Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

OPEN BETA | Patch 1.16.5

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 47904 Bug Reports 16981 After Action Reports (AAR)
Show only dev responses
I know I'm a bit late to the party here, but I wonder if the designer templates can help guide the AI toward certain designs, even if only via modding. I'd love to see AI with weighted preferences toward certain designs, and as the years go on, we'd see that change in the air/field/sea. I know players often complain about AI using outdated equipment.
 
Feedback - Götterdämmerung

What bothers me most about Götterdämmerung is that the German focus tree takes away some of the player's freedom. You have to go through countless focus decisions just to regain the cut content by re-obtaining the generals.

It feels very forced and unpleasant. This was one of the two biggest points of criticism about Götterdämmerung. And even though there were only likes and agreement — not a single dislike — across numerous feedback posts, this criticism was never addressed.

Please tone this down a bit. The idea isn't completely bad, but give us back some of the generals. We don't need tons of focus trees just to get back content we already had. And more generals for Germany would be great in general.
 
  • 7
Reactions:
Feedback - Graveyard of Empires

It would be nice if GoE could once again reach the standards of older DLCs. For me, that also includes having additional options in the preset A.I. path settings, allowing Iran, Afghanistan, and Iraq to join the Axis, the Democrats, or the Soviets — without these countries triggering a world war by attacking their neighbors.

This way, players can create their own scenarios, just as the paths were originally intended and advertised for.

That would be great since it's optional for everyone, and would bring back some more options in the paths/setups.

Thanks for your hard work, I appreciate your effort!
 
Last edited:
  • 3Like
Reactions:
MobiusXIV said:
I know I'm a bit late to the party here, but I wonder if the designer templates can help guide the AI toward certain designs, even if only via modding. I'd love to see AI with weighted preferences toward certain designs, and as the years go on, we'd see that change in the air/field/sea. I know players often complain about AI using outdated equipment.
Click to expand...

It's not impossible, in fact to an extent that's already true. The system that sharable designs was built on is actually the one the AI uses to create templates. It wouldn't be particularly difficult to make the AI try and use the templates you've made, but that also becomes a balance problem and possibly exploitable. It's definitely something I'd pondered on though.
 
  • 4Like
  • 4
  • 1
Reactions:
Arheo said:
It's not impossible, in fact to an extent that's already true. The system that sharable designs was built on is actually the one the AI uses to create templates. It wouldn't be particularly difficult to make the AI try and use the templates you've made, but that also becomes a balance problem and possibly exploitable. It's definitely something I'd pondered on though.
Click to expand...
For sure, there might be players that "encourage" the AI to use nearly-empty templates.

I'm imagining a couple scenarios.

1) For the players that miss the pre-template days, they could make standard templates for interwar, basic, improved, advanced, and modern equipment.
2) I could take the above and break it down further into each year of the war.
3) I could take the above and give each nation weighted targets so as to encourage nations to play within their flavor (i.e. Encourage early France to use non strategic materials (C.714 and VG.33 love), and encourage Italy toward light tank designs (tankets even)).

Admittedly, my mind is a little jumbled on the last point. But if fans think they can design some navy templates to keep the AI balanced (like submarines with periscopes or planes that don't resemble 1937 in 1945), I'd like to see what they can do.
 
I love the balancing and polishing yall have been doing for the game, the import planes, tank, and naval designs is a big plus. I have noticed with the UK, all the previous ship and plane designs have MIO's assigned already, while other majors, USA, Japan etc, don't have any assigned, I was wondering if the MIO's will be assigned to the designs currently in use just like the UK thing.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
A MTG-related question

Have you guys found how to prevent the AI to give you undeleteable divisions when you requested expeditionary forces (MTG) or requesting forces (no-DLC) from them?
 
I'm enjoying the Saadabad Focuses, I think it's especially a nice way to give Turkey some nice buffs. I am curious though, Playing as the Ottomans on historical I find it's very difficult to finish puppeting the countries before the Iraq coup. I wonder is there any plan to either shorten some of Turkey's focuses or maybe give the Ottoman's a decision to prolong the coup or something? It was already a pretty demanding and time-sensitive path but now it's even more so (not to mention that if Iraq does coup and goes with Britain or Germany, you'll end up losing the Saadabad Pact spirit before you even really get a chance to use it, which just seems like a bit of a waste)
 
Wasn't there cores for the US states? Or am I misremembering?

If I'm misremembering and there wasn't, I think they should be added. Also there should be cores for the confederate states, quebec in canada and mexican cores on california etc. so the new world nations can be balkanised.
 
Arheo said:
It's not impossible, in fact to an extent that's already true. The system that sharable designs was built on is actually the one the AI uses to create templates. It wouldn't be particularly difficult to make the AI try and use the templates you've made, but that also becomes a balance problem and possibly exploitable. It's definitely something I'd pondered on though.
Click to expand...
@Arheo Speaking of AI designer designs...the biggest issue is the navy here.

Most countries (to be precise: all expect the UK) lack naval presets, which does not only mean that their guiding function for the player is missing, but also leading to the AI building and fielding genericly named ships at least in the later game. I concede that this is hard to avoid for certain countries which never had a navy during that time (and you surely have more pressuring stuff to invent fantasy names for AI Tannu Tuva's potential armadas ;) ), but would it be at least possible to add the real designs for the nations with an existing WW2 navy? Fighting, Licensing or perspectively even purchasing e.g. "Cruiser Hull 1944 Mk2" isn't healthy both for immersion and keeping oversight in the game.

As I don't underestimate the work involved my suggestion would be doing that nation by nation, starting with major with a dedicated naval focus (like Japan, USA and Italy). That would be really great :)
 
  • 5Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Arheo said:
It's not impossible, in fact to an extent that's already true. The system that sharable designs was built on is actually the one the AI uses to create templates. It wouldn't be particularly difficult to make the AI try and use the templates you've made, but that also becomes a balance problem and possibly exploitable. It's definitely something I'd pondered on though.
Click to expand...
You could formulate a weighted objective function that summarizes the optimality of a design to a single number, then have the AI compare its current roster of designs with one the player has made. If the number is less (generally in optimisation the intent is to minimise an obj function), then the AI could start to use that design.

If you really wanted to go all out on this you could allow the AI to adapt its designs based on what the player is currently fielding (maybe based on intelligence - hey this could go both ways and give a use for the spy system!). That way the AI could  learn how to make a decent fighter over time, and we wouldn't have the current 20/100:1 ratios for the entire war.

The weighted objective function wouldn't be perfect but it should be good enough for the AI to field air/tank/ship designs which can actually compete against the player. Choosing the weights needs expert judgement, which you as the devs should have in spades.

I'd also recommend you include a tickbox when the player is saving the design to opt out of the AI having automatic access.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
General Tao said:
You could formulate a weighted objective function that summarizes the optimality of a design to a single number, then have the AI compare its current roster of designs with one the player has made. If the number is less (generally in optimisation the intent is to minimise an obj function), then the AI could start to use that design.

If you really wanted to go all out on this you could allow the AI to adapt its designs based on what the player is currently fielding (maybe based on intelligence - hey this could go both ways and give a use for the spy system!). That way the AI could  learn how to make a decent fighter over time, and we wouldn't have the current 20/100:1 ratios for the entire war.

The weighted objective function wouldn't be perfect but it should be good enough for the AI to field air/tank/ship designs which can actually compete against the player. Choosing the weights needs expert judgement, which you as the devs should have in spades.

I'd also recommend you include a tickbox when the player is saving the design to opt out of the AI having automatic access.
Click to expand...

It's not so much a matter of "how" (though you're pretty much on the money), but of "if", "when", and "how much". There are also potentially some better solutions that I want to explore before looking at using player-made designs.
 
  • 5Like
Reactions:
Duke_Dave said:
An overview what has been fixed, added and what is missing but which is either wrong, was there historically but isn't in game or just makes not much sense, based on my small suggestion thread, for the long-read see my signature. https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...ideas-to-replace-fictional-ministers.1730624/

...
Click to expand...

Just wanted to let you know that we've looked at your suggestions and have implemented the ones that we think fit well in the game. Again, thank you for all your suggestions!
 
  • 6Like
  • 5Love
Reactions:
PDX_Gorion said:
Just wanted to let you know that we've looked at your suggestions and have implemented the ones that we think fit well in the game. Again, thank you for all your suggestions!
Click to expand...
true if big
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
PDX_Gorion said:
Just wanted to let you know that we've looked at your suggestions and have implemented the ones that we think fit well in the game. Again, thank you for all your suggestions!
Click to expand...
Yes but people still have the wrong names, the wrong photos, we have generic fantasy ministers, staff officers and generals when real ones existed and I posted them in suggestions. Finland has 24 generals all historical people, Afghanistan has 6 and two generic ones, Iraq has 7, Iran 11. So these three countries together have as many generals as Finland, which admittedly played a bigger role but still. For the clergy minister of Iran we have a generic guy with a Zoroastrian name. Iraq can't give resource rights to Germany, as happened in 1941. The Fliegerführer Iraq still gives light planes, which it didn't Fliegerführer Iraq was 12 He-111 bombers and 12 ME-110 heavy fighters. Shias of Iraq and the Hazaras don't feature in game. The suppress Kurdish rebellions by pressing one button mechanic for Iraq is really lackluster. I love you guys and I love this game. But this DLC in this state is not good.
 
  • 8
Reactions:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back