Ideas are loosely based on War in the East 2 ( HQ units with transferable sub-units) and HoI3, but the way I'm imagining it, it'd have a distinctly DH character
- 1
-
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.
I have defected to WiTE2 while waiting for the coming changes in DH.
Two very different animals though, very enjoyable in their own ways.
Two very different animals though, very enjoyable in their own ways.
- 1
the game looks marvelous, but i want a global theatre (with just as much detail)
also its $80!
Honestly it's enough managing the one theatre ( there are theatre boxes for everything not east!). The level of detail is (sometimes) too much. There's a 500 page manual and a 850 page living manual with corrections and explanations.
You can get it for ½ price when it's on sale.
Yes, very different, but it's fun.
It's too bad I'm a grown up now and the game is such a time investment. Maybe in the retirement home, lol.
But yeah it's far too detailed for DH2. When I talked about HQ's that command units further away than 1 province, I was thinking something closer to if you imagine Hearts of Iron 3, but only corps level in the OOB.
Because in (current) DH, we use corps level (though obviously you can make a "corps" with 1 division or a "corps with 12 divisions). I think the corps level is nice for a game like this. But as I suggested doubling (at least nearly doubling) the amount of provinces, I had to consider what that would mean. With twice the provinces, the corps level of control wouldn't be sufficient a lot of the time.
Hence, the thought occurred that something like the Darkest Hour HQ's could act as a modifiable minimum unit.
I also generally like the idea of having a specific man doing a specific task and this task is of reasonable scale. In darkest hour /hoi2 I get that feeling but not in hoi2 because every division has a commander, and every corps a commander then every army.
It gets a bit too much for me, personally.
Something more like, "Ah, here's General Smith, with obsolete infantry equipment doing anti-partisan duties in this region" and "Here's General Johnson convoy raiding with submarines out in that sea region" and "Here's General Berg on an air superiority mission at this coastal province with our brand new interceptors" seems more manageable. And that's a lot like how Darkest Hour is - you have a pretty good balance in the amount of units/generals/missions/whatever you want to call it that you as a player needs to pay attention to.
My thinking is kind of an attempt to keep that level of how complicated/detailed Darkest Hour is, but adding depth. In Darkest hour your ability to add depth in the manner that I mean it, is to add or remove air units from an air group, or mix different types. Same goes for army and navy. Mix up a stack of units and that's it. I feel like there's potential to make it more in depth (through more options in what to add, and what missions to assign) but not much more complicated (by keeping it at the same scale, for the player)
I hope I'm managing to explain my thoughts well enough, not that it really matters if I didn't
Last edited: