Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Patch Notes | Operation SHOULDER

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • 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.
Hearts of Iron IV 47846 Bug Reports 16895 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
Zenbeast said:
First, thanks for the insight. Second, this continues to cement my belief that the plane and tank designers were not good additions to HOI4. The ability to optimize more than the AI and the added burden of this sort of balancing is not worth it for me.

Why are non-nsb designs so much more expensive in comparison? What is on these tanks that we don't put when we use the designer?

Just give me more variants pre-designer.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, due to how our tank designer and 'legacy-tank designs are setup, maintaining legacy version (non-NSB) is a somewhat of a pain. As Tank Designer module/chassis were adjusted and balanced many times over those last couple times, non-NSB versions didn't keep up with those changes.

I would love to adjust that at some point, but finding time for it is just a bit tricky at the moment.

SnöwTiger said:
May I ask? Why we can design tanks but we cant design armored cars?
Click to expand...

I think the simplest answer to this right now is that they are just different DLCs, LaR was for Armored Cars, while Tank Designer was in NSB.
 
  • 7Like
  • 4
  • 2Haha
  • 2
Reactions:
PDX_Per said:
Ship Hull Balance Changes
  • Light Hull 1 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 2.5
  • Light Hull 2 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 3
  • Light Hull 3 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 3.5
  • Light Hull 4 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 4
  • Cruiser Hull 2 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 1.5
  • Cruiser Hull 3 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 2
  • Cruiser Hull 4 - Submarine Detection increased from 1 to 2.5
Click to expand...
Why sub detection increase is limited to these hulls only?

While we are at it, why sub attack (for some reason, translated ingame as 'depth charges') is exclusive to Light Hull alone? Does anyone really think submarines (surface raiders historically, which could occasionally dive) were totally immune to gunfire,ramming and floatplane bombing, and/or these 3 options only ever existed for destroyers?
 
  • 1
Reactions:
Interesting so far! But still nothing on Iran being able to core historical central-Asian lands? Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan etc? Baluchistan is still only North Baluchistan that is core able, and nothing more in India even though there is great influence there. (Also historic Achaemenid Territories)
Greece is also always priotizing to go for industrial focuses rather than political, which after a while makes it so that Greece still hasn’t chosen a political path, sometimes into 1942!
 
Last edited:
Any chance we might see some cost and Stat reworks for tank modules? I've always felt that Meta designs should somewhat mimick IRL tanks, but instead if I want to optimize my tanks, I have to build weird no armor medium tanks full of secondary cannons. Secondary turrets should be great for stacking soft attack but shouldn't be the best option for tanks by mid ww2.

I'd also like to see the turret costs reworked, it feels weird that the 1 one turret is only 0.25IC cheaper, when the advantage of a 1 man turret is that they're supposed to be significantly cheaper
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
FLUX2226 said:
I assume this one would be trickier to change, but one reason I see why NSB light tanks are even able to be so cheap in the first place, is that hardness is the only stat that determines "combat" effectiveness on garrison duty. A garrison-optimized light tank is effectively a Bob Semple tank (slow-moving, barely armored and barely armed) while the armored car pays for speed and firepower which it doesn't need for garrison duty. In reality, the armored car would be a much better choice for garrison than this tank design.

Including more stats in the garrison equation might even make higher tier armored cars a valid garrison option, at the moment they offer virtually no benefit over the interwar model.
Click to expand...

Yes, the fact that 'hardness' only matters in this case, is part of this issue - when it comes to balance tanks vs armored cars (or in general anything when it comes to garrison duty).

Yes, introducing more stats could into what matters for the garrison could technically help in this matter, but I am not sure if that would be the right choice for it, as that could make the whole suppression/resistance/garrison losses even more arcane to less experienced players. I just got an idea though from this message :)
 
  • 9Like
  • 5
Reactions:
CaptainBruh said:
Any chance we might see some cost and Stat reworks for tank modules? I've always felt that Meta designs should somewhat mimick IRL tanks, but instead if I want to optimize my tanks, I have to build weird no armor medium tanks full of secondary cannons. Secondary turrets should be great for stacking soft attack but shouldn't be the best option for tanks by mid ww2.

I'd also like to see the turret costs reworked, it feels weird that the 1 one turret is only 0.25IC cheaper, when the advantage of a 1 man turret is that they're supposed to be significantly cheaper
Click to expand...

Yes, there is always a chance. :) (Or in other words, NO PROMISES, but I would personally like to take a crack at it at some point)
 
  • 13Like
  • 2Love
Reactions:
NeFuRii said:
Yes to making armored cars better. Very much Yes to making them cheaper.
Very much NO to making light tanks more expensive as they are already useless.
Even with buffs cars may not be useful enough. As someone mentioned, how about giving them more suppression? I'd like to see even bigger IC cost reduction for later models as well.
But please, revert back light tank's IC cost increase. If something, it should be lowered instead, for later tech variants. They are too expensive for what they provide. Though more advanced medium tanks also need a rebalance, as they're not great upgrades over the older variants. but it's not as bad as with light tanks.
Click to expand...
Armored cars were used in large scale, they should be at least equal or better than light tanks for recon.
Advanced light tanks were not common IRL. The Germans and the Soviets dropped light tank development in 1942/1943. The USA did make M24 Chaffee, which became the only advanced light tank of WW2. Light tanks had very few pros and many cons compared to mediums from 1942 onwards.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Ossiv said:
Armored cars were used in large scale, they should be at least equal or better than light tanks for recon.
Advanced light tanks were not common IRL. The Germans and the Soviets dropped light tank development in 1942/1943. The USA did make M24 Chaffee, which became the only advanced light tank of WW2. Light tanks had very few pros and many cons compared to mediums from 1942 onwards.
Click to expand...
Well, recon wise Armored Car Recon Company has recon value of 2 vs Light Tank Recon Company recon value of 1 :)
 
  • 6
  • 2Like
  • 2
  • 1
Reactions:
Thank you for making Arabia a tiered Formable and also for adding the Mauritanian states as cores, I just have 2 small things to add.

1. The decision to integrate the western Masriq should also require and core Kurdufan, Blue Nile and South Darfur as those states are part of modern Sudan ( the Arab Country) and not the Non Arab South Sudan.

2. Very small thing: The picture for the Arabia decision is very outdated and excludes Countries like the UAE, Palestine, Sudan, Khuzestan and the western Maghreb Countries.

Again a big thank you from me:)
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
lilcritt said:
It would be amazing to do a QoL sweep over the excessive and increasing APM. Either add Vic 3-like queuing and/or a toggle to auto-apply to some of the following
- MIO's
- Medals (imo these should already be free and auto-apply)
- General Promotions
- Special projects
- Resources/Trade
- Focuses
- Agency
- Research

Other QoL suggestions:
Allow Shift-Click 'bottleneck' auto build railways to supply hubs in faction members, not just your own territory
Add function to auto build railways to closest railway/supply hub when placing a supply hub (ctrl+click, for example)
Garrison/fallback line setting to not retake lost territory
End of war report (losses, participation, etc - like a wikibox)
Fix UI Scaling
Change/Increase impact of agencies/spies
Setting to auto delete saves/logs
Add urban warfare (maybe make larger cities bigger, with small tiles making up the city with large debuffs for attackers)
Allow more than 5 factories to railway guns
Maybe add a research/doctrine to allow more support companies
Click to expand...


Let us see urban centers in the railroad building map so we can pass through the urban tiles.
 
  • 2
Reactions:
While there are some good bugfixes in this patch, you guys brought back the game breaking retreat bug from several years ago. Now you can't retreat in states you don't control. You can retreat back to your own territory, but if you push more than one province deep you're out of luck. As seen in this screenshot, I can't retreat back to this Polish province while being pinned by the Poles.
 

Attachments

  • 20250327111543_1.jpg
    20250327111543_1.jpg
    738 KB · Views: 0
  • 6Like
  • 6
  • 1Love
  • 1
Reactions:
Could you fix the new Austrian Air Chief of Staff that you can get if he doesn't die in the crash event?

Unlike other air chiefs, he doesn't give any Air XP where presumably he should.

Also, it seems unrealistic that you can't take a nation's navy if you don't have a port as the peace conference begins.
If I annex a state with a port (or puppet a nation that has such a state), I should be able to demand navy.

If for some reason I have to forfeit the state or puppet during the conference and I no longer have a port, the demand navy request should be undone and the points refunded.
 
Last edited:
  • 2Like
  • 1
  • 1
Reactions:
ThatGuyFromCollege said:
While there are some good bugfixes in this patch, you guys brought back the game breaking retreat bug from several years ago. Now you can't retreat in states you don't control. You can retreat back to your own territory, but if you push more than one province deep you're out of luck. As seen in this screenshot, I can't retreat back to this Polish province while being pinned by the Poles.
Click to expand...
No way....
 
  • 2
  • 1Haha
  • 1
Reactions:
ThatGuyFromCollege said:
While there are some good bugfixes in this patch, you guys brought back the game breaking retreat bug from several years ago. Now you can't retreat in states you don't control. You can retreat back to your own territory, but if you push more than one province deep you're out of luck. As seen in this screenshot, I can't retreat back to this Polish province while being pinned by the Poles.
Click to expand...
Lmao this just proves the complete lack of testing if a game breaking bug that was fixed years ago gets brought back
(also hello college, nice to see you here)
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back