HOI4 Dev Diary - Fuel

[Rashie]

Question is - what is that? It is lighter than LARM and available only in 1941. So, don't think it is armored cars.

At a guess, it's one of three things, amphibious invasion vehicles, armoured cars, or branching off into tanks designed specifically to be used by airborne divisions. Something like LSTs seems most likely to me, given the theme of the DLC.

 

[davidc929]

The Royal Navy switched to oil firing well before WWI. Germany was never in any danger of running out of coal, making it a largely useless ressource for them because they don't have to care about it. Neither does Japan (coal was one of the few things Japan was largely self-sufficient in). That means neither nation needs to trade for coal or care about conquering more coal. Neither do Britain, France or the US have to care about coal. Not sure about the Soviet union, but never heard that they were close to running out. Copper was a much more sought-after resource.

That's not true at all about German coal. Getting more coal was a MAJOR issue for them. A lot of German coal mines at this point produced lower quality coal than their neighbours and another major issue is that even when they produced enough coal they could not get it to where it needed to be due to transport issues.

 

[kaguravitro]

That's not true at all about German coal. Getting more coal was a MAJOR issue for them. A lot of German coal mines at this point produced lower quality coal than their neighbours and another major issue is that even when they produced enough coal they could not get it to where it needed to be due to transport issues.

yes mobilization should reduce production of resourses so they would need foreing mines.

 

[FadedAmbassador]

Oh no...I mean hype for the new DLC, but Fuel? I want pre-1.5 HOI4 back

 

[pheonicia]

I apologize if this has been answered already, but will fuel go bad while in storage? It's my understanding that processed fuels can only last about 6 months before needing stabilizing chemicals or other treatments.

 

[Robosoldier1]

The nickel and copper from Petsamo is completely omitted from the game. The Petsamo nickel deposit is the largest in Europe. In-game Petsamo has 0 resources, and there's no possibility to prostect for them. Yup, zero, zilch, nada.

Germany wouldn't have been able to continue the war as long as they did without Finnish nickel. The main reason they even gave up Petsamo in 1944 was that they had hoarded enough of it to their stockpiles to last them till 1946.

Btw the resources in the game are quite arbitrarily distributed and often don't make much sense. E.g. Sweden has six times the steel they had IRL. Germany has far less than it should, etc.

Given nickel's use, I'd represent it as tungsten and aluminium within the current set of resources and give Petsamo a hefty lump of both. In my MP mod I gave it 60 of both, which I didn't feel was too much seeing how nearby Kiiruna in Sweden has a whopping 56 tungsten, 70 steel and 35 chromium. At the time of me adding those resources to Petsamo the Kiiruna mines used to have even higher amounts before they made infrastructure impact resources. Ideally Petsamo's nickel would start low in 1936 (as mining or construction of the mines didn't start IIRC until 1937), but could massively be expanded through Finnish (and perhaps German) focuses and decisions.

Totally no Swedish Bias eh Paradox? Greece is another example of large deposits of resources.

 

[Liquid Ghost]

Fuel is produced from unused oil, and equipment that used to use oil now no longer need that to be produced.

Excess/unused oil after what?

 

[Axe99]

Cheers for the DD Podcat, and the extra info Archangel/Bratyn (and the singing Tristan ) Fuel is very exciting, particularly from a naval perspective - every game needs more metaphorical starved baby whales on the teat . Fuel silos also exciting .

In celebration of fuel entering the game, here's a pic of one of the more important deliveries of fuel in the game - Ohio entering Valetta Harbour, Malta, at the end of Operation Pedestal - as can be seen by how low she is in the water, it was a close-run thing (even after getting some help from other ships in the convoy - if you look closely you can see a destroyer on her port that's helping keep her afloat)!

lawyer dog in the smartest little suit I have ever seen came over to visit us from Brussels.

Lawyer dog, you'll be libel to find him cute and adorable .

Anyone doing a dramatic reading of our privacy policy may request one Admiral to be added to the game

If this were true, I would so be organising a mass of dramatic readings .

As well as many of the English Capital Ships.

As best I recall, the only English 'once-was-a-capital-ship' that went into any war zones was the disarmed HMS Centurion (she was given wooden guns and sent to the Med and then the Indian Ocean to try and make it look like there were more BBs there). Iron Duke was also around as a gunnery training ship (then depot ship). But for actual ships that took part in combat operations, I think in the RN you need to go down to trawlers/minesweepers. Even Germany converted Schlesien and Schleswig-Holstein to partially burn oil (although they still burned some coal by the look of it).

mate coal was all but completely obselete by WW2. Germany even back in the Wiemar period invested millions into systhetic refineries (shit that turns coal into fuel) because they needed fuel so badly and beause they literally could not use up the coal they produced.

Coal still takes a lot of manpower to extract - something I only found out recently was that the UK had a shortage of coal during WW2 (not right away, but sooner than one would expect) because they needed the manpower elsewhere (and the type of manpower best for extracting coal - fit men - also had a fairly strong overlap with the type of people best for the armed forces). I haven't read anything about coal mining in Germany, but I can't imagine they wouldn't have preferred to have been able to use the manpower elsewhere.

Considering that many authors agree that the only success of the allied bombing campaign on Germany was its effect on fuel refineries and stockpiles as opposed to industrial output (which continued growing throughout the war)

Industrial output growing does not mean the allied bombing campaign didn't affect it though. A 'micro' analysis of individual factories makes it clear it was very disruptive at the individual factory level (and even moreso on production once the Allies worked out that hammering infrastructure would upset supply chains). I could be wrong, but I'd wager that the impact on fuel refineries and stockpiles would have been more pronounced because they were fewer of them (so a focussed attack on fuel-related infrastructure would be attacking a larger proportion of that segment of the economy than looking at bombing relative to industry more broadly).

Oh no...I mean hype for the new DLC, but Fuel? I want pre-1.5 HOI4 back

Probably worth waiting to see how it plays before getting worried. Fuel was a hugely important element of the Second World War (or warfare during that time period), so having it in the game should provide more historically plausible interesting choices, and make warfare more realistic, and there are plenty of ways to do that without making it a micro nightmare. Fingers crossed it'll be all good .

 

[Taraphir]

Hopefully some fuel is provided to tackle this pressing problem: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/carrier-plane-squadrons-wiped-out.1090883/

 

[CookieMonk]

Fuel, very good move.

 

[Silver-fox]

View attachment 383687​

Excess/unused oil after what?

I assume after trading.

I imagine fuel will be able to be traded in much the same way as equipment, but oil will still be traded away automatically as per your trade settings.

 

[CrazyZombie]

With fuel added it is time for Soviet revenge on beloved by devs Germans. What will you do with all your cool focuses, when I just early-justify on Romania and take it? (evilly laughs)

 

[Ceiphied]

Cool! But will we see Currency make a comeback as well? My main complaint with HoI4 was that is was very simplified compared to you guys other games. Like no currency, very little politics and no fuel. But seeing fuel make comeback makes we want nations with a more complicated economy system rather than just factories.

This game was made oversimplified on the beginning because it is supposed to be a game with 10 years of DLC, to make it more complicated each time one DLC is out. (and kind of easy against AI since AI doesn't use most things -ever had air invasion from AI ? for my part, no so since I don't play multi, I don't garnison a little of my land against such threats when my army marchs to the enemies to avoid my army being supply-cut)

As for the added resources, it is like mods "The Resource War" and "Expanded Resources", so I guess in that DLC, you will have free fuel but with the DLC, you will get all the cool options to rationalise your fuel and control its use. (forcing you to buy it to really see the real usefulness of fuel)

I still hope that supply trafic will be changed !

If I play SU and win WW2 and get most of Europe (Eastern at least as puppet then annexed), build infrastructure to max all over then start a war against Allies, I don't understand why my supply fleet should go through Allies controlled sea instead of using land only to supply my troops which are on my fully infra territories... (which is a part of why I build infra to max, better supply routes) (especially, having convoys from Vladivostok to the Baltics or Northern Russia, getting every chance to be destroyed -especially if I don't take control of Suez and the Med- going around Africa... with Allies having control everywhere except Black Sea)

Why not convoys switching to train&motorised vehicules (you produce or just as "convoys") to be land convoys and make full use of infrastructure ? (or having an option "do not use convoys" but only "use land", so you still need convoys but they will only be spent "on land" and you will see a good logistic if you have lot of infrastructure)

Still hope that you won't make special forces like tank div (only 400 allowed or something)... if you have the resources to do so (produce those then have enough fuel and supply reinforcments), you shouldn't have trouble having a massive tank army so why limit that ?

And that if as Germany, I capture SU oil field (Baku), I get their oil reserves in that place along with the oil producing facilities before having capitulated SU and not after only since the war against Allies would still be on with low fuel. (or do you play some decisions for SU "Oh no, the Nazis are coming, if they are too close, blow everything" to make it sure that all those won't be of use for several months but if Germany is repelled, you destroyed for nothing and take months to repair and so, you punish those who gave the order to push the destroy button )

 

[Sir Artificer the Third]

I am of the opinion that state infrastructure levels should impact the amount of supplies/fuel storage for the country overall, and that storage for each state should go up for each infrastructure level invested.

Mind you that this should be a small amount, and that damage to each level of infrastructure should destroy the amount of supplies that would hypothetically be stored at that location.

If, hypothetically, a single state nation had lvl 2 infrastructure, and was knocked down to lvl 1 infrastructure via bombing, and each level of infrastructure held 100 supplies (making the single state nation have a cap of 200 supplies for this hypothetical) and the nation had 150 supplies in its stockpile, it would lose 75 supplies as you would calculate that 150 supplies spread across 2 infrastructures would mean about 75 supplies per infrastructure level.

Harbors should also have natural warehouses and fuel tanks, and that damage to a harbor level would also destroy the supplies stockpiled their, and that upgrading harbors would also slightly boost your overall supply stockpile.

 

[Ceiphied]

If your tank div are standing still (doing some bunker line with enough air defense (infras and planes) to not be bombed), will they still be effective if you don't have enough fuel (but they are standing still, not moving at all ! and only have minimal fuel level) or doing the same with infantry+antitank gun+antiair+arti will be more efficient ? (if I have enough manpower and factories to produce all that and will those use horse to move all that or fuel motorised units ?)

 

[Voigt]

Since you are working on a Naval Rework, could we please have something like Re-Supply Subs?

As a secondary source of supply streams, so that Japan can trade with Germany over land trough Russia like they did historically. Or Hawaii for the pacific, or Singapur für SE Asia.

Supply would flow to these Hubs, and then outward to the nearest targets from these hubs. Only works with Level 10 Ports.

 

[davidc929]

Cheers for the DD Podcat, and the extra info Archangel/Bratyn (and the singing Tristan ) Fuel is very exciting, particularly from a naval perspective - every game needs more metaphorical starved baby whales on the teat . Fuel silos also exciting .

In celebration of fuel entering the game, here's a pic of one of the more important deliveries of fuel in the game - Ohio entering Valetta Harbour, Malta, at the end of Operation Pedestal - as can be seen by how low she is in the water, it was a close-run thing (even after getting some help from other ships in the convoy - if you look closely you can see a destroyer on her port that's helping keep her afloat)!

View attachment 383686



Lawyer dog, you'll be libel to find him cute and adorable .



If this were true, I would so be organising a mass of dramatic readings .



As best I recall, the only English 'once-was-a-capital-ship' that went into any war zones was the disarmed HMS Centurion (she was given wooden guns and sent to the Med and then the Indian Ocean to try and make it look like there were more BBs there). Iron Duke was also around as a gunnery training ship (then depot ship). But for actual ships that took part in combat operations, I think in the RN you need to go down to trawlers/minesweepers. Even Germany converted Schlesien and Schleswig-Holstein to partially burn oil (although they still burned some coal by the look of it).



Coal still takes a lot of manpower to extract - something I only found out recently was that the UK had a shortage of coal during WW2 (not right away, but sooner than one would expect) because they needed the manpower elsewhere (and the type of manpower best for extracting coal - fit men - also had a fairly strong overlap with the type of people best for the armed forces). I haven't read anything about coal mining in Germany, but I can't imagine they wouldn't have preferred to have been able to use the manpower elsewhere.



Industrial output growing does not mean the allied bombing campaign didn't affect it though. A 'micro' analysis of individual factories makes it clear it was very disruptive at the individual factory level (and even moreso on production once the Allies worked out that hammering infrastructure would upset supply chains). I could be wrong, but I'd wager that the impact on fuel refineries and stockpiles would have been more pronounced because they were fewer of them (so a focussed attack on fuel-related infrastructure would be attacking a larger proportion of that segment of the economy than looking at bombing relative to industry more broadly).



Probably worth waiting to see how it plays before getting worried. Fuel was a hugely important element of the Second World War (or warfare during that time period), so having it in the game should provide more historically plausible interesting choices, and make warfare more realistic, and there are plenty of ways to do that without making it a micro nightmare. Fingers crossed it'll be all good .

Yes. Without the bombing campaign industrial output would have grown even more. Also how much of that industrial output was directed towards countering the bombing campaign. Fighter aircraft, anti-aircraft artillery, searchlights, garage balloons, concrete and steel for shelters.

When you look at the huge numbers of AAA guns made by grant just think what they could have done if they had been directed towards anti-tank guns or regular artillery. Not to mention the redirection of the gun crews.

 

[Vohen]

It is a stat on equipment, much like soft attack. There are a bunch of modifiers that affect fuel usage. That's about it.

Oh well, that's not ideal for modding, by can be worked around, I suppose.
Any chance to give a shot to be more mod friendly in the end?

yeah all stats. a tank that cant move effectively cant really be where it needs to be etc.

This reminds me, will the penalties be on a battalion level or on a divisional level?
If the penalty doesn't apply to battalions, it'd be pretty easy to cheese it by making divisions with just enough tanks to still be an infantry division.
And it would also not make much sense for a division, for example, with 4inf x 3tank to suffer penalties to defense, org and other stats which comes predominantly from infantry battalions.
EDIT: Wait, never mind, just realized that if it's tied to equipment, that shouldn't be an issue, right?


Another question, will convoys also use fuel?
Probably shouldn't be much, especially when you use them to import oil itself, but I suppose it would make sense for them to use some.
Or maybe we'll see a specialization of convoys to be tankers, but that would likely be more explored in the main naval DD, as they would probably be used to refuel the navy at sea.

 

[Kadanz]

They are historical. But it's not historical that 33% of a nations entire population ( including old, children ) can be fielded as frontline soldiers in divisions.

Well they "can" It's just not a good idea

 

[Heckman]

Is that a new hat I see?