Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Wishlist for HOI3

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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Show only dev responses
unmerged(31085)

unmerged(31085)

Imperator Caesar Augustus
Jun 25, 2004
486
0
profile.myspace.com
What are your wishlist for HOI 3?

1. No more CTD.
2. No more lagging.
3. More terrain features on the maps with layout of cities.
4. New sprites for every level upgrades.
5. Dynamic night and day events.
6. Dramatic night bombings with anti-aircraft flaks and searchlights as sprites.
7. Trenches
8. Icons for capital cities like that of Victoria.
9. Improvement of weather AI.
10. Improvement on computer AI.
11. Overhaul on game engine for faster gameplay.
12. Breakdown of smaller states for MODDING compatibility.

These are some of my thoughts...what are yours?
 
Upvote 0
3d

1- Can be like Total War games. (rome total war....etc). Each Province that we are attacking can be accessible like total war games so we can command the battle in 3D.
2- More provinces can be added, more detailed.
3- 1933-2000 . More techs, more diplomacy, more countries . (omg i want much)

* I guess only number 1 is painful for game developers. Thanks.
 
1. More countries to liberate. All countries that are existing today should be availible and also some that existed before (Ottoman empire for example) and some that don't exist but that may exist in the future (Basque for example).
And more options when liberating. If i've conquered France and want to liberate them, but just the northern part, then i would be able to do that by choosing which provinces they'll get.

2. More provinces. It's boring as hell when playing outside of europe because the provinces are so big. Even Europe should have more provinces too.

3. More city management. Would be nice to have cities and populations for those cities. More options when conquering cities too. Bombings and then go in with troops or just have constant bombings for some months.. Well.. more tactical options overall.

4. A longer time-period. I would mainly want to play modern day and forward but one good time-period to cover would maybe be 1910-2005. Start right before WWI and end in the middle of War on Terrorism. Would be great for mods also to add different scenarios for the future. :)

5. Much more diplomacy.
Be able to warn other countries or help. Have meetings to improve relations or insult them to get worse. I want the world to be more living than it is in HoI2, have more opinions from the people and more options to handle everything.
 
Last edited:
I'd like to see all countries have semi-accurate IC, why would Bhutan; a country that had no factories whatsoever have 5 IC? I know its for gameplay but it just rubs me the wrong way.
Click to expand...

These countries need to be able to have infantry units - perhaps militia should cost next to no IC to make, only time (a month or two) and manpower. There should also be a unit lesser than militia with only a week to create, again affecting manpower. They can be upgraded later - or through experience (but should be prone to being erased).

-Major powers units should have different stats, lets say the Soviet Union would have lower in all stats yet they build faster and get reinforcements faster.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this, as it is almost racist (e.g. Zimbabwe cant have the same class of soldier) - they can with huge investment. The USSR had the best infantry and artillery in the world in WWII.

-Another major thing I would like to see is a death toll list, after every battle you should be able to see how many of your soldiers died how many were injured, etc. Then choose to reinforce the unit or not.
Click to expand...

Great idea. This could be totalled for each war... so you can see how many people died in each conflict, perhaps affecting dissent (both positively and negatively) - if people die defending territory it reduces dissent

-You should be a-ble to make deals for tanks and planes, lets say you could buy 100 tanks off Germany for 5000 units of money.
Click to expand...

And countries should be able to build for other countries in exchange for IC.
 
Delex said:
There could be a better use of POWs:
-You could heighten IC effectiveness
-Give manpower back to nations you puppet or liberate.
-The usage of POWs could be politically depended (If they are forced to work- socialism, or not democracy well I dont know how much of which is true).
-You could kill POWs, but you get dissent (This is a suggestion, this is not about the thing we are not supposed to talk on the forum).
-If you annex a nation, holding your POWs you could get some extra manpower.
-Exchange of POWs.
Click to expand...
Ehm...
http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/showthread.php?t=266180
 
Yes.But it also says:
Tracid said:
NOTE: There will not be any gulags or deathcamps (INCLUDING POW CAMPS) to build in Hearts of Iron2, nor will there be the ability to simulate the Holocaust or systematic purges, so I ask you not to discuss these topics as they are not related to this game. Thank You.
Click to expand...
I have pointed out the part you need to read.
 
JRHINDO said:
1) separated troop training (reinforcement included) and Weapons/tanks/warships/planes constuction:
-Soft Prod
-Hard Prod

this is very good suggestion

such as a country with very few manpower can actually try to say,

when building an armoured division:

1. he builds the tanks first.

2. later the training take place


or when a country is not having enough tanks, where he has to purchase some or build some later, can train the crews first.




also, i get another idea that one should be able to set the degree of training of soldiers, where it affects the division build time and affects the experience the unit starts with rather than abstract "standing army" slider.


again .

POW is not equal to POW camp., there's the word "camp"....

but POW won't be really useful in strategic aspect anyway, perhaps when you finish off a pocket there's a message 400,000 men are taken as POW. and your foe will have some dissent rise or so... well, just an idea.
Click to expand...
 
izdeniz said:
1- Can be like Total War games. (rome total war....etc). Each Province that we are attacking can be accessible like total war games so we can command the battle in 3D.
Click to expand...

The total war games are very good. But its a big differens between them and HoI 2.

In Total War you build up and meeting your enemie in huge battles on the fields.
In HoI 2 you can have 40 battles running at the same time (land, air sea) and in the next seconds you can have 10!

When small countries fights (lets say Urguay) they dont fights many battles. In the case of these small states it could work. But when big countries fights each other, for example in operation barbarossa it isn´t possible at all.

HoI 2 depends on many battles at the same time and the Total War games depends on a few big battles, one at the time.
 
Beagá said:
Thank you. Actually I think the naval model of HoI2 would be at the right place in a WW1 game. By the time of WW2, the development of radar and MUCH better aircraft meant that as long as you had the resources to spare, it´s was almost impossible not to eventually detect a fleet leaving it´s port or moving through a seazone. Take the Bismarck´s pursuit for example. So, it´s silly to order a fleet to patrol a SZ to catch a ship. If it´s location was pinpointed you should have a naval interception (or something similar) order.
Click to expand...

Italy never made use of radar in WWII, this gave Great Brittain a great adventage in the battle of the mediterranean sea, but still they could not intercept ALL convoys from Italy to Libya.

You also talking about the Bismarck incident. Bismarck started from Germany and was spotted by brittish aircrafts. Still Great Brittain could not intercept it untill it was only a few miles from the coast of France. Even with radar Great Brittain had big problems when trying intercept the ship.
 
Enhancements

1. Oil conversion capacity building not related to IC. See my comments in oil conversion.
2. Air formations based on wings (German would be I./JG 1. US would be 781st Bomb Wing ) not GROUP / DIVISIONS. approx. 40 to 50 aircraft.
3. Airborne units base on a brigade / regiment size not divisions almost all drops where on that scale ( even today ).
4. Most countries did not build, train or deploy divisions. Divisions where amalgamations of regiments (infantry, armor, artillery) and battalions ( engineer, recon, AT, AA, etc. ). The Germans used the Wehrkreis system; Britain and the US would be Infantry / Armor / Airborne / Artillery schools where groups 300 to 1000 would be trained in the same class. Brigades could then be built as the basic unit. This would allow an actual artillery brigade to be part of a corps/army. I realize that this takes memory and pointer size, but with most computers today that would be easily accommodated. [ I worked on the component system for the AH-64 Apache Helicopter and if that could be done in 1964, it can be done now].
5. A division construction system which would take component parts and merge them into a composite unit. infantry regt. / armor regt. / mountain / whatever.
Like the German welle system or triangular / square divisions.
6. Disbanding a division would break it back down into its component parts, which could then be disbanded or rebuilt into a new unit.
You could then handle the creation of 20 Panzer Divisions from 10 Panzer Divisions in late 1940. OR, the switch from square to triangular divisions of the USArmy.
7. I still like the system that SSI's Second Front had for armor and aircraft. Where specific factories (IC) produced specific tanks / aircraft and the output could be assigned to a particular regiment or battalion. You could build new factories and assign output to that factory either aircraft or armor. It would also take unit strength to be a part of unit composition. Both materially and number of units assigned. Second Front built i.e. a certain amount of Bf-109E
aircraft per period (week I believe) and once you had forty or more you could assign them to a fighter group. It would then take X amount of time for the unit to be ready. It also took into effect the loss and attrition of aircraft / armored units.
8. Unit conversion from one type to another. The 82nd Infantry Division (Infantry) became the 82nd Airborne Division and the 2nd Infanterie-Division became the 2nd Infanterie-Division (motorized) and in late 1940 to 12. Panzer-Division. This would be part of the unit composition / disbanding process.
9. Add a function with the right-click on a province to "assign production".
A further pop-up would allow the user to build some unit items such as at-1,
bb-3,spart-3 or int-3 etc. Naval units could only be built in certain provinces, i.e. for Germany, Wilhelmshaven, Bremen, Hamburg, Kiel, Rostock see list of German ports @http://oceania.pbwiki.com/German+Shipyards. Also limit build to capacity. All types including supplies should be listed with unassigned production going to civilian economy to make money.

Note: HoI2 / 3 is a combination of Grand Strategy and Operational gaming.
Grand Strategy is a combination of National Economic / Construction Capacity / and the type and quantity of units being built. Grand Tactical is their assignment and use. HoI is not a tactical game. agreed???
 
Last edited:
KnaZ said:
Exactly, make it all fluid! No blocks, just... territory.
Click to expand...

and then switching from Hoi2 Map view to something similar like the Blitzkrieg games to direct control his armies somewhere at the front...
 
jcfinley said:
Note: HoI2 / 3 is a combination of Grand Strategy and Operational gaming.
Grand Strategy is a combination of National Economic / Construction Capacity / and the type and quantity of units being built. Grand Tactical is their assignment and use. HoI is not a tactical game. agreed???
Click to expand...

Agreed with all your points (see my sig, especially for the built-your-own-division idea).

I also agree that HOI is not a tactical game, which is why I think that these Total War style tactical battles are a BAD idea, especially for a real time game.

What I do like about the Total War system, though, is that it is a provinceless combat system. You can move your armies around within the provinces - into forests, across specific places on rivers, unload on specific beaches, etc, that add a lot to the combat system that is, in my opinion, better than the way Paradox handles the combat.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back