• 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.

Developer Diary | Division Commanders & Unit Medals

image (9).png
Greetings all!

Welcome back to today’s feature dev diary on a series of interconnected subsystems being added to the game in By Blood Alone.

One of the major points in my first roadmap dev diary was that I felt quite strongly about the inclusion of further roleplay and immersive elements in Hearts of Iron. What I’ll be showing off today is intended to fulfill a small part of this bullet point.

Those of you with keen memories will recall an early teaser I posted here. Some of you guessed correctly, and in BBA, we’ve introduced a dynamic system for naming battleplans. For many major nations, battleplan names can be provided through a list of locations, resulting in a historical series of operation tags which will be applied when plans are created:​
image4.png

Of course, the war does not always proceed historically, and battleplan names can also be generated from several component lists for instances where a historical variant cannot be found. These name lists are fully moddable, and can be unique to countries. In some cases (ie; Soviet Union) a different naming convention can be utilized to represent the somewhat uninventive approach to naming operations that was used in reality:​
image3.png

Naturally, in the spirit of roleplaying, these operation names can be modified in-game, and you can replace the text with whatever operation name you desire. This will apply to any sub-orders derived from the initial drawn line:​
image7.png

If unset, naval landing and paradrop orders will have a unique pattern to remain unique.

This system however, goes further than a simple naming convention, and ties into another addition being made to BBA.


Division Commanders

In BBA, we’re replacing the standard method of recruiting new generals out of thin air. Instead, every division will be created with a commanding officer upon game start, or when they are trained:​
image1.png

These are predominantly generated from country-specific namelists, however in some cases we have set these individually for starting divisions. When a new unit is created, they will be provided a randomly generated character name and portrait. To accommodate the increased use of generic portraits for these, we’ll be adding a large quantity of additional generic portraits for owners of BBA. The work involved in creating these is not insignificant, so for now we’ve limited ourselves in adding portraits to major nations only.

You’ll be able to get an overview of all division commanders in your army within the officer corps screen:​
image5.png

In an effort to avoid unnecessary micromanagement, we’ve made a few important decisions. Division commanders themselves will not directly confer bonuses upon the divisions they command, however the divisions they command will now earn and log a record of important actions they may perform during the natural course of a campaign:​
image6.png

Important actions such as taking a capital, securing a high-value victory point, and more, constitute actions for which a unit can be awarded a medal. It is expected that over the course of a campaign, many units will qualify for receiving medals, often several - the system is not driven by scarcity, as we do not intend for players to micromanage individual actions, rather to manage the macro-level step of choosing when and what to award their units.​
image2.png

As mentioned above, division commanders will not explicitly confer bonuses, however the medals awarded for action will. Medals are intended to act as a pp sink for the mid-late game, as we find a lot of players tend to end up with a significant amount of this resource as decisions, advisors and focuses begin to dwindle.

Units can receive multiple medals, however the cost for each will increase as more are granted to any given unit, and the effect of stacking specific medals will decrease per instance of the same effect.

As you will note above, medals can be specific to countries, and we’ve included a series of generic medals based on alignment, as well as unique medal sets for each major country. A medal’s effects will only extend to the unit it belongs to.

A medal’s name and description will in most cases be dynamic depending on what action it was awarded for, and extreme valor while on a specific named operation can also result in receiving a medal for that action.

To further streamline the process of awarding medals, you can perform quick actions to do this through the officers entry in the corps screen:​
image13.png

As mentioned previously, we’re removing the old method of recruiting generals by means of reaching into the void and plucking out a fully qualified officer. This means that your army generals will now be directly linked to your field of divisional officers, and their capability directly linked to their actions in the field.

Divisional officers will store experience based on the experience gain of the unit they are commanding, as well as receiving a lump-sum when a medal is awarded. While active as a divisional officer, this experience will have no meaningful effect, however, when in need of a new army general, you can promote divisional commanders out of their divisional role and directly into their new role as a general.

Any medals awarded to the division will be retained by that division, however, the newly created general will keep a reference to their awarded medals as a means of remembering their accomplishments in the line of duty (albeit with no direct effect on their new army - although we’ve elected to support this behavior for modders should they wish):​
image9.png

When a divisional officer is promoted this way, the experience they have earned during the course of their field command will be applied to their experience level as a general (up to a maximum cap). Promoting someone with field experience can prove a lot more valuable than hiring another pen-pusher, after all. If they have earned at least a certain quantity (as yet undecided) of field experience, they will also begin with a personality trait corresponding to the type of division they were commanding (armor officer, infantry officer, etc).


Unit Cohesion

You will also note that my roadmap included a wish to improve the battleplanner. While this is likely to be a slow, iterative process, BBA heralds the inclusion of a new frontline parameter intended for advanced users.​
image8.png

The Cohesion parameter can be set on any root frontline order, and will affect how the unit controller places divisions across that frontline. The default setting of ‘Flexible Cohesion’ functions as you have grown to expect - all units will be evaluated for placement suitability and potentially relocated to fill perceived gaps in frontline cohesion.​
image14.png

Balanced Cohesion’ will only successfully evaluate units that are within a defined distance from the target (distances are moddable). In practice, this results in less unit shuffling along frontlines, but should still ensure that frontlines respond to changes in size and shape.​
image11.png

The final setting, ‘Rigid Cohesion’ is intended primarily for long defensive lines, and will only successfully evaluate unit positions that are within a very short distance from the target location. In practice this results in relocations only taking place to neighboring provinces, and can result in gaps being created in frontlines if left unattended. It is expected that this setting will be used by players who primarily rely on micromanagement of frontlines.

The AI will make use of flexible and balanced cohesion settings depending on the ratio of divisions:frontline length, but will avoid the use of rigid cohesion.

It is worth noting that units that are not placed directly on the frontline (having been left behind or recently added to an order instance) will not be subject to the same cohesion restrictions, and will make use of strategic relocation to find themselves a new place on the frontline. Additionally, the cohesion setting will be respected regardless of whether an order is being executed or not.


Modding

For those of you interested in modding, the addition of these subsystems also comes with some new tools regarding units. It is now possible to iterate over unit arrays in states and countries by condition, and apply a series of effects, including the awarding of medals, history entries, and other basic parameters such as affecting org, strength, and more. For performance reasons, units do not currently support storing or being stored as variables, though we will monitor the need for, and performance implications of doing this in future (I SEE YOU EaW).

Predefined divisions can be set up with lists of historical commanders that they will draw from when their current commander if replaced, should you wish to opt for extreme historical fidelity.​
image10.png

The visual display ranks of divisional commanders correspond to their gained experience, and are fully customizable, though confer no gameplay effect.

Medals themselves can be added to the medal array based on arbitrary conditions, and support a variety of modifiers, not all of which are represented in our vanilla use-cases.

Name combinations can also be split from various random lists, if you have a particular penchant for randomly generated names.
image12.png



That’s all for now, tune in next week for a second look at how peace conferences are progressing!​
 

Attachments

  • image7.png
    image7.png
    1,3 MB · Views: 0
  • image12.png
    image12.png
    18,5 KB · Views: 0
  • image (7).png
    image (7).png
    374,4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited by a moderator:
  • 133Like
  • 96Love
  • 10
  • 8
  • 2
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
Dsingis said:

I am confused. You claim you didn't want to introduce micromanagement, and yet we have to manually assign medals to each and every single divison out there. How is that not a micromanagement hell? Seriously, am I missing something here? If my army consists of 200 divisions, how exactly will I not spend hours assessing who to assign medals to?

How am I not incentivized to relocate a specific division I want a medal for to a specific location, so they can earn a medal? Unless I am missing something, this seems like so much micromanagement hell, I am baffled, honestly.

And the bonuses are not insignificant. 7.5% breakthrough? Hell yes. I want that on my tank divisions. So what do you think I'm going to do? Exactly, I will micro every single of my tank divisions to partake in a special operation so they can earn a medal. I will manually go through all my tank divisions to see who has and who hasn't got a medal yet, and then send them off to somewhere special to earn a medal.

Seriously, tell me if I am misunderstanding this, because as it seems, you are doing the exact opposite of what you claim (as in not wanting to introduce micromanagement)




HOI4 is a game that is played competitively. We spend hundreds of hours learning the meta, mastering it and then going beyond it trying to find any small edge over our opponents. Saying that we "don't have to click it" is completely dismissive of the way HOI4 is played at the highest level.

This is like telling soccer players that every goal is worth two points instead of one as long as the team continues to sing the national anthem throughout the match. But don't worry, the national anthem can't hurt you. You don't have to sing if you don't want to. It's ok if the singing is too much for your taste.

I'll wait to judge the mechanic until I've played it, but this was a legitimate question. It's relevant considering how much micro already goes into grinding adaptable. Belittling the questioner like this is very unprofessional.

Please reconsider your answer.
But the vast majority of players does not play competetively. The majority of players plays in single-player. The (most likely) majority of players is in favor of more rp elements even if this means doing a click more.
 
  • 13
  • 3Like
  • 2Love
  • 1
Reactions:
I am confused. You claim you didn't want to introduce micromanagement, and yet we have to manually assign medals to each and every single divison out there. How is that not a micromanagement hell? Seriously, am I missing something here? If my army consists of 200 divisions, how exactly will I not spend hours assessing who to assign medals to?

How am I not incentivized to relocate a specific division I want a medal for to a specific location, so they can earn a medal? Unless I am missing something, this seems like so much micromanagement hell, I am baffled, honestly.

And the bonuses are not insignificant. 7.5% breakthrough? Hell yes. I want that on my tank divisions. So what do you think I'm going to do? Exactly, I will micro every single of my tank divisions to partake in a special operation so they can earn a medal. I will manually go through all my tank divisions to see who has and who hasn't got a medal yet, and then send them off to somewhere special to earn a medal.

Seriously, tell me if I am misunderstanding this, because as it seems, you are doing the exact opposite of what you claim (as in not wanting to introduce micromanagement)
I agree with what you've said here and struggle to understand just exactly why division commanders and medals were added. If they intend to go down this road, why not bring back the HOI 3 OOB that was almost universally loathed for its complexity? Soviet players will know what I'm talking about.

This seems like another eye-catching feature that will attract sales and perhaps nostalgia from older players but doesn't add much to the core gameplay, and in fact, will likely burden it with further micro. Unit cohesion is a much-needed feature, but division commanders and medals seem rather pointless.
 
  • 9
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Dsingis said:

I am confused. You claim you didn't want to introduce micromanagement, and yet we have to manually assign medals to each and every single divison out there. How is that not a micromanagement hell? Seriously, am I missing something here? If my army consists of 200 divisions, how exactly will I not spend hours assessing who to assign medals to?
I'll never understand people who seem to consider micro-management and min-maxing something obligatory that they can't opt out of. Dude, just make the decision to not assign more medels than you feel like. You're not in the army for real, no officer is going to reprimand you for not playing optimally.

SP or MP, if you don't like a given feature, just play without them. If I'm playing soccer with someone and we don't feel like singing the national anthem while playing (to use your analogy), we'll... simply agree not to.
 
  • 10
  • 3Like
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
  • 7Haha
  • 2
Reactions:
The only way this could get better, is if you made it so our generals would stop creating new frontlines when our neighbors are at war.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
The real question is whether you're finally going to divorce planning bonus from placing your divisions under AI control. It's been an issue since the game launched. There's no reason there should be this manichean situation where, to reap the benefits of planning bonus without an insane amount of micromanagement(and even then, you'll still feel the sting of HUGELY increased decay rates from manual attacks), you have to place your divisions' movement and attacks under the control of the AI; or you just control things manually and forego planning bonus entirely.

It really creates this situation where for pro players there's no often no real reason to bother with planning because it's not worth the headache of both the micronamagement to get benefits from planning bonus without placing your troops' actions under AI control, or from just letting the AI control them. This also means there's often no reason to take Grand Battle Plan.

This has been mentioned over and over and over and over again for *years* on end. Still *nothing* has been done about it.. aside from the team having deliberately made the problem worse by introducing an increased decay rate from manual attacks. The main reason we don't hear more about it is that these mechanics are so opaque that your average player of the game doesn't even understand how they work in the first place.
 
  • 7
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
It is always so annoying, yet understandable, when features like these are added in later patches/DLC (Player stats and the tracker in Breath of the Wild being two other examples). I've played some crazy campaigns, and being able to select a unit and see it's history would have been so sweet. But it's great that it's coming and I look forward to playing around with it. I am a bit bittersweet though, seeing as many of those crazy campaigns were made possible thanks to bugs that are now fixed.

I also just want to point out that we're only like one or two buttons away from being able to see a character rise from division commander to country leader. For HoI4 that would probably be a bit out of scope, but if a later entry extends the timeline into WW1 it could be a sweet addition for simulating [insert pretty much any WW2 leader]'s rise to power. One possible usage I see though is for a Mongol Khanist branch. So instead of just taking focuses and getting a Khan, you'd get to pick any divisional commander that you then mold into the new Khan. Would make for a very unique and minor-friendly playtrough where there's incentive to focus your resources on a single division, as well as good risk-reward in how you manage said unit.
 
  • 1
  • 1Love
  • 1Haha
Reactions:
I am very pleased by the immersive RP elements added, especially the possibility to name battle plans, and by the history of each divisions. Ships had already a record of engagements and i liked it. The possibility to give medals after a special event and not a boring griding exploit is excellent. I would like to see the same feature for generals. It would be so cool to retain the history of all battle plans conducted by each general, and give medals and/or XP to them too, depending of the outcome of these plans, instead of the actuel "grinding" system. Today, we attack and withdraw on this or that tile to grind this or that general traits, but generals make great battles plans so the xp should be win if the plan is a overall success, not if a single tile is win 500 times. But i digress. Very nice work! :)
 
  • 4Like
Reactions:
Is it possible to have the game auto-generate generic portraits based on a set of templates like picrew? It would be much easier than manually making portraits.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
The real question is whether you're finally going to divorce planning bonus from placing your divisions under AI control. It's been an issue since the game launched. There's no reason there should be this manichean situation where, to reap the benefits of planning bonus without an insane amount of micromanagement(and even then, you'll still feel the sting of HUGELY increased decay rates from manual attacks), you have to place your divisions' movement and attacks under the control of the AI; or you just control things manually and forego planning bonus entirely.

It really creates this situation where for pro players there's no often no real reason to bother with planning because it's not worth the headache of both the micronamagement to get benefits from planning bonus without placing your troops' actions under AI control, or from just letting the AI control them. This also means there's often no reason to take Grand Battle Plan.

This has been mentioned over and over and over and over again for *years* on end. Still *nothing* has been done about it.. aside from the team having deliberately made the problem worse by introducing an increased decay rate from manual attacks. The main reason we don't hear more about it is that these mechanics are so opaque that your average player of the game doesn't even understand how they work in the first place.
The point of the planning bonus is that every under unit knows what's going on and knows what they're doing. That everything is planned out ahead of time and everyone is on the same page

Manual control is the exact opposite of that. Things are changing on the fly, and there is no plan before action

While it may be annoying, that's the full purpose of the bonus. You don't need to act because everyone knows the plan, and changing the plan means people don't get the tactical bonus from knowing what's going on
 
  • 8
  • 1
Reactions:
I can only express myself with a single word: "FINALLY!!!"

Well, to add a little bit of ranting because it makes me a bit salty in that regard: When you try to explain to this community, that divisional commanders are cool, immersive and whatnot, you are swatted down almost immediately with arguments like 'Uh noes - moar micro!', 'Go play HoI 3!/Black Ice Mod'. 'keep it simple' or similar and earn lots of 'respectfully disagrees'. The devs doing it? Best invention since sliced bread...

That said: now together with unit cohesion and other immersive improvements I am VERY interested into the next DLC!
 
Last edited:
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I absolutely adore this new system and while I know you only implemented it for the Army I definitely think in the future a similar system could and should be implemented for the Navy revolving around captains and ships. It would probably be easier anyway considering ships already keep track of all their naval actions, so all you would have to do is utilize that system with the medals system.

On a separate but related note, I also hope you consider implementing some way to generate Air officers, in particular through the air aces. Right now there the only officer class that can't be created and so you're stuck with whatever options you have for your high command. If you're really unlucky as the Soviet Union or something you can even purge them all to death and not have any. I don't think this new officer system would work for the airforce the same way it could be implemented for the Army and Navy, but eventually you need to figure out some way players can eventually generate their air high command if they don't have a good one. Air aces are the only form of officer which can be generated by air wings (since presumably they're "leading" their airwing), so naturally it makes sense that any new high command candidates would come from among their ranks.
 
  • 3
  • 2Like
  • 2
Reactions:
This looks great! I see that the division commanders seem to receive an army-specific rank (Generalmajor, Brigadier, etc); any chance of extending that up the chain? My American Field Marshals are very confused.
 
This is a system I've wanted for a long time. Thanks for keeping it simple, too. If I'm role playing, I can micro up my favorite generals and units, if I'm having a fast game, I can mostly ignore it. It's pretty much perfect.

If I were designing the system, these are the things I'd add:

1. Actual division experience bonuses are an average of officer experience and division experience. Both gain experience in the same way and at the same rate. When a new general gets assigned to a unit, they are green. This way you can have a unit that became veteran, but got ground down in a recent combat. The replacements are all green (division experience becomes regular), but they're being lead by the same lion (veteran), so their overall experience bonus is seasoned. Alternatively, if you promote that general to lead an army, the division is left with a green general, so the overall experience bonus would be trained. You can grind experience onto the new general, or exercise him up to regular.

***Edit*** it should probably be a weighted average towards the division (75% : 25%), though. The commander experience may be too static, and make divisions too strong.

2. This would mostly be to balance the previous addition, but there should be a small chance that a division commander is killed in combat. All removed (killed) generals are replaced automatically. Maybe put an icon next to the division icon to let the player know that the division is no longer being adequately lead.

***Edit*** this could probably be abstracted by simply making commanders and divisions lose (and gain) experience at different rates.

These are really just wish-lists, and the division commander and history systems are wonderful the way they are. I'm excited for the addition, and will continue to be excited if I get exactly what has already been designed.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
The ability to change the name of the general (and ideally the portrait) would be great.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
That seems neat.

That said, it's really unfortunate that it's land matters yet again receiving all the new goodies in a game which already is very heavily (and artificially) skewed towards managing land armies/research/production - compared to navy, for which we don't even have the most basic and primitive UI notifications reflecting battle status. Meh.
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
  • 1
Reactions:
You can disable BBA to remove the feature, yes.



Currently yes, losing their commanding officer will reset the division's field experience to 0. Jury's still out on this, as it is perceived that this is quite a harsh penalty, although it can be offset with a new Military Spirit for the NSB officer corps system. In practice we'll probably tune this down to be a bit less absolute.



As above.
But that's the issue. If I have a bunch of important divisions, then this system incentivized me to micromanage these divisions, so that every single one participated in some event so I can give them medals. And if I don't do that, then I am worse off.
If I want to play this game optimally, then I have to micromanage these divisions to get these medals.

This is something, for example, that happens in MMOs like World of Warcraft. If there is an optimal way to play the game, then players will play the game like this, even if it is an objectively worse experience, more boring or tedious, than the devs intended. Happens all the time.

Sure I can play without medal micromanagement, I can also play without a navy if I don't like it, then my experience would be objectively worse with paratooper spam everywhere for example.

It's not that any system forces me at gunpoint to use these medals, it's that this system exists and using it is objectively better, thus passively forcing me, if I want to play optimally, to use it. For multiplayer games, this will be a micro-nightmare, I can guarantee that.
There's an important thing you're not aknowledging; these medals are going to cost quite a lot of PP which doesn't grow up on trees, you're not going to stop every second to give a unit a medal because you're going to save your PP for more important stuff and once it starts becoming lss useful you can go ahead and spend it as it comes