WWW Supply and Tactical

[Number 7]

Further, your constant reference to hoi 3 is baffling. Hoi3 had massive problems and comparing what we want from hoi4 with what we got back in 2009, is idiotic. Just because you perceive it to be a bit better than hoi3 do not make it good. If you insist on comparing them, we should expect that hoi4 should solve the issues there was in hoi3.

gee, its almost like its a sequel or something. Sequels typically try to improve from the previous titles, not do something radically different. Hence my reference to hoi3.

if you find someone referring to the previous title in a game series "baffling" i don't know what to say. you at this point do not want to talk about the game, just be pointlessly argumentative. its like if i went into the EU IV forum and said someone was baffling me for bringing up EU3, even though in developer diaries johan and others talked about how EU3 influenced EU IV massively with things like the start date of EU3 being set too early and mechanics they were happy and unhappy with.

as i stated in my post, which you didn't refute at all in the slightest hoi3 has been improved upon by every means in regards to china. the only place i think hoi3 hasnt been improved on is the handling of fuel, and that might get a DLC later and i hope it does.

reference to hoi3 baffling, i'm seriously thinking you're just trolling at this point. please don't baffle me with reference to victoria 2 when they announce vicky3 one day, i don't know if we could handle it

 

[Sun_Killer]

@sons of Bordoms : yor are right that special troops where used to little or not at all, but the enemy had no special troops either, so when two infantry division clash in mountains and on division has a rifle for every soldier and the other has only 1 rifle for every 10 man then it is easy to see why japan would win. So this is more a problem of the start scenario, maybe give china some mountain troops and increase the start equipment by 50%. Now the japan player is forced to play even more carefully and has to use all your mentioned tactics and the right units in the right spot.

 

[Count Drew]

People are concerned. That jungles, Mountains, polar ice caps are non existent ... That there is no effect on a division supposedly that represents that division in WW2 in real life(things like combat modifiers, unit speed, even total hindering of unit movement is not in the game at all..you get full supply in the depths of the Brazilian Rain Forest in 2 weeks can build the infra you need to get there when that's not even possible today). I can drive a fully armored Tank up into a Polar cap and 5 weeks later down into a thick jungle and it will fight the same way and I will forget about it. I think people fear a complete pull away from the tactical and this hands free sort of auto war being a little bit to easy and simplified. Things like Mountain, Marine, Para troops are specialized and ... if you attack a city like Stalingrad you should have to pay for it. Not a speedbump as these Devs have made it appear. Though the reality is when Johan and Daniel got down to business the terrain effects/river effects/type troop effects/air power was not detailed ... down to the -5% plus 5%

Daniel rode through Russia like he did China in this game. Like it was a speedbump losing 5k in troops or whatever(of course he attacked at first light when the country is likely barely mobilized) a fact all Dictatorships always abuse in all games..if they can.. the fact you're opponent cannot defend itself!

Though I think what really is, is that the player Daniel is aware of the achilles tendon of the AI is just mowing it down. I am sure that a real opponent would not let him get away with this stuff. Though the depth of the game won't be visible to us till it's released. I can see the fear but I am open to trying new things. Old HOI broke down to gamy tactics that weren't all that historical either once you knew how to manipulate the system best.

gee, its almost like its a sequel or something. Sequels typically try to improve from the previous titles, not do something radically different. Hence my reference to hoi3.

if you find someone referring to the previous title in a game series "baffling" i don't know what to say. you at this point do not want to talk about the game, just be pointlessly argumentative. its like if i went into the EU IV forum and said someone was baffling me for bringing up EU3, even though in developer diaries johan and others talked about how EU3 influenced EU IV massively with things like the start date of EU3 being set too early and mechanics they were happy and unhappy with.

as i stated in my post, which you didn't refute at all in the slightest hoi3 has been improved upon by every means in regards to china. the only place i think hoi3 hasnt been improved on is the handling of fuel, and that might get a DLC later and i hope it does.

reference to hoi3 baffling, i'm seriously thinking you're just trolling at this point. please don't baffle me with reference to victoria 2 when they announce vicky3 one day, i don't know if we could handle it

 

[Shade205]

I can agree that mountains need to be a little more punishing for regular infantry, at least from what I've noticed in the stream.

 

[DazKaz]

I must admit this thread has made me wince a bit.
In my current game (HOI3) playing as Britain, one of my allies France, has been pushing hard over the Alps into northern Italy.

As you can see from the edited image I have posted the AI has sent the medium tanks up into the mountains, and the only two brigades of mountain troops they have, are in the more open terrain along the coast to the south.
So even if the AI has specialist units, it doesn't mean it will use them correctly.

I guess we will have to wait to see with baited breath, what improvements have been made to this and the supply mechanics.