• 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:
Was hoping for some sort of Corps feature rather than divisional commanders. This seems overly tedious. Furthermore thr current armies/army groups system is IMO plain silly. I believe implementing corps as an intermediate between single divisions and armies is a much needed change.
 
  • 6
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Great leap for battle micromanagement. As Divisional commanders are back in the game why not create Corps level OOB?
Can we have SS divisions special 3D sprite pack now?

Divisions=> Corpses=> Armies=> Army Groups/Fronts

Thank you for bringing back the Divisional Commanders. Can't wait the release of BBA.
Its corpi for corpus. Thats the plural. Not corpses. Or corps of youre going that way.
 
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
I have a question ? Some Generals in 1936 (IG) aren't Generals in 1936 (IRL) like Charles De Gaulle (Colonel in 1937, General in 1940) and Phillippe Leclerc (Captain in 1934, Colonel in 1940, General in 1941), so does this will change for the RP / History Contexte of the game now ?
 
  • 6Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Cheers for the DD Arheo and the wonderful answers to all the questions :) Lots of very cool flavour - sorry to be so late to the DD party, just been a bit of a crazy time, although not quite Umbral Panther crazy!

Currently no. Not ruling it out for the future though.

So you're saying there's a chance?! Woo! Is there anyone I can bribe? I may or may not be joking ;)

On the face of it, this could seem like a very tough DD for a naval-themed pic, but thanks to the US fielding whole divisions of marines (who are organizationally part of the navy), it's actually not too hard at all - here's Major General Alexander Vandergrift, of Guadalcanal (and more) fame :)

1660563491276.png
 
  • 5Like
  • 2
Reactions:
Apologies if somebody else already asked this, but what will this do to national spirits that give higher level recruited officers?


I asked a similar question on this topic, which you can find here, and received the below response from Arheo. I'm still a little unclear how the existing national spirits will be worked into the new mechanic, but the fact that it is being thought of is reassuring.


Yes, no changes there. You'll still benefit from any spirits etc.
 
Last edited:
  • 5
Reactions:
Was hoping for some sort of Corps feature rather than divisional commanders. This seems overly tedious. Furthermore thr current armies/army groups system is IMO plain silly. I believe implementing corps as an intermediate between single divisions and armies is a much needed change.
I have to disagree with you on this point. That would essentially be brining back the HOI III OOB system, which IMO was an over-complicated mess that bogged down the game.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
I think if they did a system like that it would be for capital ships only, since there would be too many captains otherwise. Either that or each task force
Given we usually have a lot more divisions than we do ships, I don't think it would be that much greater of a load
Barely a drop in the bucket
 
  • 2Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Given we usually have a lot more divisions than we do ships, I don't think it would be that much greater of a load
Barely a drop in the bucket
Unless you're US, UK, or Japan and you end up with like 200-300 ships.
 
Unless you're US, UK, or Japan and you end up with like 200-300 ships.
Even by that point, you're probably ending up with a couple hundred divisions as well

And given the any performance effects from division commanders applies to every country, you definitely end up with vastly more divisions on the map than you do ships

Overall, ships would be easier to handle this mechanism than divisions are, because they already carry with them a combat history, and an easy log of what they have done. In truth, the only adjustments the system would need is adding a spot on the UI for the portrait
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
Even by that point, you're probably ending up with a couple hundred divisions as well

And given the any performance effects from division commanders applies to every country, you definitely end up with vastly more divisions on the map than you do ships

Overall, ships would be easier to handle this mechanism than divisions are, because they already carry with them a combat history, and an easy log of what they have done. In truth, the only adjustments the system would need is adding a spot on the UI for the portrait
Good point.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Unless you're US, UK, or Japan and you end up with like 200-300 ships.
Usually the captains of submarines destroyers and frigates are the equivalent rank of a company commander to a battalion commander and smaller vessels get junior officers of the equivalent of a platoon commander. Those should not be simulated as those numbers would be the bulk of any fleets. Its the cruiser captains [light as well as heavy] and any cruiser subs [especially as technology pushes the capital investment in such ships higher and higher] that we want to track. But if we do get captains for capitals [and light cruisers] then I'd love to have fleet flagships to show where the admiral leading the mess is located.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
Someone must have pointed it, but there is the issue of, shall we say, the relative rarity of the medals given in example. The Légion d'Honneur or the second class Iron Cross were given, well, not to everyone, but in the million range....

And while all the things listed are interesting, I have to point out (again) that while it's nice to give some use to PP, the core problem remains : nations that have a ''silent workhouse'' had already a non negligible avantage for laws and generation of EXP, now they will have an advantage to unit buffing.
 
Last edited:
  • 1
Reactions:
Usually the captains of submarines destroyers and frigates are the equivalent rank of a company commander to a battalion commander and smaller vessels get junior officers of the equivalent of a platoon commander. Those should not be simulated as those numbers would be the bulk of any fleets. Its the cruiser captains [light as well as heavy] and any cruiser subs [especially as technology pushes the capital investment in such ships higher and higher] that we want to track. But if we do get captains for capitals [and light cruisers] then I'd love to have fleet flagships to show where the admiral leading the mess is located.

While I'm well and truly biased, given the relative numbers, I reckon there's a good case to give all ships and submarines represented in the game commanders - it's not as if Germany, the USA or the USSR (or China) don't end up with hundreds of divisions, so in terms of the net numbers, they're quite similar. It's also not as if the hundreds of corvettes, destroyer escorts, minesweepers and smaller vessels are included in the game as well (I know some can be 'kind of approximated', but even taken to its most extreme in-game, it's a long way from an accurate representation of the thousands of warships that took part in the Second World War).

Not including all of them would also create a gameplay bias towards building "leadership level" ships as well, and create different mechanics at different levels of ships.

That said, it's just my personal preference, and I fully respect that others may prefer less representation.

Also, as far as I understand it (and I could be off with the IXs), cruiser submarines (Surcouf, the Type IXs, the big Japanese boats) still tended to be Commander rank, rather than Captain.

It would also enable rear and vice-admirals for command of task forces, so you could potentially have task force and fleet flagships (would need to be auto-generated by default, to avoid turning into micro hell) - which could potentially lead to ships COs and admirals going down with their ship on occasion (but definitely not every occasion - for an extreme example, the admiral on board Barham when it sunk survived).
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions: