HOI4 Dev Diary - 1.5.2, Future Roadmap and Ironclad

[Zaikin]

Great patch

 

[LIMMPER]

I'm pumped already

 

[Standstill]

@podcat

I remember hearing about which nations were played the most in single player during ParadoxCon 2017 and Germany was obviously in the lead, which made you go "We gotta make Germany even more interesting since so many people are playing it". While I think the new German focus tree is amazing, I think that the "most played nations" statistic should not really make you think about improving the gameplay of fascist nations but hint at the fact that democratic nations have literally nothing to do for a good half of the game and that may be why people play mostly nationalist countries. Yes, there is absolutely something cool about being Germany and conquering the world, but I think everyone is playing Germany or other nationalist nations mostly because the US, UK and in general the allies are very very boring to play, at least in my opinion. Other users will correct me with many "respectfully disagree" if they don't think the same, but I don't think that's the case.

So well, I am a bit concerned about not seeing any major new system being planned to be added to democracies in the roadmap. Yes I understand the roadmap is not exhaustive, but if I were in Podcat shoes right now I'd drop every plan about combat-related features and just focus the next expansion on new unique mechanics for democratic nations. Something for the player to do during peacetime instead of just having to wait until world tension is high enough. The new decision system sure helps but I don't think it's enough to keep the democratic player busy for the first half of the game. I think that some way to control the country economy at a deeper level or an election system is what the game needs the most right now.

Anyway, I expect Ironclad to be naval focused from the name and roadmap. Do I think that's good? Yes, I think it's fantastic. Do I think that's what the game needs the most right now? No, absolutely not, the game needs a unique system for democratic nations the most. Pardon me if Ironclad is going to be about something completely different but I can't see the next expansion being focused on letting democratic nations be fun to play. It'd be nice to hear from Podcat what he thinks about this whole topic.

 

[adil3tr]

Will we see the army group front expanded on? I would really like to have all the troops under a field commander be able to be anywhere in a front, but the feature feels half implemented right now.

 

[adil3tr]

I dont see how. Alt-History is not really Alt-History if Russia is still communist. Or at the very least not Alt-Historic enough.
I agree with the last part.

Because Trotsky and Bukharin are so different in their approaches that like the democratic and monarchist paths in the Kaiser tree, and their branches, there can be a lot of difference. Besides, a democratic Russia would probably be pretty boring.

 

[adil3tr]

@podcat

I remember hearing about which nations were played the most in single player during ParadoxCon 2017 and Germany was obviously in the lead, which made you go "We gotta make Germany even more interesting since so many people are playing it". While I think the new German focus tree is amazing, I think that the "most played nations" statistic should not really make you think about improving the gameplay of fascist nations but hint at the fact that democratic nations have literally nothing to do for a good half of the game and that may be why people play mostly nationalist countries. Yes, there is absolutely something cool about being Germany and conquering the world, but I think everyone is playing Germany or other nationalist nations mostly because the US, UK and in general the allies are very very boring to play, at least in my opinion. Other users will correct me with many "respectfully disagree" if they don't think the same, but I don't think that's the case.

So well, I am a bit concerned about not seeing any major new system being planned to be added to democracies in the roadmap. Yes I understand the roadmap is not exhaustive, but if I were in Podcat shoes right now I'd drop every plan about combat-related features and just focus the next expansion on new unique mechanics for democratic nations. Something for the player to do during peacetime instead of just having to wait until world tension is high enough. The new decision system sure helps but I don't think it's enough to keep the democratic player busy for the first half of the game. I think that some way to control the country economy at a deeper level or an election system is what the game needs the most right now.

Anyway, I expect Ironclad to be naval focused from the name and roadmap. Do I think that's good? Yes, I think it's fantastic. Do I think that's what the game needs the most right now? No, absolutely not, the game needs a unique system for democratic nations the most. Pardon me if Ironclad is going to be about something completely different but I can't see the next expansion being focused on letting democratic nations be fun to play. It'd be nice to hear from Podcat what he thinks about this whole topic.

I agree that new diplomatic and social mechanics should flesh out democracies, and I think new political, economic, and social mechanics should flesh out communists.

 

[danisv]

One other things, I'd like to drag and select when selecting units on the details screen. Example: I want to split an army in 2, i an click the divide in 2 button and have half the army selected, perfect. Now i want to deselect these and send the other half somewhere else - I have to click through those other 12 units down the list.

This example can be done by giving the first order to the whole army and then click divide in 2 and give the second order. But I agree it would be nice in alot of other instances.

 

[Primarh]

Hello! Add to peace conferences the opportunity to take small arms, artillery, equipment (tanks, cars), planes and ships from the defeated country, not just one heap, but divided into categories. To win points, you could take not only land but also at the end of the conference to share trophies between war participants. For example, divided the province, the next move England takes the ships, the Soviet Union armored vehicles, China small arms and artillery. Each group of trophies should have a different cost in victory points, if someone can, takes all the trophies for their move.

 

[Coozer]

While not very important a nice feature I liked from Victoria and HOi4 was the operations map tool. While I really like the front system I would also like to be able to draw ones independent, write names, and add symbols like tanks, planes, and infantry, key victory points ect. It is really cool and useful for planning.

 

[Ceiphied]

Hello, my first post on this forum (but only because I read all these diaries without getting connected and I never needed to speak before)
(sorry if it is long and hard to understand, I will check for errors, English isn't my birth language, just one I learned because it is convenient to speak on games&Internet )

"A logistics system with more actual player involvement (now you only care once stuff has gone very badly)"

For my part, I only want a system where when you have all of EuFrASia -Europe Africa Asia- (or of all of North&South America -or just, most of the world and not just islands (since for islands, convoy usage is a normal thing) but connected land, it is important, since connected land shouldn't need a long convoy trip with tons of supplies over unprotected sea when safe land option is available !) and the best infrastructure possible (or without having the best but just having some, and not all destroyed at least) you don't have to worry about soldiers taking boats while you don't have any ship or not good enough and not in numbers to protect convoys. (which means thousands of soldiers killed for nothing since they could just travel by land...)

a solution would be something like having an option to restrict troops moving by sea (if you have enough convoys, forbid their use by soldiers, only for trade ! -since civilian manning the ships aren't counted if the convoys are lost it is ok if they die... -but nothing against civilian it would be bad !!!) or just by default, only allowing naval convoys for troops movement if you have (like for air, somehow) 75% control of all sea tiles they are going to pass through.

about logistic, again, when you have infrastucture (best or not) on all Eurasia (world etc), not have a naval route from Vladivostok to Lisbon to carry supplies while you don't protect (or can't, not enough ship or using those to blocade an enemy like UK-Japan which have a "strong fleet" -or at least, lot of ships, unlike lot of countries) any sea despite having a completely safe and long land route ! (this might sound stupid but as SU, having conquer in a war all of EuFrAsia -conquer but not end the war yet- (I own the Suez Canal&Gibraltar but I haven't clean the MedSea or I just didn't focus on fleet at all and it takes time to build those) but not having the war over yet (or capitulated nations still having their fleet active), seeing that my supply goes through sea (Vladivostok, North&East&South China Sea, Indian Sea, Suez, Med, Gibraltar, something like that with 1000 chances for each sea tiles to be destroyed) where it is going to be sunk while the connected land is safe and free of civil unrest from conquered people (with the help of a few soldiers on horse reigning these lands), it is really... ugh -_-)

having air&naval units counts in deaths counter (in war but in peace also, accidents in training, training your DCA soldiers against your real planes with real soldiers inside , training your carriers&battleships against your own ships with real ammo&torpedoes&bombs to improve their accuracy&efficiency to be ready for war -like soldiers training with real ammo)

 

[princeseth]

I haven't 100% verified this but I do believe that Stellaris uses much bigger texture size and poly counts for their ship models than what HoI4 tanks and ships 3d models utilizes.
Which is why their 3D models might seem "better"

Thanks for the info Vonboe ... have you stopped your mod ? i remember it was very promising ... is it still alive ?

 

[Dainavietis]

Yeah... When you rework Baltic states and make proper map with Vilnius core of Lithuania, not Bielorussia? Maybe i can help to you with history? At 1939 year USSR ceded Vilnius to Lithuania by "mutual treaty", so please make this event for Lithuania.

 

[myzael]

Yeah... When you rework Baltic states and make proper map with Vilnius core of Lithuania, not Bielorussia? Maybe i can help to you with history? At 1939 year USSR ceded Vilnius to Lithuania by "mutual treaty", so please make this event for Lithuania.

Only if the state is redrawn beforehand. You're not suggesting hawing whole northeastern part of pre-ww2 Poland to be a core of Lithuania, are you?

 

[Zwirbaum]

I don't understand the downvotes. On normal difficulty its pitifully easy even as countries like Denmark to hold off Germany, holding China as the Nationalists agains the Japs barely requires any strategy except bodies sitting on the borderline either.

How does this make the game any fun?

Because A) - Entrenchment is the same as it was before, unless you will specc for ambusher, which requires to have infantry leader - which usually for most countries is not available before war. Also it provides the usual case where: It improves max entrenchment, so every de-orged division/moved division/division that counterattacked - will not get the benefit of such extra entrenchment for quite some time. (It needs first to achieve base entrenchment 5+ENG+Defensive Doctrine+Doctrine - before it will benefit from ambusher)

B) Division Re-Org rate is the same, maybe slightly higher - if you'll specc into FM trait, but it is IMO waste of valuable trait slot.

C) While having lower base soft attack values for certain units (though tanks have at the same time higher base soft attack which means it benefits more from doctrines and variants than before, so the potential difference is smaller), you have now much more combat potential due to the leader traits, and CoC. Previously you would have +45% at max from leader to attack/defense, now you can have +75% (10 attack general/FM combo) and extra 40% max planning bonus. Not to mention Force Attack ability which multiplies attack by another 0.2. And CAS impact on combat has been improved. Seriously, you can still pull off crazy numbers and have valid/strong attacking force.

Picture attached is before the air support buff to CAS. There was console used in this 'test' - eq is from 1943, full doctrine, leaders are buffed to lvl 9 - though they were not ideally stat distributed (IIRC 9 and 5 attack respectively). Even if somehow someone had 10k defense on their divisions, each division would score over 900 hits per hour! (That alone can deal 45-180 ORG... PER HOUR)

Also - it is not like on normal difficulty you would have previously problems with Japan as well. I also don't remember holding out as Denmark problem either, especially if you'll dig in across the 'straits'.

 

[uberjedi]

Make defensive warfare more fun

But defensive wars are already fun!

 

[UltimaGecko]

Despite all the constant gripes about AI elsewhere, I think the combat has significantly improved from 1.4 to 1.5.2.

Stuff the AI is doing decently now:
* The AI is not rushing headlong into overpowering fortifications as much (there seems to be an exploitable weakspot; you can tailor your defense to be appealing for an AI attack while making it insurmountable, which can allow players to grind down the AI's manpower. But in general it's much improved.)
* The AI seems to be favoring fully equipped divisions (at least until factory production starts suffering)
* The AI is making decent use of commanders
* The AI gives due consideration to terrain and number of neighboring provinces
* The AI tends to have decent unit composition

It can't compete with a human player (especially given the option of pausing and micromanaging attack and defense), but it's mostly functional. That said, I don't like to leave my armies on AI-controlled attack orders because it has no concerns for manpower or creating and closing salients.

Stuff the AI still sucks at:
* The AI tends to love transporting by sea still
* The AI shuffles units excessively on fluid fronts, especially player-controlled units on player-defined fronts
* When told to attack across a wide front, the AI will also attack ridiculously unbalanced positions (e.g. 1 province versus 1 province over a large river). Default front behavior should be more conscious (maybe provide more granularity in aggressiveness levels?)
* The AI doesn't seem to research and build ships well at all (maybe Ironclad can help)
* Every country tends to cover every ally with as many troops as it can instead of trying to make discrete fronts. This makes the late game strategic overview very hectic and leads to a lot of underpowered attacks (e.g. 1 Australian unit attacks independently while the New Zealanders, South Africans, French, and Indians diligently wait their turn to attack like some martial arts movie).


That all out of the way: I'm relatively comfortable with the current AI setup and would appreciate a bit more core historical accuracy in the base game (in terms of government changes, state changes, assistance treaties, embargoes and the like). The roadmap has South America on the agenda; I think that provides a good opportunity to deepen the underlying politics and diplomacy, refine the US focus tree and drop a few trees in South America (and maybe Mexico). Once there are mechanics in place to make South American democracies (or a few neutral authoritarian regimes) interesting to play, you can be certain the rest of the world can benefit from the added depth.

 

[Colosso95]

That roadmap seems exactly what I wish from this game in the long run, I will be very happy if you guys manage to get most of that stuff in the game eventually...I'd buy all EU4 dlcs just to be thankful xD

 

[CrazyZombie]

The problem with making the tanks "different power" is that it removes the player agency. German tanks (and American, and British, and French, and Soviet, etc etc) were the result of the policies and decisions of leaders. The Sherman was outclassed at the end of the war because the Pershing was delayed, but when it was introduced it did fairly well against the Panzer III. It was policy to keep going with the Sherman, though, and policy to not up-gun it (whereas the British decided to throw the 17-pounder in it and give it some more punch).

The variants system in place now, along with research bonuses to various vehicle models lets you recreate the reality of these tank designs by letting you up-gun or up-armor (or, not) various vehicles to fit your playstyle and economics. It allows player agency. Combined with land doctrines, you can achieve superior tanks, or roll along like the US did with twice as many average tanks. To make one tank "better" ruins the spirit of a strategy game by taking these decisions from the player.

Something that might be nice is variable-length technology research. Maybe a new tank design can take from 180-280 days, and the longer you let it research, the better chance it has to turn out well. On the other hand, if you need it right now, you can begin design early -- but the vehicle might have some flaws that bite you down the line (e.g. low armor, very poor reliability).

Elements of random make no sense in HOI4. Better idea is rework of designer system to make player able to take different ones for one tech.

 

[cunningstunts]

I'm sure this has been said before but please make some adjustments to the peace system, mainly how the AI takes states. They should only want to take states that they claim or have cores on, so it's more "Yugoslavia takes Istria" rather than, well...

Side question: what mod are you using to get the map looking like this?

 

[CrazyZombie]

I dont see how. Alt-History is not really Alt-History if Russia is still communist. Or at the very least not Alt-Historic enough.
I agree with the last part.

If we speak about tzarist/democratic/fascist Russia in HOI4 - such ideas have nothing in common with alternative history, well, at least "history" part.