Hoi4 Dev Diary - Thoughts & roadmap

[Spartanlemur]

I would like mechanics to allow you to structure the post-war order.

Nothing too in-depth, but something that makes me actually want to reach the end of the war and which serves as a sort of epilogue, because at the moment, you do the peace conference and that's it.

In reality post-war there were Nuremberg trials, the creation of the United Nations, the occupation of Germany and Japan (what to do with them - denazification, political rule), the genesis of the Cold War etc.

There needs to be a lot more in this part of the game so it feels like once WWII starts, the flavour basically ends and you just focus on winning, have a peace conference and then quit.

When playing multiplayer games, I want the period immediately after the war to involve jostling over who gets to shape the post-war order, and for there to be a possibility of a unipolar outcome dominated by one victor, or a multipolar outcome that results in a Cold War.

 

[Serensius]

This all sounds very promising! Hoping especially for improvements in AI and message settings. The idea of a Custodian team similar to Stellaris is fantastic, too. I think a lot can be gained by focusing on fixing all the smaller issues that degrade the overall UX (think war declaration spam, naval convoy loss notification spam, naming of wars, etc).

In terms of content, I think there's a lot of rich material to be mined in the "could-have-been"s of WW2, such as Operation Sealion, Operation Felix, the Japanese attacking the Soviet Union instead of the South, etc, not just the massive "X country change their ideology" focuses. Also, some love for actual stuff that happened that's not represented well in the game (e.g. Winter War, Franco-Thai war, Soviet armor stockpiles pre-war).

 

[morodelapaz]

View attachment 804450

Greetings all!

As you’ll no doubt be aware, the launch of the No Step Back expansion last year was the climax of a busy year of development for the HoI team, and it continues to be one of our best received releases to date.

Of course, the last year also saw the departure of @podcat as Game Director who was reassigned to Siberia greater things at Paradox. Many of you will also have read the roadmap document that was produced towards the beginning of HoI4 development, and are asking questions as to the veracity of that plan under a new director, and whether I have any different ideas or plans to announce.

Looking Forwards

I mentioned at the beginning of my tenure that both @podcat and I see HoI4 in broadly similar terms. This hasn’t changed, and you can expect to see many of the parts of the previous roadmap make an appearance at some point in the future.

My approach to a ‘Grand Plan’, however, may be somewhat different. I have a preference for leaving plenty of space for reactive development (something that served us well on Imperator), and while there are many things that I feel are ripe for future development, I am also keen to leave a lot of space for changing course and acting on community sentiment.

There are two main points I want to raise before we get to details, however. Firstly, we intend to up the tempo of our releases a little. This is, of course, an ambition, and not a promise, however it informs some further decisions related to the development of HoI. Namely, that we are considering ways to change how and when we release information on development to you folks. Since faster development is the goal, this also means getting ideas into public view slightly faster, for feedback and conversation. We’re not exactly sure how this will look yet, but it is likely that there’ll be a reorganization of the traditional dev-diary schedule into something that feels less like a milestone delivery. This comes in tandem with a need to shift the community’s expectations on what ‘in development’ means: getting fans accustomed to seeing placeholders, WIP balance, and half-built systems in early phases, and seeing things develop as time goes on.

The last major point here is that we recognize a need to maintain the game as well as to develop it, especially if development pace is picking up. We’re still considering how best to achieve this, and I’m watching initiatives such as the Custodian team on Stellaris with curiosity. For the time being, what this is likely to manifest as, is the inclusion of older system maintenance into our patch planning - you may start to see patch bulletin features including things such as minor focus tree revamps, as well as attention paid to older systems and expansion content.

Roadmap

As mentioned above, the 2020 roadmap for HoI4 included many things which have now either been completed or rendered unnecessary. This leaves several from podcat’s list which I believe are still important for the future of the game:

• Improvements to frontline stability (progress in NSB, more to come)
• Long term goals and strategies to guide ai (progress in NSB)
• Improving peace conferences
• Update core national focus trees with alt-history paths and more options (Italy)
• Wunderwaffen projects
• More differences between sub-ideologies and government forms
• More National Focus trees
• Make defensive warfare more fun
• Adding mechanics to limit the size of your standing army, particularly post-war etc
• Have doctrines more strongly affect division designing
• Strategic and tactical AI improvements

In addition to these items, I will of course add some of my own personal intentions:

Great Power Diplomacy
This is one area that I feel doesn’t need much explanation. More diplomatic tools are a clear area for expansion, and a careful look at how this module can be developed without interfering with the overarching global war, is likely to happen.

Economic Decision Making
The economic system is very abstracted in HoI, and I do not foresee ever making it a major part of the game loop. This said, there are elements of an industrial economy that I feel could do with being part of decision making in HoI.

Immersive/Roleplay Elements
Optional tools for making your mark on a game, and/or development of further building blocks to enhance attachment to a HoI campaign. Bring the simulation to life.

And of course, many more that I feel do not need as much of an explanation:

• Battleplanner improvements
• Advisors/internal politics improvements
• Ideological distinctions
• Multiplayer & social layer improvements & support

I like to remain as open as possible to the needs of the community, and the inclusion or omission of any particular item above should not be considered ‘set in stone’.

As we look at how we plan on structuring future communications, there may be some space for a few more dev diaries on what you’ve all been getting up to in NSB in the near(ish) future!

/Arheo

Nicee! Think it's time for some interwar homefront content! Maybe using consumer goods as a resource instead of a bad modifier?
Very excited for the news!

 

[filmaty98]

I don't think so. Money it's not a good idea only iron curtain and modern games need money for very complex loans and internal affair intervention.

But loans and foreign invention could be a great feature, sovereign in a not totally sandbox way could be very good feature.

But money is not needed for good reason if there's a totally reason to use it.

Of course money is not only good, but it is necessary idea. Every other previous WWII GSG paradox game (if just not every single paradox GSG game) had money and it was essential to keep your war engines working. Explain me please, how other way than via money, can you accumulate IC during peacetime to spend/maximize it during war? Moreover, the ability to buy equipment abroad, like every single country in the World that was involved in any war was doing, since I think Napoleonic Era (not only licence buying), and no, buing it via civilian IC is not the same, when you're buying it via money. When you're buing stuff/licences via IC you're losing your country's production capabilities, while when you're buying it via money, you're not, cause you were able to either accumulate money before the war or you're running into debt, dragging away the payment (and loss of production capabilities) on after the war, which is impossble to do with IC. Concluding; money is not for "complex loans and internal affairs", but just to simulate ordinary war economy. The thing, that more people do not like simoultaneus management of economy and war does not change the fact, that money is sth absolutely necessary and unavoidable, if we want to simulate war equipment production in ANY way. Because now it is not simulated in any way. These "production lines" are now ony laughstock.

 

[Secret Master]

Every game needs a Custodian Team. Custodian Team is best team.

 

[MrMcQue]

Of course money is not only good, but it is necessary idea. Every other previous WWII GSG paradox game (if just not every single paradox GSG game) had money and it was essential to keep your war engines working. Explain me please, how other way than via money, can you accumulate IC during peacetime to spend/maximize it during war? Moreover, the ability to buy equipment abroad, like every single country in the World that was involved in any war was doing, since I think Napoleonic Era (not only licence buying), and no, buing it via civilian IC is not the same, when you're buying it via money. When you're buing stuff/licences via IC you're losing your country's production capabilities, while when you're buying it via money, you're not, cause you were able to either accumulate money before the war or you're running into debt, dragging away the payment (and loss of production capabilities) on after the war, which is impossble to do with IC. Concluding; money is not for "complex loans and internal affairs", but just to simulate ordinary war economy. The thing, that more people do not like simoultaneus management of economy and war does not change the fact, that money is sth absolutely necessary and unavoidable, if we want to simulate war equipment production in ANY way. Because now it is not simulated in any way. These "production lines" are now ony laughstock.

Most countries, afaik all major ones for sure, treated WW2 like a war for all or nothing. Money and a military budget became completely abstract during the highpoint of the war.

The economies were geared towards and commanded to a massive degree to serve the purpose of fighting the war and the military complex by large. All financial reprecussions this could possibly have were simply ignored and postponed for after the war has ended to be dealt with.

In this scenario the industrial capacity is a far more representative value than money is, and the time when money becomes an issue again falls out of the scope of the game.

 

[GrandVezir]

View attachment 804590

...and an Odeon Team to cuss at. which is the simplest way to get a Cussed Odeon Team.

This is known.

 

[Arheo]

Of course money is not only good, but it is necessary idea.

We will never add money to HoI

 

[requiem48]

It is great! I agree with you and hope that you can improve the diplomatic and economic system

 

[Balesir]

We will never add money to HoI

The only thing I think might be worthwhile in this area is a 'General Raw Materials' resource that is necessary to make Civilian ICs work at full capacity. That would add utility to a few places that need it and beef up trade as a sea strategy element.

 

[withche.07]

Very interested in these two. If nothing else it would be nice if the starting diplomacy actually reflected the diplomatic situation as it existed in 1936 (i.e., countries already have historical diplomatic ties before you press play). League of Nations might be nice. Even just cleaning up the map would be nice. For example, Myanmar should not be part of the British Raj, it should be directly administered by the UK. Similarly Lesotho and Eswatini should, you know, exist (they're a heck of a lot bigger than Luxembourg) and be administered directly by the UK and not South Africa. Oman should be "Muscat & Oman" and it should be a British subject (honestly the entire British empire could use another pass - it's not all just land occupied by the UK, in the Middle East they were more often client kingdoms). Bahrain should be a state and in the British empire.

On economics, can we please finally have the existing "concessions" system applied to the countries where it's most relevant? I will never understand why this game changing feature was added to the game and then only applied to Mexico - it takes next to no effort to add concessions to Iraq (Red Line Agreement), Iran (BP), Venezuela (Shell), Saudi Arabia (SOCAL), etc. And this would make a big difference on the economic front

Whenever I play as Turkey (I nearly always play as Turkey) and invade Iraq directly for oil, I always feel weird. I mean Britain has rights to get that oil although by invading Iraq I literally make them mine.
I think game should handle this type of complex diplomatic issues. Britain should involve. Not like directly declaring war, maybe sending ultimatum to ask for all resources (giving something in return) or offering half of it to end issue? I mean its complex issue and needs creative solutions I can't come up with. But it should be in game.

 

[JohnnyDepressio]

CUSTODIAN TEAM CONFIRMED!!!

 

[Harin]

Of course money is not only good, but it is necessary idea. Every other previous WWII GSG paradox game (if just not every single paradox GSG game) had money and it was essential to keep your war engines working.

I used to think that, too, but over time realized that defense spending is relative in value, not absolute. For example, in WW2, the US, the richest country, went from just a few percent of GDP going to defense, to over 40%. The Axis, not as rich, and more desperate, went well beyond 50%, even if their printed money may say otherwise. If money was absolute, these countries would have collapsed or gone into deep depressions. Instead, manpower was the major issue for the US, resulting in the 90 Division Gamble, and for Germany manpower and resources were major issues.

During the Cold War, the US was routinely reported as vastly outspending the USSR in defense, even though the USSR's military in terms of numbers dwarfed the US's. Today, the US seems to vastly outspend China on defense, yet China is producing as much, and more, than the US is. Even though the US pays more per unit the difference in the reported spending does not come close to reconciling with what is actually getting produced.

In my opinion, the more accurate comparison of defense spending in the world is to measure production. During times of need governments take what they need, offer promises of repayment, and proceed to produce what they require to stay in power.

 

[Uncharted95]

i really like the idea of a custodian team, and i wish you guys all the success. I hope that while not mentioned there is a plan to rework air, stuff like airzone interception, expansion of jets and naval patrol craft would be a huge welcome. Not to mention a air designer, its only natural after the tanks

 

[$ilent_$trider]

The only thing I think might be worthwhile in this area is a 'General Raw Materials' resource that is necessary to make Civilian ICs work at full capacity. That would add utility to a few places that need it and beef up trade as a sea strategy element.

Exactly, that's what I meant by some sort of resource that, Latin American countries could provide that were still somehow integral to the war effort even if not in the manner of making war machines and equipment. Cotton, grains, sugar, all that was necessary for the war effort and many Latin American countries finally had their shot at proper industrialization because of the USA buying so much of that stuff during the war that they could sell them by a really high priced and kickstart their industrialization.

 

[oeschele]

Thank you very much for your thoughts and roadmap. I'm really looking forward to it.

But what about topics like the question if there is in the near future a version 1.11.6? One content of this patch I would love to see is a fixed tank conversion. A great feature specially in NSB in my opinion , but sadly actual not usable because upgrade is same price as new tank regardless of number of changes (without conversion bonus).

 

[juanigas]

i really like the idea of a custodian team, and i wish you guys all the success. I hope that while not mentioned there is a plan to rework air, stuff like airzone interception, expansion of jets and naval patrol craft would be a huge welcome. Not to mention a air designer, its only natural after the tanks

the custodians improved a lot Stellaris I think every paradox game would benefit from them. the planes are my favorite I would have brought them even before the tanks, personally I would like to see more useful strategic bombers and a combat mechanic that motivates us to create better fighters and an improved aces system for more pleasure.

 

[backhand_blow]

A bit disappointed to see nothing regarding an air rework or a navy rework 2.0 considering naval warfare is excruciatingly boring atm.

 

[MrMcQue]

Btw. Probably not a lot of people care about this, but when will NSB be added as a badge to the PDX forums? Or will we receive new NSB avatar pictures for the forum?
I asked this question already in the general forum help thread and i believe in the HoI forum as well but no dev ever replied to me...

 

[Idle America]

This seems like a well thought out plan for the future

I do notice a lack of any air mechanics on the list, but I suspect that's just an oversight

I look forward to seeing what comes next

Good luck

My guess is, it'll come with the Italy overhaul. I can't think of any country more fitting to include it with, giving their history in the field.