• 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 Anniversary Week & Developer Corners!

Generals!

Not only is our nine year anniversary happening today, but we've got a lot of content for you all to read through so make sure to continue reading. We've got Developer Corners starting up again, HOI4 Anniversary Giveaways every day and the Multiplayer Mayhem happening in the 2025 Community Cup!


But first, a word from our Commander in Chief @Arheo .


Greetings all,

As the oft-quoted Eisenhower stated, ”In preparing for battle, I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable”. In the spirit of this, we thought it would be time to take a look at the long-term roadmap for Hearts of Iron. It has been around three years since our last formal Hearts of Iron Roadmap, and while plans have changed and evolved, this statement of intent has been largely what has guided our development process up until the release of Götterdämmerung.

Our mainline intended innovations, when this was written just after No Step Back, included the following:
  • Improvements to Frontline Stability (Progress in NSB, more to come)
  • Strategic and Tactical AI improvements
  • Battle Planner Improvements
Götterdämmerung included a lot of improvements to the AI including Force Concentration: a feature designed to simulate tactical pushes and armor concentration. This has been an interesting one: when released, we saw a lot of players taken by surprise by the AI using this approach, and a lot more discussion over players being defeated or losing to the new AI behaviour. However, most of the community seems to have adapted fairly quickly to this change. To me this is a positive thing: while having a broad playerbase with varying levels of skill means we need to be gradual about how and if we increase overall difficulty when playing against AI, the existence of community “meta” and learning materials gives most players tools to catch up. In short, there’s no reason not to continue iterating on AI features that may increase average difficulty or required skill levels.

On a related note, we’ve fixed a bunch of issues with frontline stability, but battle planning remains a tool that has a stark divide between how new and veteran players utilize it. We’ve done some quite deep user research into this particular area, but this resulted in few actionable results beyond handling edge cases better and improving frontline integrity.


Long Term Goals and Strategies to guide AI (Progress in NSB)

Most of this is “under the hood”, but we’ve made a lot of progress adding tooling to interpret and direct how the AI performs long-term planning. This area of the game is notoriously opaque and it’s taken a fair while to get to the point where we have enough analytical insight into the mechanical decision-making process of the AI, but, we’re more or less there now. This has meant improved tooling such as AI strategies, imgui debug tools that modders also have access to, and better integration with existing mechanics that previously existed “on top” of the game without interacting much with the AI. This is of course a goal that has no defined end-point, but compared to where we were three years ago, much has improved.


Improving Peace Conferences

By Blood Alone saw a contribution-based peace conference system added, with numerous narrative demand options. On reflection the design approach here was not super stable, and while the feature hit most of the key notes (contesting demands, earning defined contribution, rewarding better play), it fell into a similar trap to the old system when it came to AI antagonism. It took longer than it should have done for that behaviour to stabilize with tweaks and changes, but we’re in a better (if not perfect) situation now.


Update Core National Focus Trees with Alt-History paths alongside more Options

We’ve had a couple of methods of doing this. First are the maintenance updates included in some War Effort patches. These tend to be quite minor, but we’ve added a fair few things to various focus trees over time.

Secondly, revisiting focus trees such as Germany and Hungary represents a greater investment into this. Overall, I’m happy with the dual-pronged approach to this; reworking focus trees comprehensively is a full expansion-cycle affair, and doing it outside of a paid release is not something we will ever be able to do. I feel the majority of the community understand this, and our roll-in approach to DoD, TfV and WtT has been for the most part welcomed.


Great Power Diplomacy

I’ve spoken at length on this in a few other places. Fundamentally, design ideas for this one always ended up conflicting with focus trees. HoI4 is a war simulation with a superimposed latch-driven state-machine that drives the global narrative. It is unlikely we’ll change that approach. However, the process of working through design ideas for this has given us some avenues for further exploration.


Multiplayer & Social layer Improvements & Support

The Career Profile and associated features hit the social layer note pretty well. Traditionally, these features are designed to increase player engagement: something which HoI doesn’t really have an issue with. However, the feature has proven to be unexpectedly popular amongst specific groups within the community, both for completionists and as a learning aid. While I don’t think we’ll be making any fundamental additions to this, it won’t be going away and we’ll keep adding content such as new medals and ribbons.


Economic Decision Making

We haven’t made any great strides here. We still have medium to long term plans to expand the industrial economy elements of HoI, while taking care to avoid simulating too many pure economic elements.

Special Projects

Götterdämmerung represents the culmination of this project. I’m pretty happy with how this turned out, though now that we’ve had some time to monitor the wider effects of special projects, it is about time to revisit balance and take a pass on the huge array of tech that was added in the Götterdämmerung update.


More Difference between sub-ideologies & Government forms, Advisors and Internal Politics Improvements

We didn’t really get here! This is quite a difficult topic to broach in a strategy game, and other things ended up taking precedence. We’ve had some minor changes to advisors, but nothing to write home about in the grand scheme of things.


More National Focus Trees

Fairly Self-explanatory.


Make Defensive Warfare more fun

This is still a goal of mine, but we haven’t managed to tackle it yet. I think some of the fundamentals of HoI4 (ie, stuff we simply can’t/won’t change) stand in the way of doing this justice, though it also plays hand-in-hand with changes to doctrine and division design which are definitely in the works.


Adding Mechanics to limit the size of your Standing Army, Particularly post-war etc

Definitely still planned, though not a major priority on its own - will have some words on this later. I don’t feel like this is something that has been glaringly missing for a game with a narrative of “crescendo to war”, though as we start to experiment around the fringes of that pillar (smaller regionally-focused conflicts and expansions), it will become more necessary.


Have Doctrines more strongly affect Division Designing

We’ve had some success here with the changes to support companies and equipment streamlining. I wouldn’t go so far as to say this is “done”, though. We have short-medium term plans regarding doctrines though, and having them affect division design more strongly is one of the key pillars for this effort.


Immersion and Roleplay Elements, Optional tools for making your mark in a game

We’ve added a lot of things that touch on this: division medals, plan naming, deeper recruitment design, MIOs and industrial specialization being chief among them, feature-wise. I think these features do what they set out to do: letting you leave your own mark on the battlefield and the campaign narrative. As you may have noticed from recent war effort patches, we’ve also identified that we need to be better with streamlining how players interact with these types of features.


War Effort Updates

I talked at length in the 2022 roadmap about the introduction of maintenance updates - something we ended up doing, and calling “War Effort” patches. On their own merit, these have been extremely useful for us, and have allowed us to iterate and introduce quite a lot of system updates and quality of life changes such as:
  • Persistent equipment designs
  • System Rebalances to designer modules and units
  • MIO streamlining
  • Some quite significant performance improvements
  • Over 1000 bugfixes
  • Mod support
  • Focus tree updates
  • Balance standardization of some systems (quite important for game health!)
One of the things we were uncertain of before we started War Effort patches was whether this would reduce the maintenance included in major updates, resulting in effectively just moving things around. With the exception of our approach to country packs (ie; not including maintenance updates at country pack release), it has not directly affected the size and impact of major releases.

The old Roadmap championed these as a method of updating older focus tree content. It’s fair to mention that this ended up not being a major focus of war effort updates. It became quickly apparent that developing focus trees is the majority of the work our Content Designers do; that’s not realistically something we can do in iterative updates.

So while there is success here, there’s also room for improvement. We will keep producing War Effort updates, but I want to try and find some form of structure to them, and a way of steering them in a way that more quickly addresses high impact community issues. Particularly, I would like to find a way to increase the visibility of our approach to handling community issues, though I will caution that this will require some time to achieve.


Next Steps

Aaand that’s our retrospective.

That ended up quite a lot longer than I’d expected, but that’s ok - the future plans are at least a little more concise! I want to give you an updated roadmap for our next few years, though with the usual caveats. As you can see above, these plans are not super specific, they aren’t promises, and they don’t always work out. Nonetheless, the act of planning is extremely important, and communicating those plans perhaps even more so.

So what does the future look like for HoI4?

It will come as little surprise that South/East Asia is next, with content primarily focused on Japan and China, and mechanics to support this narrative, as well as reinvigorating the Pacific war. I don’t want to go into too many specifics here (tune in next time for more!), but the war in and around Asia as well as the Pacific has been left behind by our recent developments directed at the European elements of the conflict. To give some broad strokes here, we’re looking at developing the narratives that faction membership will give you, improving and streamlining elements of naval control, with a particular focus on the types of naval warfare that carried the Pacific conflict, and adding much greater strategic narrative (and a less opaque simulation) to the flow of naval conflict. This is not an exclusive list, and it’ll probably leave you guessing - but you won’t have to wait long.

In the longer term, we have some other areas that we’re keen to take a pass on:


Military Doctrines and Division Design

These systems are quite old and don’t offer much ability to shape your gameplay. I would like to link these better, in order to have doctrines shape both how you compose and how you use your military.

Manufacturing and Industrial/Economic Gameplay

Watch this space.


Breaking the Snowball!

HoI’s “crescendo to war” that I mentioned earlier is extremely important to the main narrative of the war. However, as time goes on we have released more content focusing on the smaller players in this conflict. There are elements of the game that don’t mesh particularly well here, and I want to take a look at the way wars and war escalation are structured to make this more engaging and less disruptive when minor conflicts erupt.


Improving the Diplomatic Landscape

“But you said you couldn’t do this!”, I hear you cry. And mostly you would be right. However, with the introduction of late game technologies in Götterdämmerung, there is even more reason to continue playing after the end of the war. I would like to keep developing how the world “falls out” after the conflict, producing more realistic geopolitical results as well as the potential for new and more systems-driven “what if” conflicts after the end of the war. Of course, any such changes would be multiplied in effect if they could also touch upon the pre-war landscape too…


Alt-History

Well, that’s a broad category. This is one we’ve been looking at in quite a lot of detail. We see an increasingly stark divide within different groups of the community on how we (or even if we should) approach alt-history. For those that enjoy it, don’t worry, we’re not going to stop making alt-history content, however, I have asked the team to look, in the long-term, into ways of producing more structured, plausible alt-history content with clearer historically-adjacent narrative hooks. In addition, we have started to evaluate if it’s possible to create more deterministic global alt-history situations and produce some “semi-alt-history” ways of playing HoI - something that I think would capture the fun parts of the non-historical content we provide while also retaining the benefits of the determinism that the historical scenario imparts.

I have one, final note on the practical elements of what we release. We intend to continue releasing what we’ve previously termed “Country packs” and “Unit packs”, but we need to both be clearer about what is or isn’t included, and adjust the scope. We’re devoting some more resources to our Country pack development moving forwards, and we’ll be including mechanics and systemic changes in those the same way as expansions - albeit still focusing on “minor players” in the war.

Alright, I started writing this three hours ago and apparently I’m still going, so here I will force myself to stop. I’m here to answer questions.

/Arheo


Hearts of Iron IV Dev Corners 2025 Roadmap - Updated: June 16

Of course, these dates may be subject to change so keep that in mind!


Hearts of Iron IV's 9th Anniversary!

As apart of HOI IV's Ninth anniversary, we've decided to do another giveaway with a different prize each day including some fan favourites and some keys for the new Song pack for those of you who missed out on some of those banger tunes. To participate and enter for a chance to win some of these codes, make sure to reply here on each day you want to take part in the giveaway.

Because of time zones, we've decided that each giveaway "day" will start at 14:00 CEST, so for example, if you want to take part in the Bonus Songs Pack giveaway on Tuesday, then you need to reply between 14:00 CEST on Tuesday and 13:59 CEST on Wednesday. If you reply on Wednesday 14:00 CEST, then you're taking part in the Wednesday giveaway, etc.

You can reply as many times as you want, on as many days as you want, but if we're looking through replies and have to choose between two replies, we will probably choose the reply that has some substance (vs "Just replying to take part") so be creative, engage, comment on the announcement or on others' replies.
(Giveaway T&C attached below)

Today: HOI IV Starter Edition So you can play with more friends x30
Tomorrow: Bonus Songs Pack To listen to, even when you're paused x30
Wednesday: No Step Back To bring Communism to the world x30
Thursday: By Blood Alone Take your fight to the skies x30
Friday: Arms Against Tyranny To bring the fight to the Nordics x30

Hearts of Iron IV Anniversary Sale!

To add even more fun to our anniversary celebration, the Hearts of Iron Sale (up to 70% off) is now live over on paradox.com!

Community Cup 2025

We are back for yet another round of the Community Cup, hosted by Dankus. This year, the Teams are participating for a chance to win 5000 Euros! With Casters such as Dankus themselves, Mo and one of our own Community Ambassadors Fraser, the finals will be played June 7th at 17:00 CEST.

Make sure to catch all of the action over on Dankus's Channel, or the HOI Youtube Channel!
 

Attachments

  • HOI 2025 Anniversary Giveaway Promotion Terms and Conditions.pdf
    69,5 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
  • 83Like
  • 23Love
  • 7
  • 2
Reactions:
I am hoping that the US gets some minor tweaks to ensure that the balancing remains good. DLC seem to give power creep so if Japan is updated alone Id worry it will make the AI pacific front go for way to long.
 
Let's go Japan + China rework!

I think the Pacific theatre of operations needs to have a unique mechanic introduced wherein you can "prepare" and plan naval invasions for numerous islands at the same time. This ideally makes use of the AI battle planner, where you start in the usual fashion of organising a naval invasion, selecting the unit that will take part, and choosing their origin and destination. This system is slightly finicky right now but I can't think of a way of improving it that doesn't take away the direct player control that it gives. This then creates an operation, or raid-like mechanic that allows for an easier combined arms approach. Navies and task forces can then be attached (much like air wings or railway guns) to a naval-invading army which will allow for subsequent naval invasions to be planned and executed.

To make up for the fact that mulberry harbours weren't so pivotal in the Pacific, navies (in conjunction with the current convoy ship system) need to be allowed to ship crucial supplies to forces like those at Guadalcanal. Japanese forces relied upon destroyers to bring in men and supplies, and denying this gave the US a large advantage in the ground battle.

The Pacific is intrinsically linked to supply and a nation's ability to reinforce and resupply troops on island bastions with their navy (and to a lesser extent their airforce). Japan's whole war ethos was to set up a Pacific "Ring of Fire" via island bastions that would form a mutually supporting line through which the US would have to penetrate to retake the Philippines, Malaya Japan etc. This would then allow the Japanese navy to sail forth and sink the US Navy in a climactic battle that would force them to the negotiation table. The failure of this strategy was exemplified in the very first ground engagement on August 42 at Guadalcanal, where the US was able to reinforce their Marines whilst the Japanese were continually thwarted. These island garrisons on the many islands of the Pacific stretched the Japanese army and navy thin and often the US would bypass certain islands and leave them to wither on the vine.

The way the research tree for naval invasions works right now is fairly good, it limits the amount of initial naval invasions a country can launch until 1940 and 44 when the better techs (allowing more divisions) needs to be researched. Japan must choose very carefully when, where and with how many troops they naval invade during their initial blitzkrieg from dec 41 to May/June 42. The US, with a slow build-up due to the need to focus on Germany first in Europe, conducts invasions in North Africa, Sicily and Anzio, and the Pacific, the US eventually navally invades something like 50 islands during the Pacific war. I need to find my source, it might be Costello. They ultimately created a trans-Pacific logistical supply chain that eventually included ice cream as standard while Japan's forces were increasingly starved in a submarine campaign that rivals the Atlantic.

It would also be fun to have spy operations or raids including Orde Wingate, John F. Kennedy or MacArthur getting off Corregidor. Panama locks raids for Japan with special airplane-carrying submarines. Alt-history Yamashita's Gold please.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
After so many years, I still wonder - will we ever see a democratic path for the USSR/Russia? As far as I know, you haven't done it due to lack of time, but now, I think, is the time to update this tree a little, because the potential is wide. Democratic USSR accessible to communist leaders, constitutional monarchy of the whites, shared brunch of Russian republic for the whites and the reds with autonomous republics in it, military coups and so on.
 
  • 3
Reactions:
Congrats on the 9 Years Aniversery HOI4!
Its nice to see "Adding Mechanics to limit the size of your Standing Army, Particularly post-war etc". One of the things I feel is missing is that after the major conflict, Axis V. Comintern and Allies on Historical, there should be some type of drop of War Support (War Exhaustion should also be a thing, it would be hard for a non-authoritarian power to keep an offensive war going after a certain period of time). I also think having a greater "economic" cost to equip and maintain your army should be slightly explained (For me this one of the core reasons why the Allies were able to take the early hits, they had the economic might to rebuild and rebuild quickly).

My wishlist for HOI4:

- Greater Economic and Warfare interaction: (Armies are expensive. There should be some type of bonus to the "Civilian Economy" during Peacetime and bonus to "War Economy" during Wartime.)
- Defensive Warfare: (I mostly play countries that get attacked, so this would expand my play style. Don't have any specific ideas, but I think Volunteer Only should be buffed considerably during a defensive war (Perhaps addition +0.5% Recruitable Population and Strong Division Defense (10-20%) on Core Territory)
- China Redux: I love playing China from time to time. I frustrating, but extremely rewarding. I'd love to see expanded political options for the ROC (Perhaps a Balance of Power between Left Kuomintang and Right Kuomintang?) and CCP.

Can't wait to see what countries get included in the East Asia Expansion (hoping for Mongolia or Manchukuo and Australia) with a Country pack for Indonesia /Dutch East Indies, Thailand, and Philippines
Not many countries have a generic tree left though I think?
A Fair Bit Still Have Generics, most are outside of Europe. At the '36 start these counties have a Generic Focus Tree

Ireland
Albania
Tibet
Burma/Myanmar
Guatemala
Cuba
Haiti
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Nicaragua
Honduras
Costa Rica
Columbia
Venezuela
Peru
Ecuador
Bolivia
Mongolia
Thailand
Syria
Lebanon
Aussa
Any/All Releasables (Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, etc.)
 
  • 3
  • 1
Reactions:
I'm really hyped for this Japan/china rework, the huge amount of manpower, and potential cores, countries in the region can obtain, make it my favourite to play inside.
I really hope that the small countries(Warlords) remain and get some content/unique mechanics. It's always fun starting small and through mainly defensive or isolated wars become capable of taking on the world.

The doctrine rework is full of promise I can't predict/have an idea of what it will contain but I see it can really rebalance the game. I do think however, if the AI could employ different division types / numbers of divisions depending on their doctrine, that would be AMAZING, it would give each country you're fighting a unique feel.

Navy is currently something I don't engage with at all except to naval invade Japan/UK the sad reality of it is, it barely has an impact when doing a world conquest.
A better use of the resources is to simply invest in a stronger army/Airforce and conquer the big continents.
Doing that typically gives you the ships (via peace conference) to naval invade, and you don't need to fight a single naval battle to naval invade.
Navy needs a stronger impact on land battles/economy/troop movement to be worth while. Right now you can just send a fullstack army(by transport) through complete enemy supremacy. You may take equipment losses but it isn't enough to hurt when you have 150+ Military factories.

Finally to the devs making Japan/Manchuria content. Think Belgium/Congo but Extreme Mode.
 
Last edited:
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Is it at all possible that more generals will be added to various countries? Both Walter von Reichenau and Ernst Busch, who were both historically field marshals for Germany during WW2, are not in the game. There are plenty more examples not only in Germany, but in many other nations, but these are my two go to examples for glaring omissions in the general roster. There is also Ferdinand Schorner, another field marshal, who is only available as an Infantry Expert and not as a general. How is that decided?
 
  • 3Like
Reactions:
Arheo, thanks for the update, sounds very exciting.
One point hasnt been addressed and id say its one of the most unrealistic, buggy, annoying parts of otherwise a lovely game.
And that is the tendency of AI to ship mountains of divisions around the globe, with no escorts and for no discernible strategic or tactical reason besides “AI made another front”. And then they also shuffle divisions like crazy.
Killing a million americans before ever seeing them in actual battle just isnt fun. Can this be fixed?
 
Oh and on the diplomatic front. To give an example. Im germany, doing well. US has entered the war and declared on me and also on vichy, vichy joins axis. Likelihood of Allies landing in North Africa successfuly are close to nil if i position even one army there, which means that if i want case anton i need to either let them do it or do some other gamey stuff. If i kick vichy out of axis and declare, they cant join the allies (they are at war) which means they will join soviets (with whom im at war) or japan’s faction (which i dont want). Is there a more elegant way of approaching this 1941-1942 timeline diplomacy?
Also, can we make case anton a bit easier/different because no player with a pulse would get taken out in africa by a few US divisions.
Final question- will we ever see AI use para’s?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:



Great Power Diplomacy

I’ve spoken at length on this in a few other places. Fundamentally, design ideas for this one always ended up conflicting with focus trees.


More National Focus Trees

Fairly Self-explanatory.


War Effort Updates

The old Roadmap championed these as a method of updating older focus tree content. It’s fair to mention that this ended up not being a major focus of war effort updates. It became quickly apparent that developing focus trees is the majority of the work our Content Designers do; that’s not realistically something we can do in iterative updates.
I think these points are important to have in mind:
  1. The majority of the work the content designers do is developing focus trees - and there are now two teams producing focus trees
  2. Updating focus trees is to much work to do properly/comprehensibly outside of paid DLCs
  3. Focus trees ends up conflicting with and blocking development of (potential) core mechanics
To me, this indicates a rather unhealthy design philosophy, where the majority of the effort is spent on content that conflicts with or takes precedence over the health and quality of the "core" game. Furthermore, said content will not receive major updates or support post release, becoming increasingly out of touch with the game, as development continues.

I know im probably sounding overly negative, but it sounds to me like we should not expect the overall health of the game to improve for the remainder of HOI4s life, possibly the opposite.
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
  • 1
Reactions:
Heck yeah, Asia and Pacific theatres getting reworked!!! Mengjiang finally getting its proper rename and its own tree??? Lol

About the "minor players in the war"-focused Country Packs... Will we be finally getting a Little Entente Country Pack in the next expansion cycle? The long-awaited rework for Czechoslovakia?!
 
It will come as little surprise that South/East Asia is next, with content primarily focused on Japan and China, and mechanics to support this narrative, as well as reinvigorating the Pacific war. I don’t want to go into too many specifics here (tune in next time for more!), but the war in and around Asia as well as the Pacific has been left behind by our recent developments directed at the European elements of the conflict. To give some broad strokes here, we’re looking at developing the narratives that faction membership will give you, improving and streamlining elements of naval control, with a particular focus on the types of naval warfare that carried the Pacific conflict, and adding much greater strategic narrative (and a less opaque simulation) to the flow of naval conflict. This is not an exclusive list, and it’ll probably leave you guessing - but you won’t have to wait long.
Really pleased about this.

Would also add that making it necessary as the USA to fight Japan across the pacific islands would be much needed. The war in Asia was a slog, and it would be great to have this reflected.

I also finally want to be able to play as Thailand.
 
I suppose the Asian dlc will cover China, Japan, Thailand, Philippines, Dutch East Asia, Australia and Usa
I am over here wondering if they will be giving the Dutch East Indies some proper content like they did with the Belgian Congo; and if they will be overhauling Malaysia into multiple puppets (like it was at the time) or into something similar to the new British Raj/Princely States situation...
 
“But you said you couldn’t do this!”, I hear you cry. And mostly you would be right. However, with the introduction of late game technologies in Götterdämmerung, there is even more reason to continue playing after the end of the war. I would like to keep developing how the world “falls out” after the conflict, producing more realistic geopolitical results as well as the potential for new and more systems-driven “what if” conflicts after the end of the war. Of course, any such changes would be multiplied in effect if they could also touch upon the pre-war landscape too…

Please. Having at least a few years of a post-war, with a lot of roadblocks to conflict to reflect general war fatigue would be great.

Ultimately a player wants to know how they shaped the world, and what new order they fought for. Some content here would be fantastic and motivate people to play through to the end, win or lose.
 
Why am I not reading about massive and comprehensive quality of life improvements, like research queues or (UI) accessibility? After nine years, HOI4 still has such obvious weaknesses. There's no need for more annoying, boring content that distracts from the actual/core game!
 
  • 4
  • 1Like
Reactions:
1. Based.

2. As a new fan of Hearts of Iron IV (I started in January of this year), I would love the free game passes to encourage a few of my friends to join me in grand strategy shenanigans! I've put in over 300 hours on Hearts of Iron and the one thing I've been missing is a solid, consistent play group; with the economy as it is where I'm from, folks are a little hesitant to cough over any amount of extra money in something they haven't tried. It would be my honor and pleasure to spread the wonders of HOI with help from you guys! I can even, hear me out, show them how the Naval mechanics work!
 
I hope that war effort updates will continue. The QoL added in the last patch is very pleasant to have (MIO, design saves), and I want to thank the dev team for adding them, but there is still a lot of improvement possibles (like a way to assign planes to a field marchal, which would split them between generals), I think that there is still a lot of good suggestions in the forum!
Funny enough, I've been having issues compartmentalizing my Air support units. Adding specific generals/ field marshals would assist in solving that issue for me and other, newer players!