• 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 - Airplanes and Lootboxes

Hi everyone! Today’s diary is sort of a logical continuation on the 1.4 “Oak” updated where we did a full revamp on the air interfaces and much of the underlying combat mechanics. So lets dive into some more air stuff!

Attaching air wings to armies
It's now possible to attach air wings directly to armies. This means that if you assign them to an army pushing into a hostile nation those wings will get automatically move to bases in range and assigned to areas the army is fighting in. This should hopefully mean no more accidentally forgetting your air force in france when you move forces up to the russian front in hectic multiplayer games or needing to manage things manually when crossing into new areas under an advance.
Assigned wings show over armies in air mapmode (you can’t attach to army groups) for easy check on how your attached air forces situation is. We show them in 3 groups: Fighters, Close Air support/tactical bombers and Transports for supply. You can’t attach strategic bombers, because, well, having planes on order to destroy the area you move through is generally not good. You can also quickly select those planes in each group which makes sending them around and rebalancing easy and quick.
Attaching is a free feature for everyone as part of the 1.5 “Cornflakes” update. The rest of the diary will cover features in the upcoming (and still unannounced. Trust me I’m itching to tell!) DLC.
Screenshot_1.png



Air Supply
Ever had your troops encircled and out of supply and wished there was some way to help them out? Now you can assign your transport planes to bring supply across enemy lines. Each plane assigned to a strategic area will boost supply in supply areas there. These planes can be intercepted as any other mission resulting in less supply, and destroyed planes. Air supply is designed to be a costly thing that you only want to use at a smaller scale, or to adjust minor supply problems. To ensure this we are rebalancing transport planes a bit so you will need a lot more of them (although with reduced costs as their “air fleet” status right now works badly with being intercepted) and air supply being a logistically tricky affair will require tying up new country resource to work. More info on that in a later diary though when we can show the whole picture. What is important here is that it's hard to use this at a large scale, and that it will come with some trade-offs.
supply_mapmode.png

(German planes delivering loot-boxes in a totally not-artificial at all situation of troops trapped in the middle of Poland)

To make it easy to identify where to send your transport planes on supply missions the air mapmode now has a special indicator showing areas with a supply need where planes could be assigned. If you are over supplying them through the air this is also shown, so that you may want to withdraw some of your wings.
supply_mapmode_2.png



Prioritization for strategic bombing
Players can now affect target selection for strategic bombers. The way it works is that you mark your prioritized targets when picking the strategic bombing mission. Those building types selected will have a higher chance of being targeted compared to others. Bombing isn't the most exact process and we felt it would be weird if you could completely control what doesn't get hit etc. So instead we decided on a system where you can somewhat affect it, but won't be able to walk into an area with all refineries destroyed but pristine infrastructure and factories.
upload_2017-11-1_16-4-0.png


We also have one more air related feature as part of the DLC, but we will be showing that off in a future diary where it fits in better with the content there ;P

Next week is a diary I have been looking forward to - we are going to explain what that new topbar button does that you may have spotted in screenies :)

PS. The second episode of our beginner-stream with @Da9L and @bus is coming any second now. Even though most of you are probably familiar with the basics, this is perfect for any friends that want to join in. Check out the Paradox twitch today at 16:00 CET: https://go.twitch.tv/paradoxinteractive
 
There should be carrier jet fighters and jet CAS aircrafts, also basic helicopters after 1945. Please fix this.

Speaking historically it would make sense if CAS and Fighters merged into jet fighter-bomber which evolved late war when fighters became larger and got more powerful engines as well as rockets became more effective and reliable. When jet-planes rolled around neither Soviet nor USA had any dedicated models for CAS ( USA using fighters instead and Soviet favoring tactical nuclear weapons ).

Helicopters did to some degree replace them, and USA did end up developing the A-10 entering service in 1977, but both of these really come in too late to matter in HoI4. Cobra is probably the first effective US attack helicopter and it entered service only in 1965.

I totally agree that there should be Carrier jet-fighters though.

The Korean war (1950-53) is a good benchmark for what equipment could be in HoI4 IMHO and helicopers really were only used for medevac, CAS was done by WW2 era propeller planes or by jet fighters.
 
Air supply existed on release in HoI2 and HoI3. It's nice that the feature finally does get implemented (it is an important aspect of later WW2), which I imagine wasn't the simplest thing to do with the completely new supply system; but on the other hand, I think it really awkward to lock a feature that is, essentially, late implementation of a basic function of an already present unit-type behind a paywall.

And that this is one of the paid features of what will, at that point, be a 1.5 years old game is a bit of a concern. Loath as I am to say this, it's the first time I'm feeling so disappointed in how a Paradox grand strategy game is moving. HoI3 took "depth" five steps too far, but HoI4 just doesn't feel like a game on par with what PDX usually produce and what long-time fans of the company may have gotten used to. It feels like what you'd expect from companies that have never delivered on Paradox's level of depth.
 
Speaking historically it would make sense if CAS and Fighters merged into jet fighter-bomber which evolved late war when fighters became larger and got more powerful engines as well as rockets became more effective and reliable. When jet-planes rolled around neither Soviet nor USA had any dedicated models for CAS ( USA using fighters instead and Soviet favoring tactical nuclear weapons ).

Helicopters did to some degree replace them, and USA did end up developing the A-10 entering service in 1977, but both of these really come in too late to matter in HoI4. Cobra is probably the first effective US attack helicopter and it entered service only in 1965.

You're right helicopters were only used for medevac also small groups of transportation. Then maybe we use is for medic support bonus? Also maybe we can use jet tactical bomber for attacking ships and docks. This is another option rather than jet cas aircrafts and more histrocal.
 
I think this starts looking real good. Attaching CAS to armies was one of my top wishes, and air supply is also great.

I'm sorry if this has already been answered, but the screenshots showed a front line called "River patrol". Is naming front lines a new feature?
You can already name front lines, it's just the name of the army the front line is attached to.
 
Air supply existed on release in HoI2 and HoI3. It's nice that the feature finally does get implemented (it is an important aspect of later WW2), which I imagine wasn't the simplest thing to do with the completely new supply system; but on the other hand, I think it really awkward to lock a feature that is, essentially, late implementation of a basic function of an already present unit-type behind a paywall.

And that this is one of the paid features of what will, at that point, be a 1.5 years old game is a bit of a concern. Loath as I am to say this, it's the first time I'm feeling so disappointed in how a Paradox grand strategy game is moving. HoI3 took "depth" five steps too far, but HoI4 just doesn't feel like a game on par with what PDX usually produce and what long-time fans of the company may have gotten used to. It feels like what you'd expect from companies that have never delivered on Paradox's level of depth.
This is emblematic of the 'reinventing the wheel' approach the developers took to HoI IV, which is why we've had the first game (along with Stellaris, though in randomly-generated worlds it makes sense) without a mini-map, and even now - and probably after Cornflakes too - we have a game in which you are not informed that you have lost territory to an enemy. There is no aspect of the interface that informs you of this, separately from any actual battles that may be taking place.

For example, if you're playing as the UK, it is very likely that you won't know you've lost Malta or Singapore until some time after they were captured. Why? Because the game does not relay this information to you. Likewise, if you are focusing on fighting in East Africa or Burma and Sealion happens, enjoy the surprise when you scroll back to the UK.

Air Supply I have less of an issue with... it would have been great in at release, yes, but we know that the game was delayed (twice?) and that several features had to be reworked relatively last-minute; it doesn't surprise me that 'luxury' features such as Air Supply did not make the cut, and it's not something that I personally would complain about. It's nice to see it being implemented now, and it's good that there is now a reason to build transport planes.

Personally, I am really happy about the stuff that has been shown off in the Bits & Pieces dev diaries, and I am looking forward to seeing what the expansion focus is going to be, and in particular which other country is getting a re-worked focus tree.

I will agree that in many respects HoI IV feels like one step forwards and two steps back, but - despite its flaws - it is probably now my favourite HoI game to date. It is important not to let nostalgia get in the way too much, and it'd be churlish to say that the game doesn't have better mechanics and more intricate gameplay than HoI II.

I can't speak about HoI III as I never played it after the launch build.
 
This is emblematic of the 'reinventing the wheel' approach the developers took to HoI IV, which is why we've had the first game (along with Stellaris, though in randomly-generated worlds it makes sense) without a mini-map, and even now - and probably after Cornflakes too - we have a game in which you are not informed that you have lost territory to an enemy. There is no aspect of the interface that informs you of this, separately from any actual battles that may be taking place.

For example, if you're playing as the UK, it is very likely that you won't know you've lost Malta or Singapore until some time after they were captured. Why? Because the game does not relay this information to you. Likewise, if you are focusing on fighting in East Africa or Burma and Sealion happens, enjoy the surprise when you scroll back to the UK.

Air Supply I have less of an issue with... it would have been great in at release, yes, but we know that the game was delayed (twice?) and that several features had to be reworked relatively last-minute; it doesn't surprise me that 'luxury' features such as Air Supply did not make the cut, and it's not something that I personally would complain about. It's nice to see it being implemented now, and it's good that there is now a reason to build transport planes.

Personally, I am really happy about the stuff that has been shown off in the Bits & Pieces dev diaries, and I am looking forward to seeing what the expansion focus is going to be, and in particular which other country is getting a re-worked focus tree.

I will agree that in many respects HoI IV feels like one step forwards and two steps back, but - despite its flaws - it is probably now my favourite HoI game to date. It is important not to let nostalgia get in the way too much, and it'd be churlish to say that the game doesn't have better mechanics and more intricate gameplay than HoI II.

I can't speak about HoI III as I never played it after the launch build.

I could accept the absence of a feature (like air supply) if it was cut because of time constraints but then added for free later. But this just feels like that they are seeing what cut base features they can re-use to flesh out future DLC.
 
@podcat im concerned about air wings moving with armies automatically. I think it's an awesome idea in theory, but not sure how it will work in practice. The AI swarms forward airfields with their planes, as they should, but they aren't very good about prioritizing airbase upgrades.

So, you already wind up with a lot of size 400-600 airbases that are overcrowded, but in a region occupied by an ally. Thus, you have no recourse as a player for improving the situation for your own air forces. I think this new feature will magnify this problem.

You've already anticipated some problems with targeted strategic bombing, so I want to know if y'all have a plan to address this concern?
 
@podcat im concerned about air wings moving with armies automatically. I think it's an awesome idea in theory, but not sure how it will work in practice. The AI swarms forward airfields with their planes, as they should, but they aren't very good about prioritizing airbase upgrades.

So, you already wind up with a lot of size 400-600 airbases that are overcrowded, but in a region occupied by an ally. Thus, you have no recourse as a player for improving the situation for your own air forces. I think this new feature will magnify this problem.

You've already anticipated some problems with targeted strategic bombing, so I want to know if y'all have a plan to address this concern?

IMO one solution would be if you could build some buildings like airbases in allied territory once your part of the same war, like you can build on puppets territory.

I mean at this point you can basically Lend Lease your entire production anyways, so balance shouldn't be much of a concern.
 
I can see why sometimes it feels like features were cut, to only later be 'reinvented' and introduced.

But:

Hoi3 air supply was micro- this looks straight forward to see supply issues and order an airdrop.
Hoi3- as Germany I was able to have enough Transports to never suffer supply disasters.- Hoi4 looks like it won't be a magic wand for all supply shortages. And with much more cost/benefit to think about.
Hoi4 has immersive model animations

So this new air supply is so different from Hoi3 I cannot conceptualise is as reintroducing a cut feature. Nor can I think that it is some kind of unfair paywall, and unjust to pay for the work to get this in the game.
 
YES! FINALLY! AIR SUPPLY! LET OPERATIONS OVER THE HUMP BEGIN! And the 101st don't have to worry about starving to death anymore!

I really like how Air Wings are attached to armies now, and with the changes I think I can actually use strategic bombing for something, not just for launching nukes. Awesome work, guys!

I don't think you can actually do the Hump with this unless you have some American divisions chilling in Kunming. @podcat Can this be used to supply allies?
 
Could be interesting to include heavier capacity transport planes together with airlift which would allow you to airlift in normal divisions with line artillery and vehicles up to and including light tanks. You would need to capture airfields with normal paras first though or sacrifice the planes as gliders.

This was something both German planes like the Me 323 Gigant and American planes like the C-74 Globemaster could do, and both were flying in the WW2 period. Both Axis and Allies also had gliders capable of bringing in heavier equipment and some light tank models.

Didn't we have a whole discussion before the game was even released about just tying in transport aircraft tech as a side effect of the bomber tree. After all, the only difference is that a transport releases their payload on a runway, while a bomber releases considerably earlier.
 
Didn't we have a whole discussion before the game was even released about just tying in transport aircraft tech as a side effect of the bomber tree. After all, the only difference is that a transport releases their payload on a runway, while a bomber releases considerably earlier.

Not sure if that's sarcasm or not, but the Me323 AFAIK didn't have a bomber equivalent.
 
Not sure if that's sarcasm or not, but the Me323 AFAIK didn't have a bomber equivalent.

It's not sarcasm.

I would just find it very sad if there is a 1936 bomber that stays the same all game even while developing B-24's and Amerikabombers. Bomber tech should bleed into transport tech.

I wouldn't be averse to there being a string of three techs that focused on the logistical and coordination aspects of transports, but the hardware should just upgrade with the bomber tree.
 
It's not sarcasm.

I would just find it very sad if there is a 1936 bomber that stays the same all game even while developing B-24's and Amerikabombers. Bomber tech should bleed into transport tech.

I wouldn't be averse to there being a string of three techs that focused on the logistical and coordination aspects of transports, but the hardware should just upgrade with the bomber tree.

But real transport aircraft development had nothing to do with bomber development at all... ( TAC or NAV development was more related to STRAT development then Transport plane development was ).

The German Me323 was born out of two requirements totally unrelated to bombers, and the Luftwaffe never had a bomber with payload, range or characteristics even remotely similar to the Me323. The requirement the Me323 and it's glider predecessor was developed after was to drop heavy guns & light tanks in a future invasion of UK and the requirement to transport the same across the Mediterranean after the allies had blocked the sea path. It was totally unrelated to the Amerikabomber development ( which focused on extreme range, high altitude and totally different performance ).

With the B-24 it did inspire a transport variant, but only out of necessity for a few extreme range transport missions. Compared to the US main transport plane it was nothing. 287 units produced of the C-87 ( as it was called ), compared to 10,174 of the main transport plane (C-47), or only 3%. The C-47 which was a twin engine plane was still produced up until the end of the war since they were more flexible and didn't need special long good runways but could land on grassfields or anywhere really.
 
But real transport aircraft development had nothing to do with bomber development at all... ( TAC or NAV development was more related to STRAT development then Transport plane development was ).

The German Me323 was born out of two requirements totally unrelated to bombers, and the Luftwaffe never had a bomber with payload, range or characteristics even remotely similar to the Me323. The requirement the Me323 and it's glider predecessor was developed after was to drop heavy guns & light tanks in a future invasion of UK and the requirement to transport the same across the Mediterranean after the allies had blocked the sea path. It was totally unrelated to the Amerikabomber development ( which focused on extreme range, high altitude and totally different performance ).

With the B-24 it did inspire a transport variant, but only out of necessity for a few extreme range transport missions. Compared to the US main transport plane it was nothing. 287 units produced of the C-87 ( as it was called ), compared to 10,174 of the main transport plane (C-47), or only 3%. The C-47 which was a twin engine plane was still produced up until the end of the war since they were more flexible and didn't need special long good runways but could land on grassfields or anywhere really.

After a quick wikipedia dive, it becomes apparent that 60% of WW2 transport aircraft were just DC-3's by various names.
 
After a quick wikipedia dive, it becomes apparent that 60% of WW2 transport aircraft were just DC-3's by various names.

Yes, that's correct. It was used by both sides as well pretty extensively.

The reason I suggested things like the Me323 and C-74 might be relevant still is because they added totally new capability ( transport of light tanks and guns ).
 
I got kinda scared when I saw word "Lootboxes" in the title.....Hopefully it didnt come to that

Please read the dev post. Not just the title.

Yes, that's correct. It was used by both sides as well pretty extensively.

The reason I suggested things like the Me323 and C-74 might be relevant still is because they added totally new capability ( transport of light tanks and guns ).

The Brits transported light tanks (the Tetrarch) and jeeps and what not with gliders, I don't see why Germans and Americans couldn't, if they chose to develop that capability.

Would give the German player something to do with all those light tanks after 1942.

Wald
 
İngilizcem kötü olduğundan türkçe yazıyorum.
Bu yazımı iyi bir ingilizce'ye çevirirseniz sevinirim.

Sonunda hoi 1 ve 2 deki özellikler geldi
Ama hava kuvvetlerinin kara birliklerine saldırılardaki sorundan bahsetmemişler
Tac and Cas sadece savunan ve saldıran birlikleri bombalıyor
Tac and Cas diğer zamanlar bombalamıyorlar düşman birliklerini

In the end, the features of hoi 1 and 2 came
But they did not talk about the question of attacking the air force's land troops
Tac and Cas are just bombing defending and attacking troops
Tac and Cas are not bombing other times with enemy troops

ve nokta stratejik bombardıman olacak mı?
örnek
majino hattının gerisindeki yolları bombalayıp ordaki birlikleri supplsiz bırakabilecekmiyiz

and will the point strategic bombing be with strategic bombers?
sample
can we bomb the roads behind the majino line?
This is an English only section of the forum.