• 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.

Baane

Captain
16 Badges
Mar 11, 2017
306
1
  • For the Motherland
  • Hearts of Iron III
  • Hearts of Iron III: Their Finest Hour
  • Semper Fi
  • War of the Roses
  • Stellaris
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Stellaris - Path to Destruction bundle
  • Steel Division: Normandy 44
  • BATTLETECH
  • Age of Wonders III
  • Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Hearts of Iron IV: La Resistance
  • Battle for Bosporus
1. The dynamic front line was neat, but it kind of mitigates the need for reconnaissance units when you always know roughly where the enemy is. Possible band-aid: make the distance by which units project their influence smaller.

2. Mortars did not have a very convincing trajectory, firing almost like direct fire weapons. This is a theme in this engine and I'm having to wonder if IRISZOOM just can't handle mortars?

3. Planes moved at comically slow speeds. This in itself wasn't surprising, but it looked most hilarious when they performed sharp turns that would have stalled any plane at those speeds. Their bombs falling like looney toons pianos and making explosions that seemed no bigger than the bombs themselves looked equally silly.

4. The map sizes are more company-scale, battalion at absolute most. Seems to me that everything could have been scaled better, especially coming off of wargame.

All that said, it looks "fun enough." I just really hope at least some of the above issues are addressed, though. Especially if you're gonna keep strumming the authenticity angle in your marketing.
 
Honestly, this stream un-hyped me quite a bit. This game looks like a micro-management hell. It doesn't look like you can group units together (in the Wargame trilogy you can group tanks, infantry, etc. in stacks or four similar units for easier management). Every single unit has to be managed on its own : expect up to 50% of death by "I wasn't looking at this part of the battlefield when they were fired upon".
 
Nobody play with groups that much anyway. The truck disappearing is a good thing if it is possible to related the infantry group with it at will. Only the frontline vs recon bother me. Interface not enought clear at that point.
 
That's their way of resolving the old ALB truck conundrum, I guess.

It was suggested a long time ago, but I hoped they'd come up with something better...
As far as I know, in ALB it was an issue because the primary form of antitank weapon was the ATGM. The thing is, in a game set in this time period and of this scale, a few riflemen would put down any given truck like that in short order; no specific antitank weapon needed. The same could be said about forces in ALB's era, too, but you couldn't stop the ATGMs from firing at their maximum range without a lot of micro effort. It's just not an issue in a WWII setting.

Personally, I think unarmed trucks like that should just impart a tax on the unit when purchasing them. Said tax would get refunded upon successfully driving them back to an extraction point after they drop off their payload. In this way, an enemy who destroys the trucks can cause significant damage to a player's economy, and adds a level of complexity to the game.

This current implementation just looks tacky. That being said, of the complaints I have about the game based on this reveal, that's relatively minor. Aircraft looking silly is a much bigger deal to me, as is the micro management hell. Especially since a part of the marketting was that the micro management would not be heavy in this game.
 
1. The dynamic front line was neat, but it kind of mitigates the need for reconnaissance units when you always know roughly where the enemy is. Possible band-aid: make the distance by which units project their influence smaller.

2. Mortars did not have a very convincing trajectory, firing almost like direct fire weapons. This is a theme in this engine and I'm having to wonder if IRISZOOM just can't handle mortars?

3. Planes moved at comically slow speeds. This in itself wasn't surprising, but it looked most hilarious when they performed sharp turns that would have stalled any plane at those speeds. Their bombs falling like looney toons pianos and making explosions that seemed no bigger than the bombs themselves looked equally silly.

4. The map sizes are more company-scale, battalion at absolute most. Seems to me that everything could have been scaled better, especially coming off of wargame.

All that said, it looks "fun enough." I just really hope at least some of the above issues are addressed, though. Especially if you're gonna keep strumming the authenticity angle in your marketing.
I agree with everything you said. To add to it, though:

1. my thoughts exactly, see the thread I just made. Maybe if the frontline updated only once per minute or something it'd work better in my eyes.

2. agree. Some of the artillery/AA projectiles looked a bit "overdone", too. Too thick and big, if you know what I mean. Maybe that's what they look like, and I suppose it's to make them more eye-catching so you won't miss them, but I prefer ordinary tracers like in most WWII games and movies.

3. agree so much. I get that they are propeller planes, but they should move realistically fast.

4. yeah, the map was small. I suppose it's a 1v1 map, and I know you don't have jets that need lots of space, and helis that cover grund very quickly, but still, it felt pretty small. A bit disconcerting given how "quiet" the game felt in my eyes compared to the super-hectic Wargame. Are we meant to have fewer units to play with?

That's their way of resolving the old ALB truck conundrum, I guess.

It was suggested a long time ago, but I hoped they'd come up with something better...
The problem with lots of APCs and trucks sitting around doing nothing? Pardon my ignorance, I never played ALB.

I would've preferred an option to simply dismiss them, to have them drive back off the map or something. If the trucks simply magically disappear when you don't need them, and reappear when you need rapid movement, that removes some significant depth from the game. Keeping transport vehicles safe behind your lines was one of the challenges in EE and Red Dragon, and whatever micro problems arose from dismounting and mounting could be easily solved by things like World in Conflict's "Board nearest transport" command.

I hope this isn't another game following the "let's simplify stuff because that's the trend" kind of game.

Personally, I think unarmed trucks like that should just impart a tax on the unit when purchasing them. Said tax would get refunded upon successfully driving them back to an extraction point after they drop off their payload. In this way, an enemy who destroys the trucks can cause significant damage to a player's economy, and adds a level of complexity to the game.
This is ingenious. I would rather have this than magical shrinking pocket trucks.

This current implementation just looks tacky. That being said, of the complaints I have about the game based on this reveal, that's relatively minor. Aircraft looking silly is a much bigger deal to me, as is the micro management hell. Especially since a part of the marketting was that the micro management would not be heavy in this game.
Anyone else reminded of how the HOI devs threw out the OOB/COC tools from 3 when they made 4, along with pop-ups giving you updates on battles, and it made the game far more frustrating and micro-heavy, because you had just as many units, fewer tools to manage them, and now you had to babysit them on top of that to know when a battle was going badly or when a unit had reached its destination?

Sometimes simplifying stuff doesn't reduce micro or complexity.

by "I wasn't looking at this part of the battlefield when they were fired upon".
^^which is exactly currently the #1 biggest problem with Hearts of Iron 4 at the moment. You have to constantly move the camera from front to front, because you can't take your eyes away from anything for half a minute of game time out of fear that the whole line will collapse without the game telling you.
 
Last edited:
The problem with lots of APCs and trucks sitting around doing nothing? Pardon my ignorance, I never played ALB.
The issue was that the premier defense against tank attack in the cold war (and, indeed, in the game) was ATGM delivery systems. These systems tend to only have a handful of missiles, and you could not tell the crews what sort of targets to prioritize. You either switch the weapon off, so that they won't use it, or turn it on and they'll loose a missile at the first vehicle that comes in range.

People began to figure out that one of the best, and safest, ways to conduct an armored attack - and get rid of otherwise useless trucks that are just sitting around the whole game - is to send them forward in a screen in front of your tanks, so they absorb the missile salvos at long range and allow the tanks to get into firing range unimpeded.

This is less of an issue in a game set in the Second World War, since infantry aren't relying on expensive ATGMs to save them against armor and a few rifle rounds will put a stop to a truck (never mind a sweep from a Bren or MG-34/42.)
 
Please do mind that he purposely played it in a way to force certain events in order to show them off. In regard to plane speed, please note that he set the game speed to very slow, perhaps that's why it and tracers looked unnatural.

As for trucks being or not being a thing, I will theoretically say the ATGM role in WW2 was assigned to AT guns and they relied entirely on concealment to be effective. I guess you can imagine the exploit potential.
 
Last edited:
Please do mind that he purposely played it in a way to force certain events in order to show them off. In regard to plane speed, please note that he set the game speed to very slow, perhaps that's why it and tracers looked unnatural.

As for trucks being or not being a thing, I will theoretically say the ATGM role in WW2 was assigned to AT guns and they relied entirely on concealment to be effective. I guess you can imagine the exploit potential.
1. There were several instances where he called out scout planes and a mosquito at normal speed. Yes, it looked silly. The scout plane not so much, but the bombs falling like leaflets was silly.

2. Antitank guns in this game will have a higher rate of fire than the ATGM launchers of Wargame, will be more immediately lethal, have more ammunition capacity, and will be facing smaller caliber weapons. In Wargame, what would often happen is that an ATGM team is exposed by firing a missile, and they are instantly erased by one or more tanks firing at them before the missile gets anywhere near hitting the target; causing it to miss.

At the 50 minute mark of the stream, we see an antitank gun deploy while under fire and win against an attacking tank. Making infantry tuck trucks away in their Pokeballs when they're done with them is silly.
 
1. The dynamic front line was neat, but it kind of mitigates the need for reconnaissance units when you always know roughly where the enemy is. Possible band-aid: make the distance by which units project their influence smaller.

I have to disagree. Even though, you can see, "that there is something", you don't know what is in there exactly.
One of the Streamers biggest fail, was to have way to less recon, to know, what is in the space, he drives his tanks in. that is one of the reasons, he lost all of his Challengers to ennemy infantry and hidden Paks. Recon is then like now really important, like we have seen in this stream.

4. The map sizes are more company-scale, battalion at absolute most. Seems to me that everything could have been scaled better, especially coming off of wargame.

Didn't some of the erarlier articles of PCGamer and PCGamesN said, that you will be in the role of a Colonel, because you only choose a Battlegroup out of all the Divisions units?
 
We know that both tank and AT gun can be potentially oneshoted coz there are no health bars. If you'd push 2-3 trucks in front of your line, the gun would be occupied long enough for even one tank to pin it down and kill it as it can't run away.
 
Last edited:
We know that both tank and AT gun can be oneshoted coz there are no health bars. If you'd push 2-3 trucks in front of your line, the gun would be occupied long enough for even one tank to pin it down and kill it as it can't run away.
And those trucks could also be dismantled by rifle and machine gun fire. They wouldn't last long enough for such a tactic to really work.

In any case, a system wherein units are taxed for coming in transports, and the tax is then refunded for the safe return of said transports, would be the final solution to this problem.
 
And those trucks could also be dismantled by rifle and machine gun fire. They wouldn't last long enough for such a tactic to really work.

In any case, a system wherein units are taxed for coming in transports, and the tax is then refunded for the safe return of said transports, would be the final solution to this problem.
Plus, it shouldn't be too hard to make it so that you can tell AT guns in general to not fire on trucks, or to prioritise tanks.