filling one of the support parts with Mech or Mot leaving a extra to be filled with art, at or whatever. You can also assign 2 Mot to this inf division giving the extra bonus that the supplying of this division doesn't drain any TC. You cannot fill the 2 Support parts with both Mech or one Mot or one Mech for balancing reasons.

This system gives you flexibility, ease of use and no fiddling around on battalion level or what not. Also the Support Parts can be easily unassigned and re-assigned to another division like the brigade system.

Also i want a ability to link CAS divisions to an HQ-equipped army (also make the HQ one the options you can chose as a Support part) so the CAS moves with that army and attacks when it's attacking or comes aiding when it's defending. Offcourse i don't really know how you people use your HQ in your army make-up. i use HQ's in all of my 9-division armies

Sorry, but I really don't like this idea. Its pretty unrealistic, doesn't make a whole lot of sense and not a leap forwards from the current system.

-Modified engineerThe engineer i would like to see modified to actually make them usefull. keep the speed bonus and add the ability that the division it is assigned to dug-in twice as fast and up the dug-in level to 30 for the division when assigned with the engineer.

Yes, engineers could be more useful.

- Unique Ministers I want to see some real uniques ministers instead of those idealtypes. Give each major country a maximum of two, maybe three. An Example: Albert Speer, assigned as Armaments minister in 1942 when things in Russia where getting clogged up, manages to more then triple the ammunition output in a very short time. So instead of just giving him only the +10%IC bonus, also give him a +10% supply, a -5% production time and a +5% TC bonus. Another Example: Winston Churchill, give the guy a +5 Decryption bonus and some Intelligence bonusses closely linked with partisan activity, Charles de Gaulle, give him a +5-10 dissent in Occupied France bonus or something.

I honestly like the leaders the way they are. I wouldn't mind if their values were a little bit more unique (i.e. they offer a 3%-7% bonus, vice a flat 5% bonus)

-Exclusive units Besides giving everyone some accurate units (German Panzers being better then Allied and so forth) also add in some unique units like a elite SAS units for UK or the ET (Experimental Tank) for Germany. These units being very expensive and long to produce.

No country had units that were totally exclusive to themselves. At any point the US or UK could have built heavy tanks on par with the Germans, but doctrine and logistics concerns largely forced the end to any of those programs. Likewise for the SAS - the Germans had the Brandenburgers which were roughly equivalent. In addition, a company sized unit is absolutely irrelevant in HoI2.

 

[unmerged(62947)]

1.Should there be system in which you produce rifles,tanks,planes,artillery and other stuff in realistic numbers.So,for example,you would need 200 tanks to create armored division,but you could add another 200 if you want,and 10-15000 rifles (depending on doctrine) to make infantry division.By this way you could also add artillery,trucks etc.

2.This system would give more realistic trade,so you could trade from some country 30 planes and form squadron,but using your own manpower.

 

[Prokman]

New grafix machine! Able to change resolutions! The current crawl miserably after 1940

 

[unmerged(51925)]

clickable map-mode

 

[Myth]

just some random ideas I've had over time:

Allowance for multiple combat events to occur at the same time (or at least that one may counter another, ie assault may be met with a counterattack or tactical withdrawal).

‘Regroup’ combat event for attackers. The attacker ceased fighting while the event occurs (unless met with a counterattack event), and a random reorganization of a random amount of involved divisions (on an individual basis, ideally, and perhaps which divisions and how much may be influenced by leaders). Perhaps a similar event also available to defenders. This would serve to make battles longer, at least somewhat.

‘Not one step back!’ combat event for defenders. It would only be possible to have this event when defending VP locations and would drastically slow down the attackers’ advance. It would make regroup combat events for the enemy much more likely, to balance out. (otherwise, you’d never have epic 4-5 month long battles like Stalingrad or even one month battles like Iwo Jima).

‘Artillery Barrage’ combat event for attackers if he has at least one artillery brigade. Does high strength and org damage, is more likely, more powerful and lasts longer with each additional artillery brigade beyond the first one.

‘Counter-battery Fire’ combat event for defenders if he has at least one artillery brigade. Does high org damage to attackers, and is more likely, more powerful and lasts longer with each additional artillery brigade beyond the first one.

‘Emergency Ground Fire’ combat event if one side has at least one AA brigade and the other side at least one armored division. The AA will be used in ground attack role, dealing high strength and org damage to the armor only. The more AA there is, the higher the damage and the longer it lasts, the more armor there is the more likely it is to occur, and the more spread out the damage would be.

‘Minefield’ combat event if defenders have engineers. Deals high org and light strength damage to attackers. Again, more likely, stronger and longer lasting with each additional engineer brigade.

Encyrption/decryption are individual unit upgrades and/or activate brigades (in the simple HoI2 system) or battalion level building blocks as in Hellfish’s system (ie, probably similar to the signal battalion).

Rivers have 4 possible states with 2 variables. Wide, not wide, fast, not fast. This would make some rivers have a greater intrinsic defense capability than others, as is historical (and makes those rivers more important, as rivers also were).

Turn strategic redeployment into something akin to transports on land—ie, make trains a unit that transports divisions quickly. Obviously the speed of the train is dependent on the infrastructure of the province and the player’s TC, but like strategic redeployment as it is now, once you select a destination it goes the shortest/straightest/least dangerous path (preferably player’s choice) to the destination and once it gets going you can’t change without stopping it first (and thus getting that 24 hour delay). Trains would be somewhat vulnerable to air units, but would get some defensive bonus from the division inside it and they’d incite partisans in conquered territory, making more likely for the partisans to band together into a militia and attack the train. Perhaps, to prevent the map from getting too complicated, also have major and minor train stations (and, of course, the possibility to build them)—they’d act essentially as major and minor ports for transports.

Training mission for units. They become rather vulnerable to attack (having a malus) but they slowly gain experience and their general has a chance at gaining a terrain-based trait.

 

[unmerged(53117)]

HOI3 on the EU3 engine. Sweden immediately annexes Norway, then the war doesn't start because Hitler inherits Poland through marriage. Also the timespan is reduced to 1941-1944.

 

[unmerged(19997)]

I would like to see brigades able to be attach Brigades to corps and armies instead of single divisions.If somebody had 3 division and an engineer brigade under their command chances are the engineers would not stay all the time with the same division but would help what ever division needed their help.
Also allowing a division to have more then one brigade at times. Many so called elite divions where larger then normal divisions and anyone look at some of those supersize division the U.S had in 1945, think the 1st infantry had like an engineer, artillary and tank destoyer attached in game terms
Would also like an option where a leaders abilities where both random and hidden .After all many leaders where found out to be boneheads only after they went into combat.
A way to upgrade division to a different type would be nice. Turning an infantry division into a motorized division was done at times but cannot be done in the game yet to best of my knowledge

 

[Don E]

Allow me to throw me prefernces into the mix

- Possibility to have the game create random leaders rather than the historical. Alternatively the game could keep the original traits, but give random abilities to each.

- With the new game engine relying on 3D graphics introduced for EU3 I think it is inevitable that the same will be done for HoI3 (and all other future Paradox games). For a modern era game I thin kit would be natural to try implement the maps as a globe rather than as a 2D map. I’m thinking something along the lines of Google Earth here, where one could rotate and zoom at will. This will eliminate the problem with oversized provinces in the extreme northern and southern regions. Similarly it would open up the possibility of strategic bomber and subs passing over/under the artic. This was a major part of the cold war strategies between the superpowers, and could easily be implemented in a 3D engine. This will also allow realistic night time periods across the globe.

- More, smaller provinces with a more uniform size. The difference between the Ardennes province and many eastern European provinces are huge. I’d like to see this become more standardised, or perhaps use provinces similar to the layout in CK (one could dream of a continuous map used through CK-EU-Vic-HoI ). Warfare in Siberia gets annoying when one almost makes it to the new province, only to be thrown back at the last minute. Then one have to start moving all over again.

- Motorized/mechanised infantry as an upgrade/addition to current inf units.

- Differentiate between military and civilian industry/resources. In peacetime it should not be possible to amass huge piles of resources or military units which the country has not perceived use for. Market forces worked in those times as well, and an surplus would be sold. One possibility is to implement a harsh gearing modifier on resource extraction as well, combined with either capped resource stockpiles or stockpiles that have diminishing returns as they get bigger.

- Remove unlimited AI naval range. The AI should be good enough to cope with the naval aspect of the game without resorting to such a lame cheat.

 

[unmerged(44587)]

You should have to build warehouses, depots and storage tanks etc in which to keep all your stockpiled resources (energy, metal, rare materials, oil). These would then become targets for the enemy (and partisans by rare event).

 

[HMS Enterprize]

Also the timespan is reduced to 1941-1944.

I cant tell if you are joking or not...

 

[Fielding]

I'd like to see an overhaul/re-thinking of the way supply works in the game.

Historically, supply/logistic issues were a major factor in determining Allied strategy. Eisenhower's dilemma of whether to supply Montgomery or Patton, exacerbated by the logistical nightmare of having to bring supplies in through the Normandy beachhead, just doesn't happen in the game as it stands. Port facilities play no real role in the supply model, so the historical Allied need to capture Antwerp or the western French ports (which the Germans held until nearly the end of the war) just isn't there. Likewise, overland supply lines are too abstracted, reducing the strategic importance of places like Tobruk in the Desert Campaign. Both the Italians/Afrika Korps and the British were plagued by supply problems as the moved too far from their respective supply bases in Tripoli and Alexandria.

So . . .

- I'd like to see some sort of supply/resource handling capacity applied to ports and beachheads. Also along this line perhaps there could be a research tech (secret weapons or industrial?) for artificial ports, like the Mulberries used by the Allies in Normandy. If a player can only bring in a limited amount of supplies per day over a beachhead, it would create a strategic necessity to capture a useable port.
- Supply lines should become much less efficient as the become longer. And, as a previous poster has suggested, there should be the possibility of setting up intermediate supply depots. Perhaps these could work with the existing defined geographic regions/areas? As one gains territory in a new region, supply depots could be automatically established, or, ideally, the player would have the option to do this manually.
- I'd also like to be able to choose a route for sea supply lines, and even better, I'd like to see convoys as actual, individual missions, though with the ability to schedule them to repeat over a period of time. With that I'd like to be able to assign warships to convoy protection. Also, one should have to assign convoys to trade routes where applicable, though again, the option to automate this function should be available also. These changes would make it possible to model the Murmansk convoys and associated engagments that took place in the arctic, and would give Germany a more pressing reason to occupy Norway.
- I suppose that if it were required to assign convoys to overseas trade routes, then it would make a certain amount of sense to require some TC usage for overland trade routes too, though this would probably require tweaking the TC formula.

 

[unmerged(64030)]

Also, take convoy protection a step farther, make their a map where you can see all the convoy routes, and Assign Capital Ships to them if neccesary. I love your idea's, keep it up.

 

[unmerged(65567)]

Interceptors autofly

I think it would be nice to have a mission where interceptors stay grounded until an enemy bomber is sighted and then they fly automatically. This way you would not waste fuel having interceptors fly all the time.

 

[unmerged(72564)]

I have the second the requests for an air mission of "intercept". Keeping planes in the air all the time and grounding those that need to reorg or repair is a pain.

I'd also like to second the request for more "what if" scenarios. I love the idea of asking what would have happened if... What if Rommel had joined the assasin in planting a bomb to kill hitler. What if it had worked?

Rockets work well to batter enemy industry. Especially against countries with intensive Anti-Air. Being able to build strategic rocket launch bases with mission assignments would be helpful. Deploy new rockets to those bases and let them keep auto firing. The org would be on the base instead of the rocket. New rockets lower it, and firings lower it. As would air attack.

Limit firings until the org gets above a certain level.

Greater freedom in developing techs would be great. Allow players to decide if they want their air units to be agile, rugged, well armed or some mix. With range and speed being affected by those choices.

 

[Sgt. Optimus]

-More Yugoslav events
-More Chineese events (for Communists too!)
-Cold War scenario
-Efective nukes
-Longer play time (up to 1992, maybe even 2000?)

 

[MoxPearl]

-- Better Graphics with a proper 3D Globe... With Improved Support for other Resolutions (Eg Widescreen)


-- Sort out something with interceptors... the micromanagement of them is just tedious.


-- Able to select multiple provinces at once


-- Railroads to ferry troops


-- Longer playing time (Maybe up till the end of the soviet union)


-- A Overlay of supply routes and convoys.... eg it could be a map mode.... and better control over them.

 

[stabsoffizier]

-- A Overlay of supply routes and convoys.... eg it could be a map mode.... and better control over them.

Interesting to read wishes for features already implemented in the game. Click the 'Supply' mapmode (click the the little barrel icon) and look at the sealanes, you'll see 'lines' od provinces colored a little more purple, these are your convoy routes, since supply across land works different there is no such thing but look at the color of the provinces, it represents their infrastructrure, major factor for how good your troops ESE is.

-- Railroads to ferry troops

Strategic Redeployment anyone?