Haven't played in a long long time because of feature bloat

[Gyrvendal]

I kinda agree with this, as much as I don't want to. I want to add that focus tree bloat is also too much for me. Ever since their reworks, starting a game as Germany or Soviet just feels like a huge core. There are so many subsystems, buffs and debuffs to prioritize and navigate, and there is almost always an "optimal" order that you actually have to learn so the choice feels artificial.

 

[Joshua Happytree]

EDIT: Found it. 29:00 minute here:
https://vkvideo.ru/video-163055852_456239941
"From Oct 1, 1942, all Soviet aircraft must have receivers RSI-4, and every third aircraft must have a transmitter as per the Government Committee of Defense order"

You were right and I was wrong, didn't know they were installing "half" of the radio as it was designed. Here's the source https://www.prlib.ru/item/1350070

 

[Cornutus]

You can google and this sentence is not from Moskalev's memoirs, it's a statement from certain Sergey Ivanov's pulp-fiction about Yakovlev fighters. Pulp-fiction because it's a run away text published in 2001 yet with no sources to any bold statements he makes. And that is understandable as he "wrote" 194, I repeat, 194 "books" on anything WWII historyish. Can you imagine, it's about one book per months. Though he probably doesn't "write" them himself.

You need no more than two minutes to find the list of all aircraft radios designed and built in USSR in 30s and 40s, including where and when they were designed and produced, what aircraft used them etc.

You may be right here.

The problem is, even if you write that quote off, you still have other sources with documented proof confirming the exact same thing as of late 1942 for certain.

If you had this problem during the war, and some very questionable source is saying it continued after the war: chances are, that problem persisted.

PS Don't trust everything random guys are saying on the Internet if it's not backed up by original sources, especially blah-blah-blah in pulp-fiction YT vids.

Yepp, you're right. I was wrong, didn't know they were installing "half of the radio". Here's the source of the document https://www.prlib.ru/item/1350070

Good to have this settled.

But speaking of this, HOI4 has zero connection to the importance of radios in aircraft. In tanks you get breakthrough and defense, in aircraft you don't even have this option, which is a shame.

I don't even know how I could mod this in, as it I don't think I can grant a modifier to "interception" or any other combat mission based on the radio module that can be modded in.

 

[PanzerMan7]

View attachment 1281424

I fully agree that UI, lack of configurable notification system, lack of queueing in most mechanics really sucks and takes away the fun from the game. But if one simply wants to play a less sofisticated GSG one can always go for TW or CIV. E.g. I don't want the game to auto-trade for me with whoever. I carefully select trade partners to boost their industry to either take it over after capping or help them in their wars.

Dude, I want to focus on moving divisions around not opening a stupid trade screen and clicking the set enough button.

Every. Other. Day.

 

[Joshua Happytree]

Dude, I want to focus on moving divisions around not opening a stupid trade screen and clicking the set enough button.

But others want it IMHO HOI4 strength is exactly in combining warfare with production and many ways to minmax with spreadsheet modelling. You say you prefer TW-like experience -- very basic production / research that allocates higher share of player's time to moving pixeltruppen on the map. There's nothing wrong with it, the question is why take away the heart of Hearts of Iron 4 and make it another TW only WWII-themed.

 

[lilcritt]

I think the features in general are fine. They just need some balancing/slight fixes and a lot of QoL love.

 

[TarsTarkin]

We're talking about Soviet aircraft having just receivers but not transmitters?

It was mentioned in a variety of sources. I definitely recall Mark Solonin mentioning it regarding certain Yak-3 series in 1944.

As well Gennadiy Serov + Mikhail Timin's documentary series of shows "How Soviet Fighters fought in (Year)" mentioned something similar IIRC. I would have to go through about 30+ videos a couple of hours each, to find exactly where. I definitely do recall them mentioning how in a lot of orders "the squadron commander must have a working radio transmitter while pilots must have working receivers" implying that pilots may not have transmitters.


EDIT: Found it. 29:00 minute here:

https://vkvideo.ru/video-163055852_456239941

"From Oct 1, 1942, all Soviet aircraft must have receivers RSI-4, and every third aircraft must have a transmitter as per the Government Committee of Defense order"

Afterwards when Soviet aircraft officially went from 3-plane formations to 2-plane formations, "Every second fighter must have a transmitter"


Also you see it here regarding the Yak-3 fighter AFTER WW2 ENDED:
А.С. Москалев: По-прежнему не удавалось наладить производство достаточного количества радиостанций так, чтобы каж¬дый самолет оснащался приемником и передатчиком. Все самолеты оборудовались приемниками, а передатчики имелись лишь на каждой второй машине."

A.S. Moskalev: It was still not possible to set up production of a sufficient number of radio stations so that each aircraft would be equipped with a receiver and transmitter. All aircraft were equipped with receivers, but transmitters were only available on every second fighter." Later "

I don't have a reference handy, but I have memories of references related to this across the early war Red Army in general. Part of the Paranoia, the NKVD were as afraid of "Illegal transmitting" as they were of "Illegal printing". There was a shortage of Radio's across the Red Army (Tanks and Infantry as well, Infantry made extensive use of field phones, Tanks "not so much). In all fairness, for infantry at least, field phones also made it harder for enemies to pick operational information, but the cost came at taking longer to set up after movement. (arguably represented as part of the reason for the lower org in the Soviet Military). This was not so much a technological or a material constraint as a political one. I believe the Russians changed their mind on this very rapidly as their war progressed...

 

[Lamartine]

But others want it IMHO HOI4 strength is exactly in combining warfare with production and many ways to minmax with spreadsheet modelling. You say you prefer TW-like experience -- very basic production / research that allocates higher share of player's time to moving pixeltruppen on the map. There's nothing wrong with it, the question is why take away the heart of Hearts of Iron 4 and make it another TW only WWII-themed.

Then don't check the automation box?

No one's making you use the battle planner, no one's forcing you to check the box to automate trades on the arms market, and no one's conscripting you into ticking the 'repeat operation' box on the espionage screen if you prefer to micro everything. These already exist in the game to make players lives easier and you don't have to use them if you think they dumb HOI4 down into a Total War style arcade game.

All that this thread is asking for is similar QOL for resource trade, equipment designers, the battle planner, and other gameplay loops. They would not "take away" from the gaming experience because no one has to use them if they don't want to.

 

[Joshua Happytree]

All that this thread is asking for is similar QOL for resource trade, equipment designers, the battle planner, and other gameplay loops

The OP was

Then the MEOs and the intelligence network stuff. Just a bunch of extra stuff to learn and click through.

In my understanding it's more about HOI4 having too many "extra stuff to learn". Especially since

I had to spend a ton of time on the ship designer for functionally the same gameplay as before

1. You'd spend "a ton of time on the ship designer" only when you learn it. After that it takes 2 seconds to click a ship in designer even with eyes closed because you know what you need.
2. Ship designs were certainly settled into few of them yet it's not "the same gameplay". Instead of sole abstracted DD people build roach DDs, max torp fleet DDs, cheap ASW / escort DDs, mine-laying and mine-sweeping DDs etc. And all these designs are valid and optimal for their specific strategies. Yes, one can still use only one design but it's like having a laptop and only using it as a calculator.

And certainly this one

not opening a stupid trade screen and clicking the set enough button. Every. Other. Day.

Is overblown. When do you need to modify trades? In the worst case it's every 4 MILs built (2x Steel per MIL). That's far from every other day. Inability to open multiple combat screens when you have several fights going on takes thousands if not tens of thousands times more clicks than resources because you need to constantly switch between them to see what's going on.