Couldn't stand them even back then.
The only reason to use them is they are easier/faster to draw than an actual unit icon -- which isn't much of an excuse when it is a game!
Last edited:
-
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.
The only reason to use them is they are easier/faster to draw than an actual unit icon -- which isn't much of an excuse when it is a game!
I even see artillery when I fry eggs sunny-side up!
It might be that we are only 9% of the total players, but we definitely make up for at least 90% of the most militant customers! It's not about the number of voices but about their volume.
Symbols are only useful if you can relate to them.
Icons are more relateable for most of our players as they visually represent the unit. Soldiers for infantry, cannons for artillery, tanks for armored etc. Players without a lot of military experience (virtually or real life) will find them easier to understand at a first glance.
NATO symbols are designed to be easier understood and less ambiguous for those with training. A player who has experience with NATO symbols will often find them easier to understand and distinguish on the map. Many of our fans prefer NATO symbols for this particular reason, or because it feels more immersive to them.
If you don't like counters or icons, that's fine. You have the option to not play with them. Please don't disrespect people who do though.
Icons are more relateable for most of our players as they visually represent the unit. Soldiers for infantry, cannons for artillery, tanks for armored etc. Players without a lot of military experience (virtually or real life) will find them easier to understand at a first glance.
NATO symbols are designed to be easier understood and less ambiguous for those with training. A player who has experience with NATO symbols will often find them easier to understand and distinguish on the map. Many of our fans prefer NATO symbols for this particular reason, or because it feels more immersive to them.
If you don't like counters or icons, that's fine. You have the option to not play with them. Please don't disrespect people who do though.
I think that NATO symbols would be more used if playing with them didn't handicap you.
The only reason I don't use them is because the 3D models convey critical information like in what direction an enemy or friendly unit is heading, which I can't see at a glance on the NATO counters.
Basically the little movement direction arrow from HoI3: http://simhq.com/forum/files/usergals/2011/12/full-10095-23953-war_1.jpg
The only reason I don't use them is because the 3D models convey critical information like in what direction an enemy or friendly unit is heading, which I can't see at a glance on the NATO counters.
Basically the little movement direction arrow from HoI3: http://simhq.com/forum/files/usergals/2011/12/full-10095-23953-war_1.jpg
Last edited:
I don't think it's worth re-litigating the pre-release discussion about the advantages and drawbacks of NATO symbols - I've played plenty of games which had them and can read them OK. I do think that:
1) NATO symbols have not turned out to be the all-important feature that some people thought they were going to be.
2) That the overwhelming majority of players aren't bothered to use them.
3) That many, probably the overwhelming majority, of the remaining 9% of people who do use them would still be OK with playing a game that doesn't have them.
4) That whether or not it is worth expending the (minimal? or was it more than that?) time and effort to implement them so as to accommodate the very small minority (probably less than 1%, or even 0.1% of the people who bought the game) for whom not having NATO symbols is a genuine deal-breaker is a question for the devs and we don't really have the information necessary to know that.
5) But we also know that had they not implemented NATO symbols likely a Modder would have done it.
1) NATO symbols have not turned out to be the all-important feature that some people thought they were going to be.
2) That the overwhelming majority of players aren't bothered to use them.
3) That many, probably the overwhelming majority, of the remaining 9% of people who do use them would still be OK with playing a game that doesn't have them.
4) That whether or not it is worth expending the (minimal? or was it more than that?) time and effort to implement them so as to accommodate the very small minority (probably less than 1%, or even 0.1% of the people who bought the game) for whom not having NATO symbols is a genuine deal-breaker is a question for the devs and we don't really have the information necessary to know that.
5) But we also know that had they not implemented NATO symbols likely a Modder would have done it.
Hey! I was always wondering what is the least played country,and their players .. can you tell us about this week?Hi everyone, we are still working on 1.4.1. The initial plan was to release it today, but we are currently chasing a multiplayer bug. Its looking likely for a release tomorrow though and an update on the beta version today.
So this diary will be a little brief as we focus on the patch work, and if you want to help test 1.4.1 you can find out how to here: https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...eta-patch-checksum-73d8-updated-26-6.1031090/.
Our game reports useful data to us, and I'd figured I'd share some of it with you as well.
Here is a list of the new countries in DoD and their relative popularity last week:
1. Hungary
2. Romania
3. Yugoslavia
4. Czechoslovakia
its roughly how I expect it, but what sticks out is that Hungary is almost twice as popular as Romania. In fact right now the only nations more popular to play is Germany, Soviet, USA and Italy. I suspect part of this is because its new stuff (my check doesnt care if you own DoD or not btw) but clearly Austria-Hungary formation is a big draw. We'll keep our eyes on it and see how it develops long term
Another interesting data point is when people start. Seems only 4% of games are started on 1939 bookmark. This is something we have noticed across games in the company. People prefer the earliest start point with a large margin. This means that with its a pretty bad idea for us to focus on new start points over improving the popular option and that it probably would have been a good idea to skip the 1939 start for HOI4. I feel that its likely in hindsight that a '41 start could have been more popular.
As a side note we broke both our daily active players count and monthly active record during the DoD release and it seems to be going strong, so thanks everyone for enjoying the game
I also want to take the opportunity in this dev diary to present 3 people who just joined the team (art team had to give up lebensraum to fit the new ppl
Hi! I am @shultays , I am a new programmer at the team and I just joined Paradox a of couple weeks ago. I studied C.S. and then started working with embedded systems for a while (*yuck*) but I have been professionally developing games for the last couple years now. I am excited to work at Paradox and to work on such a complex game! I will be working mostly on the A.I., trying to make game more challenging and fun for you people. Get ready because soon you will be also fighting against me when you fight against the A.I.! Feel free to report anything or contact me so I can improve things around.
@JohanLerstrom here, I'm a senior programmer here at PDS and have worked on pretty much every game we have released since CK2. I even had a brief attempt at leading the CK2 team ( where you might have seen me in some streams ) but programming is my passion so I left the manager hat on the shelf and I've been moving between projects helping out for some time now. My very first contact with Paradox was playing Hearts of Iron 1 with my friends at a LAN party back in what feels like a million years ago so it feels fitting to be working on HoI4 now. My spare time is almost 100% Factorio these days, except an hour per week of Twin Peaks. (Podcat's note: not quite true, we also spend some work lunches discussing Twin peaks)
Yo people! I'm @Bratyn , a bit of the 'wild card' content designer at PDS (been on quite a few projects in a short span of time). I'm excited to be on HOI4 again (had a brief stint on it helping out for DoD), and this time I'll be here for a lot longer, working on some more cool content for HOI4 that I think is going to make the game even more fun to play. I'm Dutch, studied English and History in Norway (don't ask...), and wrote my Master's thesis on WWII while Paradox was developing HOI4. I love my strategy games, so you can imagine how excited I was to finally get to play HOI4 when it released, about a month after I had finished researching the period for nearly two years. Some interests of mine include history, sci-fi, astronomy (and science in general), and a nascent fascination with big WWII-era warships (WoWs!). Just gotta talk Podcat into adding more of the latter (and making them more fun to use) in HOI4...
See you all next week for a final diary before summer vacation whisks us off for much needed rest and relaxation
This is the main problem is the Devs are trying to bring HoI to the normal people, when it should just stay for Us, lets say 'unique' types.I think it's cute that you believe any of us is normal.
Not a problem. I'm here to corrupt the young, innocent, beautiful people.
Gotta start somewhere. 9 years ago, I was a Total War heretic. A paradox proseletyzer convinced me to try eu3. Now, I can't play Vicky 2 without Pops of Darkness, EU4 without M&T, and coming soon, HOI4 without BICE.
One day you are playing a "casual" grand strategy game, and then you turn around and 10% of your life is gone, and you can't do without the hardcore stuff.
I respect your view*, but I have to say, if you're not using a courier font mod to make it more period-appropriate, there's no way I'd play you in MP .*For real - if there's any ambiguity I'm just having a joke here
.
Touché
*For real - if there's any ambiguity I'm just having a joke here