• 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.

HOI4 Dev Diary - Chain of Command

Hi everyone and welcome back to regular dev diaries. This and upcoming diaries will be covering stuff happening in the 1.5 "Cornflakes" update as well as the unannounced expansion that will come out together with it. One of the main focuses of those can be summarized as "making players care more about armies, leaders and troops" (our DLCs tend to have 1-3 main focuses or missions). The first feature that touches on this, and the topic of today's dev diary is adding a military chain of command to the game.

After Hearts of Iron III, where something like organizing the soviet chain of command could take about an hour of the players time we decided that we wanted something that was a lot less effort to work with for HOI4. We basically settled on a flat level with field marshals with no restriction on commanded divisions, and generals with a limit on division count but with a different set of traits. Over time we felt that we lost a bit too much of the WW2 military flavor with this abstraction, so we started thinking about how to do it in a more interesting way.

Pasted image at 2017_09_13 02_48 PM.jpg

What we have done now for 1.5 is that field marshals are now leading an Army Group, which is a certain number of Armies (what we had before) led by Generals. There are then places in theaters as before. Theaters are like before just a geographical organizational tool for the player and don't have a commander or the like to keep them as flexible as possible. This means that we have a Theaters->Army Groups->Armies->Divisions structure now.
While the Generals still come with a soft cap for how many divisions they can efficiently command, the field marshals will now have a number of armies they can efficiently command.

I also want to make sure to point out that this is still very early on in development, so stuff is very likely to change, and some stuff aren't completely working as it should yet. So we are showing you this in progress rather than showing a completely finished feature, and as always any numbers you see are extremely subject to change ;) Also I very sneekily hid the topbar for now ;)
upload_2017-9-13_15-27-6.png


When it comes to controlling your troops the new system introduces some changes to the battle planner. You can either do a plan for each army in the army group, or have a central plan for the whole Army Group where each army has a part of the frontline assigned as its responsibility. You can also do a mix, in which case an Army will finish its plan and then fall back to executing the Army Group's plan. We are still iteration on this stuff though but I figured you all wanted to know how it would work in practice.

upload_2017-9-13_15-26-30.png


Something that does not really come across in the images is that we are working on ways to streamline the process for setting up fronts using the new army groups. This should make at least the basic cases feel smooth to set up, even with one more command level and more armies without a ton of extra clicking.

upload_2017-9-13_15-23-51.png


The sharp eyed reader will also notice that we have removed the skill level for generals. This is now replaced with separate skills of different kinds. Attack, Defense, Planning and Logistics. Attack and Defense do what you expect while Planning improves planning speed and Logistics lowers supply consumption. Field marshal stats apply together with army general stats at a reduced capacity, so you will always want to have a chain of command for best efficiency.

The chain of command feature is going to be part of the free update, although there is some cool DLC features that tie into it we will be revealing in later diaries. Also expect to read more details about the system itself like how things in combat are affected etc.

See you next week when we will be taking a look at national unity...
 
I am left with but one hope from the change in this update - Please, please tell me that ALL involved command officers in a battle will gain from being in the battle. The Winner-Take-All effect annoys me, and leaves a number of command officers involved in the similar process gaining nothing unless they're lucky enough the Big Cheese doesn't get a division in that fight.

Makes it very hard to progress generals on their own, especially when you have hundreds of divisions involved.
 
Correct if i'm wrong but pictures in the first post shows that the player is using spearhead instead of offensive line as offensive line itself. Since i don't own TFV dlc, could someone please explain why would he does that? I mean is there any sort of advantage by doing so? Does the AI execute the plan better?
 
Last edited:
Correct if i'm wrong but pictures in the first post shows that the player is using spearhead instead of offensive line as offensive line itself. Since i don't own TFV dlc, could someone please explain why would he does that? I mean is there any sort of advantage by doing so? Does the AI execute the plan better?

You can read more about the differences in this development diary detailing it:

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...4-development-diary-october-12th-2016.973797/

In short the AI should attack without defending it's flanks as much when using it and push just forward.
 
I am left with but one hope from the change in this update - Please, please tell me that ALL involved command officers in a battle will gain from being in the battle. The Winner-Take-All effect annoys me, and leaves a number of command officers involved in the similar process gaining nothing unless they're lucky enough the Big Cheese doesn't get a division in that fight.

Makes it very hard to progress generals on their own, especially when you have hundreds of divisions involved.
Ive got to agree with this request. Its just so unrealistic to send a commander with a Volunteer force to fight for china only to find he doesnt gain experience because whenever you attack a chinese division will join in.
 
@Arkhis

These two might interest you.

  • A logistics system with more actual player involvement (now you only care once stuff has gone very badly)
  • Properly represent fuel in some way in the game
I am not saying there is going supplies in the game, but it looks like Fuel will be. If modders can implement supply, base on the fuel mechanic, & it works well & is popular (2 things that supply was not in HoI 3) then the may add it to HOI IV some day.
 
@Arkhis

These two might interest you.


I am not saying there is going supplies in the game, but it looks like Fuel will be. If modders can implement supply, base on the fuel mechanic, & it works well & is popular (2 things that supply was not in HoI 3) then the may add it to HOI IV some day.

Oh, I'm not saying there won't be a supply system, but this was from their list of ideas and things they want to add if I'm not mistaken, so I meant we can't be sure it'll come with the upcoming patch/expac (but I do hope so).
 
Setting up a proper OOB was one of the most enjoyable things from HOI3 - I wish you would expand on it, rather than simplify it this much. Still early so better wait perhaps, but these images look still extremely simplified. Are there Army assets? Corps assets?
Although I think this patch will be a good improvement, I agree that setting up a good OOB is enjoyable.

As for corps - I would think it would be quite easy to program something along these lines: Seeing as how 20 width is recommended for many division types, and the width of a province is 80, it makes sense to try and fit four divisions into one province. And since a corps could consist of four divisions or thereabouts, it makes sense to keep one corps together in one province, if possible. Advancing, you would see the fastest division getting there first, but all divisions would try to fight together when they could. So my idea of a corps in HoI would neither have any corps assets or special mechanics, nor (necessarily) any named leaders with bonuses, just be a named container to dump a handful of divisions into, which would act as an instruction to the AI to try to bunch these divisions together if at all possible. And for the player to have a fast way to pick a small force for a specific task.

I would like to have the opportunity to assign certain assets to army and army group, giving bonuses to the entire force regarding e.g. intelligence, logistics, manpower etc. For the time being, though, I would prioritize one: CAS. As others also have mentioned, it would be awesome to assign some air assets to direct army ground support, moving along with the army and operating from field airstrips.
 
As for corps - I would think it would be quite easy to program something along these lines: Seeing as how 20 width is recommended for many division types, and the width of a province is 80, it makes sense to try and fit four divisions into one province. And since a corps could consist of four divisions or thereabouts, it makes sense to keep one corps together in one province, if possible. Advancing, you would see the fastest division getting there first, but all divisions would try to fight together when they could. So my idea of a corps in HoI would neither have any corps assets or special mechanics, nor (necessarily) any named leaders with bonuses, just be a named container to dump a handful of divisions into, which would act as an instruction to the AI to try to bunch these divisions together if at all possible. And for the player to have a fast way to pick a small force for a specific task.

This could be a really interesting approach to corps, use it for grouping together 2-6 units so they move as a single unit on the map just like they would in HoI2 ( limited to the speed of the slowest naturally ).

AI could use it for keeping attack units together to ensure good striking power and prevent the single infantry division attacks we often see it doing.
 
This could be a really interesting approach to corps, use it for grouping together 2-6 units so they move as a single unit on the map just like they would in HoI2 ( limited to the speed of the slowest naturally ).

AI could use it for keeping attack units together to ensure good striking power and prevent the single infantry division attacks we often see it doing.

This is a very neat idea. I'm wondering if it couldn't also help reduce front shuffling by considering this corps level to be the ideal individual unit to occupy a province, and only moving individual divisions out from the corps if there's a hole in the front line?

Adding individual commanders to the corps level just sounds like an extra management chore, and an opportunity for players to min-max against the AI, but as a purely optional, AI-friendly organizational tool it could be very cool.
 
Last edited:
This is a very neat idea. I'm wondering if it couldn't also help reduce front shuffling by consdering this corps level to be the ideal individual unit to occupy a province, and only moving individual divisions out from the corps if there's a hole in the front line?

Adding individual commanders to the corps level just sounds like an extra management chore, and an opportunity for players to min-max against the AI, but as a purely optional, AI-friendly organizational tool it could be very cool.

I'm not sure it would be super useful on the defense since you normally want to rotate in reinforcements, and retreats low org units as soon as they run out of org so they can start to regain it.

Keeping units together on the offense though so they arrive and fight together could be useful for both AI and players I think.
 
I already employ this within the boundaries of the current UI.

I form little stacks of 3-4 divisions within an army, and place each stack in a single province. On the main map, each stack is represented as a single counter icon, which I can order around to move and/or attack. If I need more than that in a single province, I move in a stack from a different army. Since the counters of different armies don't merge on the map, I now have two counters, each representing a stack from one of the armies.

Unfortunately, this trick only works as long as you don't use the battle planner.
 
I'm not sure it would be super useful on the defense since you normally want to rotate in reinforcements, and retreats low org units as soon as they run out of org so they can start to regain it.

Keeping units together on the offense though so they arrive and fight together could be useful for both AI and players I think.

True, it would have to account for that too by essentially borrowing divisions from other corps, preferably the closest ones that are not also losing a battle. Don't know enough about how the system currently works to say if that would be an improvement or not.

Alternatively, the AI could keep a pool of reserve divisions away from the front line to shuffle in. But I imagine that's a separate discussion.
 
True, it would have to account for that too by essentially borrowing divisions from other corps, preferably the closest ones that are not also losing a battle. Don't know enough about how the system currently works to say if that would be an improvement or not.

Alternatively, the AI could keep a pool of reserve divisions away from the front line to shuffle in. But I imagine that's a separate discussion.

Or, a corps could already include the reserve division - which the AI holds in reserve to prevent the overstacking. If the optimum is 4, then optimal corps size becomes 5, with one not on the front line
 
It won't as there's no supply system.

There is a supply system, it's just not the logistics that you're actually thinking of. Maintaining supply lines is key (through infrastructure and convoys) but it doesn't stand out as much as the system in, say, HoI3. I'll be one of the first to admit I'd want an actual logistics system (beans, bullets, bandaids and POL), but we do have a supply system of sorts.
 
Hello to you,developers,I'm very glad to see you in the same way, I'm looking forward to the patch (or DLC) with this function, and not only with it, will be released in the next time, I just wanted to excuse, I noticed, I noticed, in limiting the command of the armies in the army group: not exactly, I think, exactly, that the maximum of the armies in the army group is 6, I think that the best will be a maximum of 12 armies, I want to give an example of the 1st Belorussian Front of Zhukov (1945) about 11 armies, but all the same you are developers, you know what is better, and I think, do the right thing by doing the following I hope you will read my message. To you and health))) P.S: Sorry for my English, you know, I'm from Ukraine, I used Google translator ...
 
I'm absolutely certain that amount of armies per army group will be moddable. The number of divisions per army and armies per army group will be hopefully used by the AI to keep troops together rather than relocating all the time. Too many army groups might defeat this purpose. That's why I hope they institute theater commanders as well, mainly for immersion purposes, but as I suggested in an earlier post, keep it simple - let one army group commander also command the theater. That theater group commander's army group would be a bit more powerful than your other army groups, and which can have benefits for the player and AI.