Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Hearts of Iron 3: the future?

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.
Show only dev responses
Tahuti

Tahuti

God of scribes
15 Badges
May 25, 2007
183
0
  • Hearts of Iron II: Armageddon
  • Crusader Kings II
  • Darkest Hour
  • Deus Vult
  • Europa Universalis III
  • Divine Wind
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Heir to the Throne
  • Europa Universalis: Rome
  • Semper Fi
  • Victoria 2
  • Victoria 2: A House Divided
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • 500k Club
Many people, including me would be curious how Hearts of Iron 3 would turn out. Considering EUIII has 3D graphics and fully random events (as opposed to pre-scripted events), its likely HoI3 Will be much like it.

What do you think about it, and would you think out would happen?>
 
Upvote 0
I doubt that it will be much like EU3 in the sense that there will be no scripted events. I think the average HOI player wants a sense of history when they play, especially given the short time period. You want World War Two to start most of the time. Its what makes the game. Now after say 1943 if there were no scripted events, that might be just fine with me.
 
Well, some EU players claimed that EUIII lacked any historical sense because events were fully randomized. On the other hand, it seemed it had greater diplomatic flexibility; the same was true for the AI.

I think this is the future of paradox games, which I like, it brings much more stabler games as well.
 
The Hearts of Iron time period is much too narrow for an EU3-like system to be in place. It would in fact be completely ridiculous.
 
The difference between HoI and EU is that HoI is about one conflict in the world history. EU covers a larger timeperiod.
A HoI without events would be pretty worthless in my opinion.

I think that if HoI 3 ever is produced it will concentrate more around different outcomes of the war. I also hope it will cover logistic (convoys, attacking et cetera) much better. And I also hope that it will have more political point of view. And that it will have much morre micromanagement. Factories like Vicky and techs like HoI 1, would be terrific. :)
 
At most an option to turn off scripted events would be okay/useful/appreciated.

But foregoing them entirely would gut the essence of the game.
Consider how it would be reviewed - A World War II game that fails to deliver World War II!
:eek: :D

The additional option for event-free might be a selling point - failure to include events as default would result in hordes of confused n00bs and much mockery from gaming pundits.
:D
 
Anonymous4401; your argument is pretty weak, especially considering the fact that HOI portrays dates and times far more detailed than EU, in the same amount of hours, you have spended 2 'game'years in HOI and 50 'game'years in EU.

Tskb18's argument - that random events could perhaps decrease the propability to trigger a World War, thus reducing the fun - would easily crush Anonymous 4401's argument into pieces.

Tskb18 has got a point, even though I still believe that the amount of pre-scripted should reduced, there should be at least a slight degree of pre-scripted events so a WWII game will bring WWII.
 
Yes, so let's have a random event that will trigger a series of wars to reclaim the 'lost territories' of your country's people, and later to expand into another very large, neighboring country for the purpose of gaining 'living space', but with the condition that your nation is a National Socialist one whose leader's initials are A.H. The MTTH of this will be reduced by certain factors, so that the war could start as early as 1937 or as late as 1942 who knows!?
 
Sounds good; a mix of pre-scripted and random events combined with the factor that pre-scripted events are less reliant on time will make an excellent game. This certainly could work.
 
Kaiserguard said:
Many people, including me would be curious how Hearts of Iron 3 would turn out. Considering EUIII has 3D graphics and fully random events (as opposed to pre-scripted events), its likely HoI3 Will be much like it.

What do you think about it, and would you think out would happen?>
Click to expand...

There have been many games which have morphed into ever more elaborate graphics and ever poorer game play and it would be tragic for this to happen with HOI. Too much generalisation is another typical flaw as series progress & this would be a killer too.
 
Well, graphics aren't Paradox strong point, though gameplay is. When they brought EU to 3D, the graphics are horribly outdated compared to the trend, but the gameplay was good. Hoi is no exception to the rule, altough its still in 2D, there are enough people who enjoy playing it.
 
That's the problem actually, when things don't go historically in the game, the AI isn't prepared at all, one of the weaknesses of pre-scripted events.
 
First, Paradox needs to get an AI to begin with. The current HoI2 AI is fairly stupid. Alright, that was an understatement, calling this an "Artificial Intelligence" is an insult. I like the scripted events, but I wish they'd fire in saner ways. For instance, if you go to war as the US in '36, your peace penalty kicks in as soon as the war ends, rather than either a slow spiral back down, or simply remaining at the same level because you just had your big war. And then on top, your "Gearing up for war" events will not fire because you passed the time checks.

What I would like to see is the abstraction remain. I don't like how detailed Victoria got with all of it's economic management. I like the HoI2 simplicity that allows me to look at the computer, say "run my sliders" and have the computer say, "okay" and proceed to let me concentrate on my strategy. I don't want to have to micromanage 90 different resources, factories, and shipping centers. If I did, I'd go play Civilization IV.

I would also like to see the option for players to mod in their own unit classes, with behaviors and rules. Rather than have us stuck with "Infantry" "Tanks" "Tac Bombers" I'd like to have the ability to add in, "Dirigibles" let's say.
 
I find it rather amusing that no one has mentioned making the air and naval systems actually produce realistic outcomes. That I find a touch more essential than whether the game is event-driven or not.
 
Interesting question, now you're saying this, I noticed the air force is not as usable than in reality. Strategic Bombers are virtually useless.

But lets get on-topic, you can start threads you like as do we all here do.
 
I think paradox is at a crossroads. They now have more attention from the general public, so they may choose to make their games more "user friendly". Sad for us, good for them.
I definately agree that we should focus on air and sea functionality, and the occational land glitches, too.
They could even implement unique soldier and general statistics... like a general known for his skill in the jungle, or a predisposition for not following orders, or even a special ability that allowed him to change directions mid move to take advantage of tactical vulnerabilities. The posibilities are endless. :D
 
oh dear the ideas keep flowing

You could have a bar strictly for morale, and if it got too low(with the right environmental circumstances) your divisions could turn on each other.

If dissent umungst troops got too bad, i could cause your political leaders to lose faith, reducing their trait effectivity and cause corruption, which could inevitably lead to a violent overthough(new random event). Imagine being in the middle of a protracted war and then having all you political leaders change and half of your troops "defecting". Now THATS A GAME.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back