HOI4 Dev Diary - Beta Patch Update IV

[Mr.Grizzly]

When will this come out? impatiently waiting.

The Beta is already out

 

[ImperatorG]

The Beta is already out

Nevermind I got it to work now. Awesome!

 

[pdstanbridge]

Do they still attack independently of the main front resulting in glorious volunteer suicide charges?

Yep, they are still stupid

 

[FindFloppies]

German Reich still releases German Czechoslovakia in Bohemia, Moravia and the Sudetenland, which doesn't make any sense because German Reich has cores on Sudetenland. I'm fine with Germany creating a collaboration government in Bohemia and Moravia from the Fate of Czechoslovakia focus, as it was actually more a collaboration government than a full annexation. Same for Slovakia, the annex everything option should create a collaboration in Slovakia. Maybe that would be a solution? Anyway, ad hoc solutions won't solve this problem because there will always be another case where the problem still exists. For example, it's not very noticeable, but Spain releases Spanish Morocco too.

@podcat please, the collaboration government thing is clearly not solved, 1.9.1 shouldn't leave beta with countries spamming collaborations in places and situations which don't make any sense. It's not just historicity, a Germany that has cores on Sudetenland would never release a Czech puppet that 'steals' those German cores.

Yeah, Italian Yugoslavia stole Istria when it popped, too.

Italian Germany, on the other hand, didn't try to take over East Prussia, which had gone to Poland in the peace settlement. That popped later as Polish Germany...

Czechoslovakia tried to use a war goal on Hungary, *after* Germany was annexed, and Hungary was in my faction, so after they got capitulated, Czech got broken up into three pieces. Ruthenia to Romania, the Slovakia pieces to Hungary, and I (Italy) took the rest.

Czechoslavia popped properly in Italian and Hungarian Czechoslovakia pieces. I guess the Romanians didn't have the compliance, or maybe they had a core. I didn't look.

Seems to only be an issue when the player has something that is double-cored with Collaboration X. I bet Austria would steal the South Tyrol from Italy if it popped up, *if* played by the player.

 

[tankbuster]

I accidentally posted on the dead 1.9.1 thread instead of here so here it is again:

One UI thing, for air and army units we can use the Shift-K shortcut to exercise units 'until trained'.

For naval units, we can hold shift and click the exercise button, but we cannot use the keyboard shortcut.

 

[Áurum]

Yeah, Italian Yugoslavia stole Istria when it popped, too.

Italian Germany, on the other hand, didn't try to take over East Prussia, which had gone to Poland in the peace settlement. That popped later as Polish Germany...

Czechoslovakia tried to use a war goal on Hungary, *after* Germany was annexed, and Hungary was in my faction, so after they got capitulated, Czech got broken up into three pieces. Ruthenia to Romania, the Slovakia pieces to Hungary, and I (Italy) took the rest.

Czechoslavia popped properly in Italian and Hungarian Czechoslovakia pieces. I guess the Romanians didn't have the compliance, or maybe they had a core. I didn't look.

Seems to only be an issue when the player has something that is double-cored with Collaboration X. I bet Austria would steal the South Tyrol from Italy if it popped up, *if* played by the player.

South Tyrol would certainly be stolen from Italy by Austria, AI or not. The release mechanic gives the puppet all its cores, even if they are cores or claims of the master too. That has been a flaw from game release.

So we actually have two errors: AI spamming collaborations and collaborations (puppets) stealing cores and claims from their masters.

 

[Simon_9732495]

Why has the AI to release collaborations at all?
Which problem before LAR is fixed by that? (And couldn't be fixed by some more "Reichskommisariat"-Decisions)

 

[kettyo]

Why has the AI to release collaborations at all?
Which problem before LAR is fixed by that? (And couldn't be fixed by some more "Reichskommisariat"-Decisions)

I personally wouldn't want one more player only mechanic like paratroopers.

 

[Simon_9732495]

Agreed, but there are lot of decisions the AI never chooses, aren't there? And they are no problem, right?

 

[--Yigito123--]

Agreed, but there are lot of decisions the AI never chooses, aren't there? And they are no problem, right?

They are problem. We don't need MORE of them. When you keep restricting mechanics from the AI and disregard it's overall impact to the game at large beyond what a player can see, you end up with the EU4 problem.

 

[Áurum]

Why has the AI to release collaborations at all?
Which problem before LAR is fixed by that? (And couldn't be fixed by some more "Reichskommisariat"-Decisions)

While the purpose of collaborations while already having many different puppet types and an automatic "release nation" button (that AI never uses) is debatable, I think the AI should be able to form them, but only when it makes sense.

And yes, Reichskommissariats should be collaborations or something very similar, because in practice they were nothing more than colonies. And Reichsprotektorats should be integrated puppets?

Reichskommissariats -> Collaboration government
Reichsprotektorats -> Integrated puppet
Regular puppets -> Puppet

 

[Simon_9732495]

Ok let's structure the discussion:
Why are collaborations governments (short C-GOVs) needed?
--> If you have very high compliance (>80%) you can get rid of any resistance by forming a C-GOV, without needing a peace conference.
Are there any other intended uses of it?

If this is it then it is debateable if the are needed at all, because if you have 80% collaboration, resistance is not that big of a deal.

But they are here now and will not go away soon, so:
When should they AI do C-GOVs?
--> Certainly not for territories they own in 1936 and are not cores in my opinion.
--> The answer may be: "When a player would do it." So when does anybody form a C-GOV and for what reason?


Is anyone using it because of the generic tree they get? To make them build factories?

 

[kettyo]

Are there any other intended uses of it?

Getting manpower from it is a very important use of it.

 

[Simon_9732495]

Getting manpower from it is a very important use of it.

Before LAR it was not possible to get this manpower without a peace conference.
Why is it needed now?

 

[kettyo]

Before LAR it was not possible to get this manpower without a peace conference.
Why is it needed now?

Probably for balance. If you conquer someone who joins the Allies you might never get manpower until the end of the world war.

 

[FindFloppies]

Getting manpower from it is a very important use of it.

Yeah, I had more puppet manpower in my divisions than I did of my own manpower a couple nights ago. Was very useful.

Without collaboration governments, it wouldn't have worked as well.

 

[Áurum]

Ok let's structure the discussion:
Why are collaborations governments (short C-GOVs) needed?
--> If you have very high compliance (>80%) you can get rid of any resistance by forming a C-GOV, without needing a peace conference.
Are there any other intended uses of it?

If this is it then it is debateable if the are needed at all, because if you have 80% collaboration, resistance is not that big of a deal.

But they are here now and will not go away soon, so:
When should they AI do C-GOVs?
--> Certainly not for territories they own in 1936 and are not cores in my opinion.
--> The answer may be: "When a player would do it." So when does anybody form a C-GOV and for what reason?


Is anyone using it because of the generic tree they get? To make them build factories?

The problem is that when you get 80% compliance, you are already at peace and have annexed the country, at that point you can just release as a puppet. A possible solution would be being able to create them only at war. And with a much lower compliance requirement so there is time to create them while still at war. After the war they would be turned into regular puppets.

Yes, one of the benefits from having collabs (actually, from having any kind of puppet) is the free factories from their focus trees. Only if those countries didn't exist anymore (so those focuses haven't been completed yet) or don't already have a lot of built factories (you would lose more than you would gain).

For example, France gains factories by releasing a collab in any African country but losses factories by releasing Belgium.

Getting manpower from it is a very important use of it.

With 80% compliance you actually gain a significant amount of manpower from the country, releasing them as collabs lets you create division templates from their manpower pool but your own pool losses manpower.

For example, as France I took British colonies in Africa and later released them as collabs, I lost 400k manpower. And the collabs start with Volunteer Only IIRC, so it's going to be some time until they have a decent pool. You would probably get better results by releasing them as puppets to save the time it takes to get 80% compliance. And well, I didn't need any factories at that point.

Right now the only reasons to release a collab are:

• Too much resistance in other states and need to release resources from those places (the AI can certainly understand this).
• Role playing (the AI can't understand this, although different ideologies do have different rules).
• Needs the maximum number of factories possible for some reason (I don't think the AI can understand this well enough).

Tying the creation of collabs to resistance can be a solution, although making collabs a war-only feature is also a thing, and would make sense historically because collaboration governments were created as occupation governments during war.

 

[xtfoster]

I accidentally posted on the dead 1.9.1 thread instead of here so here it is again:

One UI thing, for air and army units we can use the Shift-K shortcut to exercise units 'until trained'.

For naval units, we can hold shift and click the exercise button, but we cannot use the keyboard shortcut.

That probably has something to do with the fact that it doesn't work the same for Naval units. For army units only the divisions in an Army Grouping that need training will train, for the airforce they are trained individually as well, but with naval units the entire task force will be in training (and consuming fuel) until all are fully trained.

I usually have a separate Task Force (2 for the USN) for training and all new construction goes there. I try to check it monthly and split off units (to my 'Reserve') that have fully trained.

 

[Simon_9732495]

That probably has something to do with the fact that it doesn't work the same for Naval units. For army units only the divisions in an Army Grouping that need training will train, for the airforce they are trained individually as well, but with naval units the entire task force will be in training (and consuming fuel) until all are fully trained.

That's not 100% correct.

With Shift+Training the fuel consumption is a lot less than compared to just clicking Training (without shift).

It's possible to have a Training fleet where all ships are dispatched to, which is always on shift+Training. The ships that are fully trained use less fuel from that point on.


Evidence:

Doomstack where all are trained except 1 DD on normal training:

Same doomstack training with shift+training:

7300 fuel/day vs. 1300 fuel/day


Training the DD alone uses 13 fuel/day. So don't let your training fleet get too big. ;-)

 

[Voigt]

Collab Goverment is fine for China, since rising the operation boosts compliance in Nat. China Territory and atleast not all Warlord Territory. If you have 80% compliance on Nat China, you can release Japanese-China controlling all Chinese cores. This should give back a sizeable amount of Infantry Equipment from Occupation. Furthermore you get more ressources of the territory, since the -65% non-core modifier doesn't apply anymore.

Also for China but also other Nations aswell: They can progress down their Focus Tree and improving Infrastructure or Civ/Mil.
Beside China