• 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 - Resistance and Compliance

Hello HoI bois and ladies, welcome to the second dev diary on our upcoming unannounced expansion and 1.8 ‘Husky’ update. This update features some big changes to how occupied territory functions. The biggest part of this is an overhaul of the game’s current resistance system into what we are calling the “Resistance and Compliance” system. This should help curb a bit of power from snowballing (Hello, Germany), remove gamey early war sniping of provinces, and put a bit of a clock on world conquest runs.

The old resistance system is rather simple. Each occupied state has a suppression requirement. If you meet that requirement nothing happens. If the suppression requirement is not met then you suffer from increasingly common sabotage to factories or infrastructure as resistance strength grows. We decided we could make this more interesting and use it as a way to further control the power of snowballing.

The growth of resistance is no longer stopped by having an adequate garrison. Resistance now functions with a target system. The resistance level will grow or decay towards whatever the current target is. The target is impacted by the development of the state, the core owner still existing and other factors. Resistance activities will still scale with the level of resistance, but the garrison will now work as a shield that absorbs these sabotages. If the garrison is adequate, the garrison shield will absorb the vast majority of sabotage attempts and take losses to manpower and equipment. Not having an adequate garrison means a higher resistance target and more resistance activity making it past the garrison shield to the state.

DD_RESCOMP_COMP.png


Compliance is in some ways the opposite of resistance. It is a rating of how willing the local state is to work with their occupiers. Compliance will normally start at zero and increase slowly over time. Compliance growth will generally be slow and several factors can affect that speed of growth. As compliance increases in a state, it will decrease local resistance and give access to more resources, factories, and manpower.

DD_RESCOMP_COMP2.png


Resistance and compliance also will have various effects that are unlocked. Resistance will gain the ability to more frequently bypass the garrison shield after it reaches a strength of 25%. Reaching 25% compliance means reducing suppression requirements for the current level of resistance.

DD_RESCOMP_UNLOCKS.png


The highest level of resistance unlocks include two levels of uprising. The first is a passive malus that is applied to the state, adding attrition, decreasing move speed, and slowing org regain for occupying forces in the area. The 2nd level uprising is a full scale organized uprising that functions somewhat like a civil war. The states that rise up will gain low-quality divisions and either rejoin their former master or if that no longer exists, reestablish themselves on the map. Both of these should be somewhat rare and will require the local resistance being supported by an outside source.

DD_RESCOMP_UPRISING1.png



In conjunction with these new systems, we have reworked how occupied states are handled. Colony states will be removed as a concept and every state not controlled by a nation with a core on the state will be viewed as occupied. Occupied states will now be less rewarding for the occupier. Access to the factories and resources of the state will by default be much lower than before. However, the conqueror can get more out of the state by cultivating compliance or adjusting occupation laws. This gives a bit of granularity between what was previously colony states and cores.

Occupation laws will also be updated to work with the new resistance and compliance systems and give the player more choice. Previous occupation laws were mostly a linear system of paying PP and increasing suppression need for increasing rewards. If you could afford it, harsher occupation would almost always be more beneficial. This was also a system not a lot of people interacted with as it was hidden behind several layers of the menu.

New occupation laws are built around trying to give the player choice based on playstyle and short and longterm goals. The new laws tend towards one of three objectives: compliance growth, resistance suppression, factory/resource exploitation. Compliance growth is a longterm reward, while resistance suppression and resource gains are more short term. These laws will, in turn, be bad at what they are not concerned with. IE focusing on resistance suppression will generally not be very rewarding in terms of resources or long term compliance growth. Cultivating compliance will mean that the player will have to deal with a period of low yields and maybe a more active resistance movement. Each of the big three ideologies will also get their own special occupation laws. These laws fit the themes of the ideologies and give them some unique choices

DD_RESCOMP_OCULAW02.png


That's all we got for this week. Next week we will update the good people of these forums on what is going on with France. Secrets and things hidden will be revealed!
 
You already have to race Germany to Austria and Czech, you have to deal with RNG moments, that force you to save scum. And now, you have to deal with this issue? Hungary already starts with no manpower. How exactly do you plan on keeping Austria happy with occupation... when you have no manpower? You're just going to have a rebellion. This entire update, as it is given to us right now, is poorly designed.
Uhm, you get cores on both Austria and Czechoslovakia as Austria-Hungary, I don't understand what you're getting at here. You're just whining at hypotheticals at this point. First of all, it must be said that the game should be balanced in a way that most of the times, Germany loses the war. The stategic situation IRL Germany had simply makes it that way (and even considering that they got a whole lot further than they actually should have had). Britain not being able to conquer the world? They have the industry of the entire Anglosphere available if you take the Imperial Federation route. Not to forget that all of this is merely speculation. We know none of the final values. Whilst QA might not be one of PDX's strong points, they are always pretty quick in updating a new release with bugfixes and possible rebalancing. It's just whining about nothing. We don't know the new balance yet. And if you're afraid of losing strategies, this has always happened. I can remember the days when the Byzantium strategy was building 20 heavies, declaring war on the Ottomans and winning because they couldn't cross the straits. When straits changed, this strat also dissapeared. But I have done Byzantium games afterwards. At the beginning of HoI4, my stategy for the Netherlands was just building forts on the border, but the new focus tree made me actually capitulate and continue the war from Indonesia, something I had never done before. And before you say "well, that gave more possibilities, this just removes them" let's just wait untill we actually know how all of this will influence game balance.
 
One Empire
Unite the entire world under the British Empire.

This will not be possible. This is literally a world conquest achievment.
4. If you dont see how this update screws that the achievments, then let me explain it to you.

Lets be generous and say that the harshest occupation law only costs... 1k manpower to use.

So theres at least 760 provinces. That's 760,000 manpower required just to man the entire world. At the harhest, but you get no equipment, no factories, no resources, so you're army is weak. Yea, that sounds like an AMAZING idea. You do realize the UK doesn't get that much manpower right? Lets say thats two million manpower you get as UK. Thats about 1.4 million manpower left over. You have to og to war with Germany and Soviet Union. You need manpower to field armies, so now you have to delete your manpower in order to make alot of armies.

You will not have the manpower needed in order to this. Its not possible having to garrison all of the provinces.
hence their achievments being the make everyone facist or a world conquest as Britain.
You realize the achievement just requires you to have all nations in your faction, right? Like, you can get this without annexing a single nation. Half the world is going to join the Allies anyway, it's really not a hard achievement. That's not even mentioning the Imperial Federation. Again, it really just seems like you are too stubborn/fixated on achievements to turn down the difficulty to match your skill level.


Paradox achievements usually have a good range of 'fairly straightforward' to 'yikes, that looks scary' when it comes to achievement difficulty ratings).
Yeah I imagine his head would explode if he tried to get all the CK2 achievements
 
Last edited:
You realize the achievement just requires you to have all nations in your faction, right? Like, you can get this without annexing a single nation. Half the world is going to join the Allies anyway, it's really not a hard achievement. That's not even mentioning the Imperial Federation. Again, it really just seems like you are too stubborn/fixated on achievements to turn down the difficulty to match your skill level.

They can also adjust the requirements to get achievements, they've already done it for HoI IV.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Uhm, you get cores on both Austria and Czechoslovakia as Austria-Hungary, I don't understand what you're getting at here. You're just whining at hypotheticals at this point. First of all, it must be said that the game should be balanced in a way that most of the times, Germany loses the war. The stategic situation IRL Germany had simply makes it that way (and even considering that they got a whole lot further than they actually should have had). Britain not being able to conquer the world? They have the industry of the entire Anglosphere available if you take the Imperial Federation route. Not to forget that all of this is merely speculation. We know none of the final values. Whilst QA might not be one of PDX's strong points, they are always pretty quick in updating a new release with bugfixes and possible rebalancing. It's just whining about nothing. We don't know the new balance yet. And if you're afraid of losing strategies, this has always happened. I can remember the days when the Byzantium strategy was building 20 heavies, declaring war on the Ottomans and winning because they couldn't cross the straits. When straits changed, this strat also dissapeared. But I have done Byzantium games afterwards. At the beginning of HoI4, my stategy for the Netherlands was just building forts on the border, but the new focus tree made me actually capitulate and continue the war from Indonesia, something I had never done before. And before you say "well, that gave more possibilities, this just removes them" let's just wait untill we actually know how all of this will influence game balance.

1. I dont know what you're getting at here with the cores thing. You do realize you only get cores once you select the decision as soon as you have Czech, Austria, the 4 romanian and the bits of Yugoslavia you need right? You dont get cores until then.


2. No. Wrong. The game should not be balanced around Allies win 2.0. That is a horrible idea. Just no.

3. You are right. I dont know what the final values will be as they are being very vague at the moment, but I always go for the worst case Scenario as it's best to ALWAYS bring up concerns about something before the final product, so the devs can actually rethink before they release. Call it beta testing.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
You realize the achievement just requires you to have all nations in your faction, right? Like, you can get this without annexing a single nation. Half the world is going to join the Allies anyway, it's really not a hard achievement. That's not even mentioning the Imperial Federation. Again, it really just seems like you are too stubborn/fixated on achievements to turn down the difficulty to match your skill level.



Yeah I imagine his head would explode if he tried to get all the CK2 achievements

Ok, maybe you could... I dunno. Raise the difficulty level yourself instead of having everything fit for you... and screw everyone else?

Why does everything have to fit for you, instead of fit for everyone?

You aren't the only player in this game. You aren't the only playstyle. You are one of many people. There are plenty of people like me who have other playstyles instead of needing a Allies win 2.0 game. Please just stop.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
They can also adjust the requirements to get achievements, they've already done it for HoI IV.

Seems like alot of unnecessary work because they want to make this game a different game than what was sold to me.

Victory is at your fingertips! Your ability to lead your nation is your supreme weapon, the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV lets you take command of any nation in World War II; the most engaging conflict in world history.

From the heart of the battlefield to the command center, you will guide your nation to glory and wage war, negotiate or invade. You hold the power to tip the very balance of WWII. It is time to show your ability as the greatest military leader in the world. Will you relive or change history? Will you change the fate of the world by achieving victory at all costs?



This was what was sold to me. What they are doing now, is changing what was being sold and into a different game.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Victory is at your fingertips! Your ability to lead your nation is your supreme weapon, the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV lets you take command of any nation in World War II; the most engaging conflict in world history.

From the heart of the battlefield to the command center, you will guide your nation to glory and wage war, negotiate or invade. You hold the power to tip the very balance of WWII. It is time to show your ability as the greatest military leader in the world. Will you relive or change history? Will you change the fate of the world by achieving victory at all costs?



This was what was sold to me. What they are doing now, is changing what was being sold and into a different game.

Wait so them adding a resistance system, it's still in the game just an actual thing now instead of the non-existent mechanic before, is bad? Games change over time when they have support from updates and DLC. If a game goes from a RTS Grand Strategy and turns into a FPS than yes that's deceiving fans and changing what was sold. Literally adding a proper system where one was lacking to a crucial part of a WW2 game is changing what was sold to you, in a bad way? This is why I walked away from arguing with you. You are throwing out weird arguments and keep changing the subject when someone counters you. First it was bad system, then it was I can't world conquest, then it was I can't world conquest as minors, then achievements and now you're saying the game is changing drastically from what was sold to you.

If you do not like the changes, when the update comes out, you can revert to the old version and stay on the old version of the game that was "sold to you".
 
Wait so them adding a resistance system, it's still in the game just an actual thing now instead of the non-existent mechanic before, is bad? Games change over time when they have support from updates and DLC. If a game goes from a RTS Grand Strategy and turns into a FPS than yes that's deceiving fans and changing what was sold. Literally adding a proper system where one was lacking to a crucial part of a WW2 game is changing what was sold to you, in a bad way? This is why I walked away from arguing with you. You are throwing out weird arguments and keep changing the subject when someone counters you. First it was bad system, then it was I can't world conquest, then it was I can't world conquest as minors, then achievements and now you're saying the game is changing drastically from what was sold to you.

If you do not like the changes, when the update comes out, you can revert to the old version and stay on the old version of the game that was "sold to you".

See, and I want to play with the other focus trees. I'd love to see what the new France and the new Spain brings! I didn't actually read too much into the dev diary as I wanted to be surprised. Im excited for France and Spain being updated. It makes me giddy!


But the problem for me is, what was sold to me was a game with multiple options, variety and the ability to change the course of history. This update, in the worst case scenario, completely negates 90% of all the other playstyles. They didn't think this update through, or maybe they did as they are withholding information.

Who wouldn't want the ability to bring back the Roman Empire? Who wouldn't want the ability to recreate the Chinese Empire((Manchuko))? Who wouldn't want the ability to play the USA, conquer the world in the name of "Freedom."? Who wouldn't want to play Britain and make everyone drink tea?

Thats the beauty of this sandbox game. But this update, the way I see it and envinsion it... and they way they talk. Is taking a beautiful WW2 Sandbox.... and turning it into a WW2 simulator. Its not a simulator and never has been, but this update is pushing towards it... which was not the game I paid for.

World Conquest options? Gone. There was no actual reason to remove this. It harmed nobody except someones opinion about how a WW2 game should be. Whoopdy doo. This wasn't a balance issue.

Forming the formable nations that were put into the game? You can more than likely kiss most of it good bye.


You are right. The system in place for occupation before was pretty bad. I personally ignored it and never garrisoned. I just conquered and eventually, it will go away. Sure, it was silly but THIS was not the correct way to fix it.

As I said in previous psots, there were multiple ways to fix this game and slow Germany down, without actually ruining the other countries in the game.

Max factory caps. Military factory caps for starters. This would easily slow down Germany.

But this occupation update, the way it was portrayed/given to us, easily negates so many play styles and so many of the sandbox items and there was no actual reason for this particular change.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Seems like alot of unnecessary work because they want to make this game a different game than what was sold to me.
Victory is at your fingertips! Your ability to lead your nation is your supreme weapon, the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV lets you take command of any nation in World War II; the most engaging conflict in world history.
From the heart of the battlefield to the command center, you will guide your nation to glory and wage war, negotiate or invade. You hold the power to tip the very balance of WWII. It is time to show your ability as the greatest military leader in the world. Will you relive or change history? Will you change the fate of the world by achieving victory at all costs?
This was what was sold to me. What they are doing now, is changing what was being sold and into a different game.

Hmm, I wonder what the key component here is.
in World War II
balance of WWII
Oh yeah, that would be it. World War II. Not a fantasy land where resistance just magically disappears when you take the enemy capital. Thankfully the devs haven't listened to nonsense arguments like yours and are continuing to develop a WWII strategy game instead of an I win button simulator. Go play with mods or something, I think we're done here.
 
See, and I want to play with the other focus trees. I'd love to see what the new France and the new Spain brings! I didn't actually read too much into the dev diary as I wanted to be surprised. Im excited for France and Spain being updated. It makes me giddy!

Again, I'm sure a mod will come out for people like you. That's the beauty of PDX games.
But the problem for me is, what was sold to me was a game with multiple options, variety and the ability to change the course of history. This update, in the worst case scenario, completely negates 90% of all the other playstyles. They didn't think this update through, or maybe they did as they are withholding information.

Who wouldn't want the ability to bring back the Roman Empire? Who wouldn't want the ability to recreate the Chinese Empire((Manchuko))? Who wouldn't want the ability to play the USA, conquer the world in the name of "Freedom."? Who wouldn't want to play Britain and make everyone drink tea?

Thats the beauty of this sandbox game. But this update, the way I see it and envinsion it... and they way they talk. Is taking a beautiful WW2 Sandbox.... and turning it into a WW2 simulator. Its not a simulator and never has been, but this update is pushing towards it... which was not the game I paid for.

I for one don't like the idea of doing that. Democratic America conquering the world doesn't interest me. Forming the Roman Empire in 1930-1940 is ridiculous to me. Chinese Empire is fine, because you're recreating something that collapsed only 25 years ago and still had some support and a living Emperor. While it's not a perfect simulator, the game was made at launch as a simulator, just like the rest of the series. It gives you sandbox options to take different paths in history, but some type of global massive conflict needs to happen. It's a game where you can play France and communism takes over the country. Not a game where you can click two buttons, win and deal with no penalties. In fact it's one of my problems with the game is there's not enough penalties in the game. India is one of the few countries that has a modifier that is negative, and while you can reduce it, you can't get rid of it.

World Conquest options? Gone. There was no actual reason to remove this. It harmed nobody except someones opinion about how a WW2 game should be. Whoopdy doo. This wasn't a balance issue.

Except it is a balance issue, if I'm playing Belgium and I conquer the world by 1950, something is too easy and not right and should be adjusted. Since you want to pull quotes from the Steam store page, "You hold the power to tip the very balance of WWII." This means that you are playing a WW2 game, but you can tip things to go differently. If you play Spain and the Republicans win, that doesn't mean you get a free pass to annex the world. It means you can do things differently, such as join with the Allies in democracy and prevent France from falling and make the Germans fight a gritty WW1-esque war again. Maybe you play Czechoslovakia and stand up against the Germans for taking the Sudentenland and trigger the war to start early which completely changes who, where, when and how the war goes. World conquest is suppose to be extremely difficult, even for the majors. If ANY country takes over the world in 15 years that is ridiculous. Every country runs into problems, and dealing with those problems and still succeeding is more interesting and fun for me. It's so dull to invade, snipe some VPs, annex country and suddenly I have everything and the only thing that war cost me was 50k manpower or something. Diplomacy is going to get revamped one day, maybe even the League of Nations will be added, world domination will probably get harder once that comes out.

Forming the formable nations that were put into the game? You can more than likely kiss most of it good bye.

Ummm, no? They're still going to be in-game, you can still do them rather easily. You are once again over dramaticizing this all. It's not going to be like you invade a country and suddenly you can't operate anymore. Seriously, stop and think about it. If you're playing a minor, usually the people who form new nations. You are invading other nations that have like 2-5 states, that means you're barely spending any resources on them and then you click the button and suddenly those states are cores and all your problems gone.

You are right. The system in place for occupation before was pretty bad. I personally ignored it and never garrisoned. I just conquered and eventually, it will go away. Sure, it was silly but THIS was not the correct way to fix it.

Well, I agree it doesn't seem to be a perfect system, but this is drastically better. Not only is it an actual mechanic now, it will reduce FPS drops from needing so many garrison units and it'll add depth to conquering new land. As stated earlier, if you can actually work for it, you can make non-cores better than they already are. World conquest might become easier now that I'm thinking about it. It might take longer, but there's not really an end date for the game so you can just keep playing and make the resistance go away and poof you get even more benefits than now.

As I said in previous psots, there were multiple ways to fix this game and slow Germany down, without actually ruining the other countries in the game.

Doesn't really ruin countries, and this does slow Germany now with a historical and very important missing factor in a WW2 strategy game.

Max factory caps. Military factory caps for starters. This would easily slow down Germany.

There's already limits on factories per states.

But this occupation update, the way it was portrayed/given to us, easily negates so many play styles and so many of the sandbox items and there was no actual reason for this particular change.

No "items" are going away. No mechanics are being removed besides the non-existent resistance, and don't even argue that adding a real resistance mechanic had "no actual reason" to be added. And with every PDX update/DLC, playstyles will change, submarines were useless and battleship spam was the way of navies prior to MtG.
 
Victory is at your fingertips! Your ability to lead your nation is your supreme weapon, the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV lets you take command of any nation in World War II; the most engaging conflict in world history.

From the heart of the battlefield to the command center, you will guide your nation to glory and wage war, negotiate or invade. You hold the power to tip the very balance of WWII. It is time to show your ability as the greatest military leader in the world. Will you relive or change history? Will you change the fate of the world by achieving victory at all costs?

This was what was sold to me. What they are doing now, is changing what was being sold and into a different game.

As others have said, it feels a bit like you're creating reasons to be concerned here. Even if (and it's a huge if which I highly doubt will come to pass) WC by majors isn't feasible), I'm stil not clear (at all) on how adding a resistance mechanic changes what was sold to you. At no point in that spiel does it say "you can lead your country to global domination" - it just says you hold the power to tip the balance of WWII, not to conquer the world. I don't think, even with a lot of work and some pretty involved logical gymnastics, I could come up with a credible argument that adding a resistance mechanic nullifies any of those points. That said, I could well have missed something.

But the problem for me is, what was sold to me was a game with multiple options, variety and the ability to change the course of history. This update, in the worst case scenario, completely negates 90% of all the other playstyles. They didn't think this update through, or maybe they did as they are withholding information.

As best I understand it, this "worst case scenario" is something you're almost/totally single-handedly pushing. You're assuming something that has been neither shown nor announced, and that the devs would want to narrow the nature of the game down at the very time (through focus trees) they're clearly working the alt-history options.

But this update, the way I see it and envinsion it... and they way they talk.

As far as I'm aware, the sole statement from the devs on this is:

This should help curb a bit of power from snowballing (Hello, Germany), remove gamey early war sniping of provinces, and put a bit of a clock on world conquest runs.

It does not say that snowballing is stopped, just slowed. It doesn't say WC isn't possible (indeed, it logically implies WC is still possible) but rather suggests it might mean it's got to be done within a certain time.

I have no doubt it will change the way the game is played, but unless I've missed something (which I may have) the devs are not saying what you say they're saying.

Is taking a beautiful WW2 Sandbox.... and turning it into a WW2 simulator.

Again, no-one here (and definitely not the devs, who have in the last few weeks revealed national focus trees that include an option to pain the world Anarchist :cool:) is saying this. Assuming that what releases is what we've seen, once this content is available, HoI4 will be a game where there are focus trees with strong alt-history options for most of the majors and a good number of the minors and mechanics (game rules) that allow players no small amount of control over these. I imagine I'll be able to have a game where I play as Anarchist Spaniards fighting against a Monarchist France and the Kaiser's Germany. Now, I am by no means an expert here, but I've read enough to be confident in saying that this does not sound to me like a WW2 simulator :).
 
As others have said, it feels a bit like you're creating reasons to be concerned here. Even if (and it's a huge if which I highly doubt will come to pass) WC by majors isn't feasible), I'm stil not clear (at all) on how adding a resistance mechanic changes what was sold to you. At no point in that spiel does it say "you can lead your country to global domination" - it just says you hold the power to tip the balance of WWII, not to conquer the world. I don't think, even with a lot of work and some pretty involved logical gymnastics, I could come up with a credible argument that adding a resistance mechanic nullifies any of those points. That said, I could well have missed something.



As best I understand it, this "worst case scenario" is something you're almost/totally single-handedly pushing. You're assuming something that has been neither shown nor announced, and that the devs would want to narrow the nature of the game down at the very time (through focus trees) they're clearly working the alt-history options.



As far as I'm aware, the sole statement from the devs on this is:



It does not say that snowballing is stopped, just slowed. It doesn't say WC isn't possible (indeed, it logically implies WC is still possible) but rather suggests it might mean it's got to be done within a certain time.

I have no doubt it will change the way the game is played, but unless I've missed something (which I may have) the devs are not saying what you say they're saying.



Again, no-one here (and definitely not the devs, who have in the last few weeks revealed national focus trees that include an option to pain the world Anarchist :cool:) is saying this. Assuming that what releases is what we've seen, once this content is available, HoI4 will be a game where there are focus trees with strong alt-history options for most of the majors and a good number of the minors and mechanics (game rules) that allow players no small amount of control over these. I imagine I'll be able to have a game where I play as Anarchist Spaniards fighting against a Monarchist France and the Kaiser's Germany. Now, I am by no means an expert here, but I've read enough to be confident in saying that this does not sound to me like a WW2 simulator :).

I'm only going to reply to the first part. You did miss something. Let's start with a simple alt history country. Hungary. The austro Hungarian empire. To go down this path you select multiple focuses. Three of them in particular cause problems with the way this resistance update is presented. So. Let's assume that if you get the focus for a free annex with no war. There's no resistance though logically. There will be but let's say there isn't.

As Hungary. You have a focus for Austria, Czech and Romania. Austria either is given to you or says screw you. Czech is a annex, puppet or screw you. Romania is either 1 province annex 3 to 5 province annex or a screw you. Hungary has no manpower. None. They already must race to austria and Czech before Germany does or its a fail.

So keep this in mind. So. You go to war with no manpower. This is actually easy againdt Austria. But then you win and now they have resistance but you still have no manpower. It's expensive to raise for Hungary and there are limits for a non aligned.

That resistance needs to be squashed with manpower and equipment. You actually have very little factories. So what happens now? Rebellion if the devs were correct. You can't squash this residtabcr so they rebel. Same for Czech which is even more provinces.

The issue here is. This resistance update screws with a lot of things. Alot of current strats go out the window and become impossible as per what they said. I see a lot of the formable nations to be no longer possible in a single player.

Sweden. Italy. Greece. Probably the Arabian empire and persian too. Dunno bout them. Any of the current nation's that require early province sniping has now become impossible if your goal was that formable nation into a world conquest/massive empire creation.

Now. This is just a worst case scenario but it has to be likely. It has to be strong enough to curb Germany otherwise theres no point i highly doubt they'll make each nation different in how this resistance affects them. While Italy will still be playable obviously for its historical WW2. Doing anything but will be pointless as you were always reliant on early province sniping.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
That resistance needs to be squashed with manpower and equipment. You actually have very little factories. So what happens now? Rebellion if the devs were correct. You can't squash this residtabcr so they rebel. Same for Czech which is even more provinces.

You're very wrong here. First resistance is not squashed using manpower and equipment, the off-map garrison only serves to shield the factories and infraestructure from the attacks of the resistance. But you could just not select the harshest occupation laws and get less resistance.

And the resistance doesn't make any rebellions unless they receive important foreign support for a time, I doubt Britain or Germany are going to support the Austrian or Czech resistance in a Austria-Hungary run
 
You're very wrong here. First resistance is not squashed using manpower and equipment, the off-map garrison only serves to shield the factories and infraestructure from the attacks of the resistance. But you could just not select the harshest occupation laws and get less resistance.

And the resistance doesn't make any rebellions unless they receive important foreign support for a time, I doubt Britain or Germany are going to support the Austrian or Czech resistance in a Austria-Hungary run

Nice summary. One thing that I find a bit unclear is how on-map divisions act in case of a rebellion in province that they are positioned in. Will they be teleported away to make room for rebel forces...or ...
 
Not sure if serious. Currently the game is Axis Wins 1.0, to use your jargon, in part because the German AI is so good, but also because you can snowball with no real consequences. The addition of a proper resistance system is in part to offset this and help the Allies and Soviets have a chance.

You also seem to think that the devs will add this resistance/compliance system and change nothing else to balance the game around this significant change -- how focuses work and how much manpower a power has, for example, will stay exactly the same, even if it breaks parts of the game. That's one heck of an assumption to make.

PS: if this did break world conquest runs, I wouldn't really call that a bad thing in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Not sure if serious. Currently the game is Axis Wins 1.0, to use your jargon, in part because the German AI is so good, but also because you can snowball with no real consequences. The addition of a proper resistance system is in part to offset this and help the Allies and Soviets have a chance.

You also seem to think that the devs will add this resistance/compliance system and change nothing else to balance the game around this significant change -- how focuses work and how much manpower a power has, for example, will stay exactly the same, even if it breaks parts of the game. That's one heck of an assumption to make.

PS: if this did break world conquest runs, I wouldn't really call that a bad thing in the first place.

Yes, the current game is Axis wins 2.0, but its not what these few people are trying to do. They continue to act as if this should be Allies win 2.0.

And no, I dont think they'll do anything ot offset this. Their entire paragraph talking about it was to slow down Germany... but to slow Germany, you're going to slow everyone else. They aren't going to just select Germany for this particular 'nerf'. Its a blanket nerf.

And why wouldn't it be a bad thing? Why remove an option from the game that has no effect on anything else? It litereally, does not effect you if you are trying to play a realistic WW2 simulator. You can still play the UK and go Democratic. You wont see the AI going for a world conquest. So again, what does it affect? Nothing.

World Conquest has no affect on the game as a whole, except another option to do in this WW2 sandbox. Provide me proof that this affects you in a single player match.

Hint. You cant. No nation is going for a World Conquest game. I have never once seen an AI go for world conquest. Only players do that. So, as a whole, this doesn't affect you. It's just you wanting an Allies win 2.0.

I have agreed that Germany was overpowered and there were multiple ways to go about this. This resistance system was not the right way.
 
Last edited:
You're very wrong here. First resistance is not squashed using manpower and equipment, the off-map garrison only serves to shield the factories and infraestructure from the attacks of the resistance. But you could just not select the harshest occupation laws and get less resistance.

And the resistance doesn't make any rebellions unless they receive important foreign support for a time, I doubt Britain or Germany are going to support the Austrian or Czech resistance in a Austria-Hungary run

So, once agian, if you have no manpower or are a minor nation... you're fucked? Got it. Once again, done without thinking of the consequences of the game board as a whole.

You still haven't addressed the fact that the SEVERAL examples ive given, this new occupation system hurts the most.

You either have no manpower or no equipment((No factories))

Either way, you are fucked by the new system.

No factories from Austria or Czech. GG. You have no way to continue forward.

You guys continue to not address this particular example...