• 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 - Future and Cornflakes

Hi everyone, this week I'm going to take some time and talk future plans with you all.

Right now
With the "Oak" 1.4.2 patch out the door and the team back from vacation its time to start looking at the future. This week we started work on the next DLC which is going to be a full-sized expansion. A lot of people have been asking for more mechanics and larger changes, and this will be it. As normal the expansion will arrive together with a free update we've dubbed 1.5 "Cornflakes".

As for exactly what these will contain you will need to bear with us a bit. As I said with us getting started on it now we need some time to actually make and test stuff before we start showing it off to you. This will mean that the next two diaries (if all goes according to plan) are going to be covering other stuff while we get ready. My plan there is to get some guest writing in from people who can talk about the business and process side of the company and team.

The five year plan
Not actually a five year plan, but I want to share with you some form of roadmap on what to expect in the future. Some of you may have seen me talk about some of this in my PdxCon talk earlier this year.

Just to be super clear, this is not any form of exhaustive or final list and unless we have already done it we can't promise anythings. Priorities change etc. The point of this is to give you an idea of things we would like to do. The order of things is also not in any kind of priority order, or order we would do them.

  • Improve flavor and immersion with naming of things in the game. No more Infantry Division Type 1 etc.
  • More player control over naval warfare and fleet battle behaviour
  • A Chain of Command system allowing field marshals to command generals
  • A logistics system with more actual player involvement (now you only care once stuff has gone very badly)
  • Improved naval combat interfaces with good transparency to underlying mechanics (give it the 1.4 air treatment)
  • Improve balance, feedback and mechanics for submarine warfare
  • Long term goals and strategies to guide ai rather than random vs historical focus lists, visible to players
  • Every starting nation has a custom portrait for historical leaders
  • A way for players to take dynamic decisions, quickly. Something that fits between events and national focuses.
  • Spies and espionage
  • Changing National Unity to something that matters during most of the game rather than when you are losing only
  • Improving peace conferences
  • Update core national focus trees with alt-history paths and more options (Germany, Italy, USA, United Kingdom, Soviet, France, Japan)
  • Wunderwaffen projects
  • Properly represent fuel in some way in the game
  • Add the ability to clean up your equipment stockpile from old stuff
  • Rework how wars work with respect to merging etc as its a big source of problems
  • More differences between sub-ideologies and government forms
  • More National Focus trees. (Among most interesting: China, South America, Scandinavia, Spain, Turkey, Iran, Greece)
  • An occupation system that isnt tied only to wars and where core vs non-core isn't so binary for access to things.
  • Make defensive warfare more fun
  • Adding mechanics to limit the size of your standing army, particularly post-war etc
  • Allow greater access to resources through improving infrastructure
  • Have doctrines more strongly affect division designing to get away from cookie cutter solutions and too ahistorical gamey setups

You'll notice that some of these are small and some of them are huge. I can't really talk too much details about this stuff though. That is stuff we will do once/if it makes it to dev diaries with feature highlights and has been implemented. Oh yeah, and before someone goes "why isn't improving AI on this list" the answer is that its not really something you can ever check off as done. We'll keep working on that in parallel with other stuff as we have since release.

There is no World War Wednesday stream today since the channel is all streaming from Gamescom today, but you can now check out last weeks episode on youtube to see me run the dev team as generals in a massive co-op.
 
Last edited:
Yoooo. Are we going to be able to build the p1000 ratte? Schwerer Gustav? Maybe even sillier stuff like power armor maybe?
I would first consider real things and not only focus on Germany. Some tech that caused a paradigm change later is clearly missing.
- helicopters (maybe as SAR support brigade)
- guided missiles (anti air and anti tank)
- air search radar
- flying wing

then also a bit more futuristic things that did see adaption to service in the 50s but still might be interesting "Wunderwaffe" options for WW2

- nuclear reactor for carriers and submarines
- ICBMs
- guided A2A missiles
- hydrogen bombs
- airborne tanks/assault guns

And sure some weapons that never saw any use after WW2 but were considers really special would be cool to, e.g.:

- super heavy artillery guns
- submarine/carrier hybrids
 
@podcat
Motorised or Mechanised Art, AA or AT is not planned ? :(

And what about a 1933 start date and a real Weimar Germany playthrough with it`s own, more sane, tree ? :D
At least it would be good if we had other NF trees and ideas for the other ideologies. It makes no sense to keep the Nazi tree for democratic German e.g.
It's also a bit immersion breaking when you see Himmler as a minister under Wilhelm Pieck in a communist Germany.
Well it would be a lot of work and there is more important stuff to do, but at least switching to the Generic focus tree for some countries when their ideology changes shouldn't be that difficult.
Making some ideas exclusive to some ideologies neither.
 
You should also try and put in focus trees for released nations or nations that change their ideology
 
I would pay any price for a Turkey and Iran tree and resources. It's so unlikely, but I hope its the next DLC. #ReuniteTheOttomonEmpire. Anywho, I'll be happy with any content, good luck!
 
Four words: Pride of the Fleet
 
Unlikely, it's abstracted as part of Infrastructure.

Railguns on the otherhand...
Yes, it is, but railways are so needed in this game! In Western & Central Europe the abstraction works, but get to Africa or Asia it does not. This goes for both supply & SR movement.
 
Yes, it is, but railways are so needed in this game! In Western & Central Europe the abstraction works, but get to Africa or Asia it does not. This goes for both supply & SR movement.

Indeed - where railways are few and may be the only means of effective military transport, their strategic importance is washed out of the game with a low average infra number.
 
EDIT: To add to this, please stop completely unaligned and unrelated countries from joining a major faction immediately. There's been too many times as Brazil that I have to join the Axis or Comintern to combat the Argentinians who join the Allies right off the bat of a declaration of war.
So let me see if I understand you...
You call on your 'big buddy' to attack someone and you don't want them to be able to do the same?
 
  • I fear imbalance from snowballing stacking like HOI3, but if the mechanism with a General under FM is about getting the better modifier of the two that could be fun and worthwhile.
Remember, Field Marshals and Generals don't have the same traits...so that shouldn't be a problem.
 
Nato symbols have been used in "every" normal strategy game as far back as I can remember, why try to make new symbols?

But. These counters are not normal counters :)
Funny, NATO Map Symbols weren't adopted until 1986 (31 years ago, although they are based on US Army Corps of Engineers map symbols adopted 100 years ago), strategy games have been around for literally millennia (Mancala ~5000 years old, Go ~2500 years old, Chess ~1400 years old, etc). In fact even most recent computer strategy games don't use them anymore, and only did in the past because of graphics limitations.
 
Yes, it is, but railways are so needed in this game! In Western & Central Europe the abstraction works, but get to Africa or Asia it does not. This goes for both supply & SR movement.
That's a fair point and I do agree, I just wonder how it would be implemented.
 
That's a fair point and I do agree, I just wonder how it would be implemented.
There are more than one way, but the way I would it is:

1. Have railways in a province and have them levels 1-3 (0-3 with 0 being none).

2. Move supply effects (I wish & think supply as a thing that is produced should be in the game & if they add fuel I hope it can be modded to also have supplies) to the provincial level, Railways move supply much better (just more through put) with more the higher the rail level.

3. Have all SR movement start in a province with railways & move along a rail line & end in a province with railways. So all non-rail movement would be normal movement (marching/driving) Also the speed of the SR/rail movement would be determined by the level of the railroad in that province, not the general infra. This way the general infra might be low in an African province, slow normal movement (swamps/jungle) but fast rail movement. This is also a big thing in the war in Russia.

Just think of the effects of cutting a rail line?

The Devs do know a lot about WW II! I just think that it is centered on Europe where this really doesn't matter as most ( a few mountain ranges it would) rail & general infra are well mixed. And even Strategic Command WWII: War in Europe has railways & they are important for supply & movement.
 
So let me see if I understand you...
You call on your 'big buddy' to attack someone and you don't want them to be able to do the same?
You misread that. "There's been too many times as Brazil that I have to join the Axis or Comintern to combat the Argentinians who join the Allies right off the bat of a declaration of war." What I mean by this is that I am nearly always forced to join an opposing faction after declaring on a non-aligned country, as a non-aligned country, that joins a random faction.
 
I would first consider real things and not only focus on Germany. Some tech that caused a paradigm change later is clearly missing.
- helicopters (maybe as SAR support brigade)
- guided missiles (anti air and anti tank)
- air search radar
- flying wing

then also a bit more futuristic things that did see adaption to service in the 50s but still might be interesting "Wunderwaffe" options for WW2

- nuclear reactor for carriers and submarines
- ICBMs
- guided A2A missiles
- hydrogen bombs
- airborne tanks/assault guns

And sure some weapons that never saw any use after WW2 but were considers really special would be cool to, e.g.:

- super heavy artillery guns
- submarine/carrier hybrids
Agree. We already have fancy things like the Maus. I prefer things like helicopters and guided missiles.
 
Four words: Pride of the Fleet

What would you do with a 'Pride of the Fleet' though? There's no evidence (as far as I'm aware at least) that being made such necessarily improved performance, and very little evidence that that the loss of the pride of the fleet was particularly more traumatic than a similar loss of a similar sized ship in a similar way. While the Hood exploding is the example most used for this kind of thing, I'd argue that the impact of that was more due to the way it was sunk, rather than because it was the Hood per se (if Prince of Wales had gone up like that instead, and Hood survived, I wouldn't have been surprised if the reaction had been similar). Barham's sinking (hardly the pride of the fleet) was hushed up for some time because of the potential impact on morale, and its likely it would have been similar to that of Hood if it had been made common knowledge at the time.

I would first consider real things and not only focus on Germany. Some tech that caused a paradigm change later is clearly missing.
- helicopters (maybe as SAR support brigade)
- guided missiles (anti air and anti tank)
- air search radar
- flying wing

then also a bit more futuristic things that did see adaption to service in the 50s but still might be interesting "Wunderwaffe" options for WW2

- nuclear reactor for carriers and submarines
- ICBMs
- guided A2A missiles
- hydrogen bombs
- airborne tanks/assault guns

And sure some weapons that never saw any use after WW2 but were considers really special would be cool to, e.g.:

- super heavy artillery guns
- submarine/carrier hybrids

These are all interesting things, but the biggest paradigm shift during and post-war was the move to far more 'electronic' warfare - radar, jamming, countermeasures, all of that, as well as the installations and systems to take advantage of it.It's worth noting that air search radar is covered in the electronics tab at the moment, but the implementation is fairly limited - there's definitely room to improve both the WW2 and early cold war era electronic warfare/countermeasures side of things.
 
These are all interesting things, but the biggest paradigm shift during and post-war was the move to far more 'electronic' warfare - radar, jamming, countermeasures, all of that, as well as the installations and systems to take advantage of it.It's worth noting that air search radar is covered in the electronics tab at the moment, but the implementation is fairly limited - there's definitely room to improve both the WW2 and early cold war era electronic warfare/countermeasures side of things.

electronic warfare was already quite important during the second world war but mainly for the navy and airforce.
the far larger effect comes from guided missiles of all sorts as the massively increase the lethaity of combat and drastically reduce the weight requirements for the launch platform (an at gun may weigh 2 tons while an atgm is maybe 15kg + 10kg missile also anti sip missiles let destroyers have comparable firepower to a battleship)